PETER HÜBNER:  ... and: that it is able to satisfy an educated person intellectually as well as emotionally.
For in particular many educated scientists of all colors do not like at all that version of many neuroscientists of our time – who want to make out thinking so exclusively to be a function of the brain and in doing so deny the soul.

NATURE MEDICINE CURRENT AFFAIRS:  When the scientific studies in the field of medicine prove satisfactorily, that in our inner world it is the soul, which has the highest natural position of power, then science will soon also teach, that it is foolish, to violate this power.

PETER HÜBNER:  And also your question, “how do you find out, whether you violate the will of the soul?“ is very easily answered then under the protection of objective science: you recognize it by the fact, that health gets worse – it is that simple. For this we do not have to consult our conscience. It is certainly practical to leave all that systematically-logically in the medical field.

NATURE MEDICINE CURRENT AFFAIRS:  Mr. Hübner, the fol­low­ing point I did not yet un­der­stand:
“Artificial intelligence” you call everything, what in the mental-emotional field comes from the outside to the inside – in opposite to “natural intelligence”, which structures my thinking and my mind from inside.

But in eve­ry com­mu­ni­ca­tion – and most no­ta­bly in the proc­ess of learn­ing – I can­not help to also take up men­tal-emo­tional in­for­ma­tion from out­side. That is, I can not hinder that my mind comes into con­tact with “ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence” – what then in turn – ac­cord­ing to your ex­plana­tions – leads to these many prob­lems.
There can­not be a per­son who does not take up in­for­ma­tion from out­side – whose flow of in­for­ma­tion is al­ways only di­rected from inside to out­side, or what do you think?

PETER HÜBNER:  As I al­ready em­pha­sized: natu­ral in­tel­li­gence al­ways works from inside to out­side – this is a law of na­ture. On this all evo­lu­tion is based. But it does not mean, on the other hand, that, when it has worked from inside to the out­side, it can in turn not be ef­fec­tive from the out­side to the inside – for natu­ral in­tel­li­gence works eve­ry­where at any time and also in any di­rec­tion –, in terms of space as also in terms of time, as also in terms of space-time in­te­gra­tion.

I mean here the fol­low­ing: a teacher, who wants to pass on knowl­edge, must have this knowl­edge him­self au­then­ti­cally.
But if we want to call it “knowl­edge” ac­cord­ing to the high­est stan­dards we can think of, or: ac­cord­ing to natu­ral stan­dards, then this knowl­edge must have a uni­ver­sal char­ac­ter as well as a cos­mic one – as for in­stance the knowl­edge about the har­mony laws of the mi­cro­cosm of mu­sic. That is, the teacher has to gain the knowl­edge there, where it natu­rally has a uni­ver­sal and cos­mic char­ac­ter – due to the level of crea­tion or also the level of con­scious­ness where it is gained. In a natu­ral way all knowl­edge has uni­ver­sal char­ac­ter on the level of the self: whatever knowledge I draw from the self, on the level of the self – by structure it always has a universal character in a natural way. The reason is, that the self is the first natural: individual expression of universality.