When Healing Becomes Educating, Vol. 1 - Waldorf Research Institute

3 There is no human spirit truly capable of cognition.
This dogma states that an individual person is unable to perceive
causality in the individual case; experimental findings capable of statistical
analysis are essential in establishing causes. This is the “dogma of statistics.”
In terms of this dogma, it is pointless to imagine there can be ways,
methods of direct perception, that will enable an individual person to
perceive the medicinal principle of a plant (which is what the title of our
conference proposes). It is also impossible, according to this dogma, for an
individual person to assess the activity of an herbal preparation reliably in
the case of an individual patient.
So we have three dogmas:
• the dogma of particularism, i.e., there is no creative principle in
nature;
• the dogma of Darwinism in its widest sense, i.e., there is no overall
natural order, no spirit, in nature;
• the dogma of statistics, i.e., there is no human mind and spirit truly
capable of cognition.
These three dogmas form a whole and are the dogmatic opposites,
at least in the context that applies to science, of the Christian principles
known as Father, Spirit and Son. They dominate modern science, and the
theme of our conference is more or less obviously going against them.
A new universals debate
If, in spite of these dogmas, an individual biologist, pharmacologist
or physician looks for ways to find the essential nature of the medicinal
plant, scientists and the whole present generation, which is governed by
science, will not be able to follow him—because of these dogmas. Ways must
therefore inevitably be sought by individuals. From the point of view of
modern science they’ll have to be and remain clearly nonsensical, leading
people astray, unless it proves possible to develop a way that can be used
by the whole of humanity—a way of finding the essential nature of the
medicinal plant.
It is clear this cannot be achieved unless we enter into scientific dispute
concerning the three great dogmas: particularism, Darwinism and statistics.
To do so does, however, mean a new universals debate.
What does it mean when we say “universals debate”? The original
debate occurred between nominalists and realists in the 12th and 13th
Centuries. 1 The general view is that the point at issue was the following:
Are general conditions—meaning “universals”—such as the concept “horse”
55