Steiner's views on evolution were complex (not to say self-contradictory). Sometimes he indicated that man evolved from animals: "As man has evolved out of the animal, so will the 'superman’ evolve out of man.” [1] At other times, he said something quite different.

As I've reported elsewhere, at the Waldorf school I attended, evolution was taken as moving in two opposite directions: true humans were evolving upwards in a linear, progressive set of reincarnations, while failed humans were degenerating: bad karma, leading to linear regression. In partial support of my school's take on the issue, let's turn to Anthroposophist Roy Wilkinson. "Waldorf teachers are supposed to teach Steinerian evolution. In this view, species were specially created, rather than evolving from one another, and 'spiritual beings were the creators.' 'Let us start from the point that the gods, or the divine spiritual beings, decided to create the world and man. For this we have a good authority in the first chapter of the first book of the Bible.'” [2]

“The Waldorf version of evolution is especially concerned with the relationship of humans to animals, but this relationship is quite different from that of mainline evolutionists. 'It becomes apparent that man is a compendium of the animal kingdom; alternatively expressed, that the animal kingdom is the human being spread out.' The human 'essence' passed through a number of 'spiritual states' on the way to becoming human, which was a relatively recent event. 'Dr. Steiner considers animals to be the by-products [sic] of human development. Man has been involved from the beginning but not in a physical form. Man existed spiritually and the animal forms represent physically incarnated soul forces which the human being had to dispense with in order to mature sufficiently to receive the ego ... As in life ... we are trying to overcome the lower passions to evolve to something higher, so throughout evolution, the passions were separated out from man and these were incorporated as animals.

‘We see then that man is not the result of animal evolution but that he is at the beginning of it and is central to it. Indeed he is the cause of it. The animal world represents soul qualities which the human being has discarded although he still retains remnants of them.’” [3]

To take this a step further, here is one of Steiner's comments setting forth the notion that animals descended from humans, not vice versa. (Note how here, as so often, Steiner explicitly rejects the findings of science. He knew better than some of his current adherents that science was/is his enemy: Science will never confirm Steiner's bizarre "theories," not because of any bias against Anthroposophy, but simply because Anthroposophy has no basis in factual information.)

“[T]he scientist would, in principle, always say that minerals, plants and animals would develop without the existence of people.

“This is incorrect. If the evolution of the Earth did not include human beings, then most animals would not exist. A major portion of the animals, particularly the higher animals, rose within earthly evolution only because human beings needed to use their elbows (of course, I speak here only pictorially). At a particular stage in their earthly development, human beings, to develop further, needed to rid their nature, which then was much different than it is now, of the higher animals ... [H]uman beings in an earlier stage of development were one with the
animal world, and then the animal world precipitated out. In earthly development, animals would not have become what they are today had humanity not needed to become what it is now. Thus, without the inclusion of humanity in earthly development, animals and the Earth itself would look much different than they do today.

“Let us now go on to the mineral and plant world. We must be quite clear that not only the lower animal forms, but also the plant and mineral world would have petrified long ago and ceased development were there no human beings on earth ... [E]arthly development would have long ago reached its final stage were the Earth not continuously fed with the forces of human corpses, the forces released by the human spirit-soul at death." [4]

A few additional comments on this passage may be worth considering. Steiner places humanity at the center of evolution: animal life, plant life, and even the mineral world depend on human beings for their continued development. He does not deny that some animals (particularly lower animals) may have come into existence before humanity arose. Inferentially, these would have been the animals with whom humans "were one." Later, humans gave rise to the rest of the animal kingdom. The higher animals were, originally, part of the human spirit-soul. Thus, they represent portions of humanity that sank to subhuman status: They descended from, or “precipitated” out of, humans.

Steiner's contention that "[E]arthly development would have long ago reached its final stage were the Earth not continuously fed with the forces of human corpses" is hard — if not impossible — to square with the findings of science. Indeed, life existed and evolved for billions (billions with a "B") of years before humanity showed up. Here are some numbers:

◊ Life arose on the earth about 3.5 billion years ago.

◊ The first mammals appeared between 286 and 248 million years ago.

◊ The first dinosaurs appeared about 230 million years ago.

◊ Dinosaurs ruled the earth for about 160 million years, dying out about 65 millions years ago.

◊ Birds evolved from dinosaurs about 100 million years ago, with the first modern birds appearing about 65 million years ago. [5]

All of this (and much more, of course) occurred without the aid of human corpses. The precise date of the emergence of Homo sapiens remains in dispute, but it was probably less than a million years ago, perhaps as recently as 300,000 years ago. [6] Earthly development, in other words, got on just fine without us.

Let’s turn to another passage from Steiner. Here he is discussing mankind’s evolution with teachers at the first Waldorf School:

Dr. Steiner: “ ... In the Quaternary Period you will find the first and second mammals ... You can create a parallel between the Quaternary Period and Atlantis [yes: the legendary lost continent], and easily bring the Tertiary period into parallel ... as the Lemurian Period [Lemuria was a land that was lost long before Atlantis] ... The human being was at that time only jelly-like in external form. Humans had an amphibian-like form.”

A teacher: “But there were still the fire breathers.”

Dr. Steiner: “Yes, those beasts, they did breathe fire....” [7]

According to geologists, the Tertiary and Quaternary periods are subdivisions of the Cenozoic Era, which began about 65 million years ago. The Tertiary lasted until about two million years ago, when the Quaternary began. We are still in the Quaternary Period. [8] Few of Steiner’s assertions are consistent with any of this. The first mammals, for example, appeared between 286 and 248 million years ago, not as recently as 65 million years ago. There was no Lemuria, no Atlantis. Humans did evolve in the present Quaternary Period, but they were not around when dragons ruled the earth, since there were no dragons. Nor were humans around when dinosaurs ruled the earth (the reign of the dinosaurs began about 230 million years ago, ending about 65 million years ago; homo sapiens arose about 300,000 years ago).

A final note before I yield the floor: Steiner’s statement to his teachers, above, is not even internally consistent. Were we jelly-like or amphibian-like? We couldn’t have been both. An amphibian made of jelly couldn’t pull itself ashore, and if it washed up on shore, it would likely lie wherever the water deposited it, like a stranded jellyfish, gradually cooking in the sun. What we actually seem to be seeing here is Steiner changing his story even as he tells it. But let it go.

◊◊◊◊