Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1652

Carbon copy of a letter to Dr. Hans Lutz, Ross-strasse 17, Dusseldorf, Germany.

March 24, 1958

Dear Dr. Lutz:

     I was greatly pleased by your letter of February ninth and your very intelligent perception of the purpose and spirit which guided the writing of my Citadel, Market and Altar. I am especially pleased at your notice of my departure in social analysis from the old dichotomy of good and evil, coercion and cooperation, left and right. The growing order of nature is not through compromise between these contraries but by the transcendence of the negative through development of the life-advancing positive. In social evolution, it is from this transcendence that the third element, the Altar, springs forth.

     Replying to your inquiry as to the origin of my ideas, I think they spring from a gift which some of us possess for generalizing on a single basis two or more things previously thought to be unrelated — the faculty of analogy. I think this is at the bottom of probably all scientific discovery and intellectual advance, whoever be the person to apply it.

     My first knowledge of Dr. Rudolph Steiner’s Threefold Commonwealth was some seven years ago, long after my own formulation which was substantially completed in manuscript form in 1937. I was delighted to find that he had discovered the threefold relationship — very delighted. But I was disappointed that he had not more completely worked out its logical implications, and especially that he did not seem to recognize the necessity for the independence of each in order to ________ /enable? facilitate?/ the functional coordination of the three. He seemed to propose for the Altar a dominant jurisdiction over the functioning of the Market, at its own level, which would of course impair their respective specialization and coordination. In fact, it seemed to me that he conceived of a kind of authority in the personnel of the Altar who would employ the instruments of the Citadel and thereby impair the free functioning of the Market. In this aspect his formulation might be of service to a totalitarian philosophy. I am happy to find that you do not observe any similar imbalance in my own formulation.

     As to any plans for a German edition, I must say that nothing is under consideration at the present time. However, I shall be most happy if sufficient interest should be aroused to make that possible. My own interest in the whole field is purely aesthetic — without profit motivation.

     With reference to possible lectures upon this general subject, I should certainly be most happy to do something of that kind (preferably under auspices of the Science of Society foundation), should circumstances permit. By this I mean not necessarily any allotment of funds, but attractive invitation making it seem well worthwhile. Meanwhile, I enclose for your inspection an outline of six talks and discussions which grew out of my attending a course in advanced theology at one of our universities. In these, the orientation is religious rather than scientific, which is my more customary approach.

     Perhaps the greatest pleasure that comes to an originator of creative ideas is to find them being recognized and enjoyed by other minds. In this connection your letter is very inspiring to me.

     With cordial good wishes, I am

                       

                        Sincerely yours,

 

SH/m

Enc:  Christian Doctrine of Man Advertisement