Critical Thinking v Goethean Thinking

I'm practicing with the long gone philosophers.

Heard often this past decade is the refrain—from all sides—about others lacking ‘critical thinking skills.’ I’m comparing critical thinking with Goethean thinking in this post.

I’ve been reading and re-reading Kierkegaard and Nietzsche in preparation for an upcoming podcast series with the very cool Freedom Convo, WD James, and André Meloche. We’re going to discuss around a general theme of Christian Existentialism, as well as our favorite Christian Philosophers.

I’m going to talk about Rudolf Steiner, 💛 and looking forward to describing his insights in the context of this conversation. Steiner might be more of a romantic than anything—his worldview helps much with making sense and meaning of existence.

Returning to the thesis:

The last time I read Kierkegaard would have been in art school—over twenty years ago. I don’t remember what I got out of it then, but here’s the first thing I noticed this round of reading:

I was thinking critically first, and it was limiting my ability to understand.

Kierkegaard is very removed from how I currently think and perceive. But there I was, critiquing without first understanding.

The entire Christian conception is one of love as a cognitive force. “Understanding” is but a pale shadow of this potential. In theory, all enmity is washed away in the understanding-love continuum, but really only the saints have learned to practice this in a continuous, strengthened way.

It’s not possible to do effective critical thinking without first using “Goethean Thinking.”

Goethean Observation: an anthroposophical term referring to the type of proto-phenomenological science practiced by Goethe, in which through deep, true, and objective observation the mysteries of the ‘thing-in-itself’ are revealed.

When someone with an anthroposophical background tags something as “Goethean” (science, conversation, observation, thinking) they are pointing to a stage of spiritual development where one learns to discern what is “theirs” (subjective) and then see through that veil to the object observed.

In spiritual development, the doppelgänger/ lesser Guardian is the personification of this subjective lower self (and all its karmic baggage) which—once perceived accurately—acts as a guide.

After the subjective self can be perceived, objective thinking can be activated.

But: as you know, our materialist culture has (mostly) skipped the Goethean understanding stage and passed right over into critical thinking without understanding—especially for things we find morally repugnant.

We all have our pet sins that cause us to feel condemnation for other people. From there, it is a few tiny thought-steps to dehumanization.

The way to overcome the critique is literally by bringing more understanding and “love-as-a-cognitive-force” into my own observation of the world.

This is no small task.

But managing it for a long dead philosopher is at least good practice.

These are my steps, with anything, but it’s easier to practice on the simple things:

1. Try to understand phenomenologically / love-as-a-cognitive-force

2. Only after that: thinking as critique

---

Hoping to publish another piece from the conversational series about pattern recognition later this week.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Evelyn de Morgan, Aurora Triumphans, 1886