At school, we practice interpreting texts—in the school of life, we learn to read people: how do I interpret gestures, looks, or words? Pure perception becomes all the more important lest mere speculation guide our actions.
Our tendency for interpretation is wonderfully exemplified in Paul Watzlawick’s story of the man with the hammer.1 Today, empathic appreciation and nonjudgmental listening are becoming increasingly important—for the younger generation as well. “We listen, and we don’t judge” is a trend on social media. Consciousness is growing that prejudices are often rooted in specific interpretations, not only of behavior or situations, but also of characteristics: for example, that black skin indicates inferiority or that a disability predicted by ultrasound signifies a worthless life. Many assumptions (and provisions) are based on prior interpretations. Whether I interpret life only biologically or also spiritually will change how I evaluate the morality of abortion; or if I interpret the fact that animals cannot write petitions to mean that I am free to do whatever I want to them since I’m a superior being, then my willingness to spare them pain diminishes.
Assumptions in Minneapolis
How do I interpret my power? How do I interpret humanity? When Donald Trump responds to criticism that he is violating international law by saying that the only things constraining him are his “own morality” and his “own mind,” it sounds like a perversion of the ethical individualism found in Rudolf Steiner’s The Philosophy of Freedom as well as the European Enlightenment (“Have courage to use your own understanding!”).2 Though it’s hardly likely that the U.S. president is familiar with Steiner’s book, Trump’s self-exoneration seems like a monstrous misinterpretation of moral freedom. In essays written by high school graduates for their Abitur [German university entrance exam], arbitrary and unfounded interpretations are considered mistakes; but for some politicians, arbitrariness is part of the system. The ICE officer who shot a mother of three in her car in Minneapolis interpreted her presumably panicked reaction to him and his colleagues as a sign that he himself was in danger. But what emotional preconceptions may have been behind his assumption? What is the mood in the U.S. that seems to be replacing “don’t judge!” with self-justice?
In the Horizon of Expectations
We cannot avoid interpreting social processes and signs. Communication theories serve primarily to raise awareness. Everything has meaning—even things that are indirect and nonverbal. Sometimes we only hint at how we feel and hope the other person will interpret this as a silent request—to ask or not to ask, to help when we’re in need, or to think over patterns of behavior. Without interpretation, there can be no empathy. But what if my “interpretative approach” (as it is referred to by specialists) is wrong? When analyzing a text, this doesn’t matter, because here the point is to examine, prove, or disprove one’s own thesis. I am in dialogue with the text; I draw on certain aspects and question others. Similarly, I can describe my impressions to someone in a social situation, enabling them to tell me whether I’m right or wrong. But what schools require and assess with grades that determine our future is not something we seem to ever take to heart in public. There is a need for a climate of trust: talking to one another and taking the level of interpretation into account. When this is done between nations, it’s called diplomacy. It’s important to be able to reveal our interpretations to others while staying open to questions. Students often worry that they will misinterpret something or fail to meet expectations. The technical term for this is “horizon of expectations,” because in literature, I cannot boil everything down to a single point as I can in mathematics. There is room for play, and there are also gray areas, readings that the author themselves were not even aware of. Something may lie within the horizon of possibilities that one had not even considered as an option.
Do You Actually Interpret Yourself Correctly?
Accusations made in conflicts such as “That’s just your interpretation!”, “You’re completely misinterpreting me!”, or “You don’t understand!” are ultimately based on nothing more than one-sided assumptions. Someone misunderstood the understanding of someone else. The concept of “body language” brings together this interpersonal and literary aspect. How do I interpret the other person’s body correctly? How about their gestures? “‘No’ means no”? In certain situations, where we need a clear yes or no, there are words that it’s not possible to misunderstand. But apart from these moments (but perhaps also including them), life is fluid, processual, and playful—we try things out, testing the waters. No text is ever exhausted; encounters can also have their (karmic) aftermath, and only rarely is an interpretation free from alternatives or some behavior unambiguous. What is necessary, however, is to talk about the films running through our heads and the hammer stories (a la Watzlawick) that we’re creating; the question being posed is unavoidable: Have I interpreted you correctly? When other people no longer mean anything to each other, civilization will come to an end only when we no longer help each other answer the equally valid question: Are you actually interpreting yourself correctly?3
Politically, a lot depends on how leaders in the East and West interpret each other’s intentions. Is a hand that is cautiously extended still being noticed? Europe must remain a place of dialogue and flexibility,4 just as in everyday life, each individual can contribute to ensuring that the horizon of hope, freedom, and justice is not obscured. The children of Renée Nicole Good, the woman shot in Minneapolis, expect this of us, as does the entire younger generation.
Translation Joshua Kelberman
Image U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol officers on Nicollet Avenue on January 24, 2026. This occurred after the shooting of Minneapolis resident Alex Pretti, who was the second person killed by federal agents in Minneapolis that month and the third person shot. Photo: Chad Davis, CC BY 4.0.
Footnotes
- Paul Watzlawick, The Situation Is Hopeless, but Not Serious: The Pursuit of Unhappiness (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1983); first published as Anleitung zum Unglücklichsein [A guide to being unhappy] (Munich: Piper, 1983). A man hastily decides to borrow a hammer from his neighbor. But he immediately has second thoughts, as he more and more imagines hypothetical situations that prove his neighbor has something against him. The man gets himself more and more caught up in these mental pictures to the point that he becomes angry at the other man for seeming to think of himself as so important. He rings the doorbell and, without any explanation, yells at his astonished neighbor that he can just keep his hammer.
- Immanuel Kant, “An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?,” in Political Writings, translated by H. B. Nisbet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 54–60; first published in German, 1784.
- According to Rudolf Steiner, Napoleon, for example, misinterpreted his spiritual assignment to unite Europe in that he understood this assignment in military terms; see Andreas Laudert, Die vergessene Lebensaufgabe: Von Kafka zu Napoleon. Eine Spurensuche [The forgotten life task: From Kafka to Napoleon. A search for clues] (Stuttgart: Urachhaus, 2011).
- See also, Andreas Laudert, “. . . und wofür ich kämpfe” [And what am I fighting for], Gegenwart 4 (2025).
