In
the "Death
of Myth-Making" Plath associates the horse with human thinking. Here
the horse is a swift, airy vehicle carrying thoughts instantaneously in the
mind of the thinker. Despite the rapidity of thought creation, the limitations
of dead concepts in a non-living intellectualism combined with pure utilitarian
practicality result in the death of a creative, living thinking. Reason and
common sense allow us short term security but force us to think in a chain
of endless causes and effects. The capacity to think creatively with inspired
awareness is lost and the direct cognition of the world of ideas, the source
of all myth, is replaced by sense-bound thinking. The subject-object dichotomy
separates us from the rest of the cosmos.
The two horseman of this foursquare duality arrive on the scene to banish Lucifer and the fear caused by his superstitions. What we gain in suppressing the mysticism of Lucifer we lose in our inability to perceive the realities of the cosmos that lay behind the appearances.
But why do these "virtues" ride on horseback? What is the relationship between the horse and human thinking?
Rudolf Steiner in his lecture series The Apocalypse of St. John (pages 84-85) takes a radical view of the horse archetype. As a background for understanding Steiner's view of the horse, we should recall that Steiner maintained that human thinking is part of an objective world reality and he consequently rejected a purely mechanistic view of earth evolution. All experience requires thinking which supplies the connection between observed phenomena. Science correctly demands our meticulous perception of outer experience; however the lawful connectedness of this observed experience is provided by human thinking. Human thinking must be experienced and studied as rigorously as outer phenomena in order to create a coherent science.4
We carve out our portion of thought from an objective world thought. We only know the world through human thinking and this thinking is permeable and can be entered by other thought beings. Any object or animal that we can think about is united with us in the very act of cognition. My thoughts about a horse are an attribute of the horse and part of the horse as much as its hooves and tail. It's no objection to declare that an observer is necessary for the horse to have this attribute of human thinking. Food is necessary for the horse to have life and hence tail and hoof.
Therefore
when we think about the horse, we unite with the horse. Presently our method
of thinking, the Reasonable and Practical(like in Plath's poem), dictates
that we separate the horse from out of ourselves. But human thinking and consciousness
evolve over time and we can envision a thinking of the past that transcended
both human and horse and subsumed them into one unified thought form. The
radically different consciousness of this "proto-human/horse", a
consciousness that wasn't necessarily a self-consciousness, felt the horse
as much a part of its own being as we think of our eyes and ears as part of
our own being today.
The transcending, macro-thinking entities continued to differentiate and consciousness of self was moving into smaller and smaller thinking units. For this evolution to take place, the human entities had to force out of themselves thought forms that hindered the development of self consciousness. The human horse component allowed larger macro thought forms to stream directly into the human being and prevented humans from feeling thought was contained within their own individual being. By becoming aware of these thought matrixes, humans could begin to objectify the horse archetype and move it outside of themselves. Although retaining an intimate connection to this animal, we were able to completely change out thinking nature by establishing a degree of independence from this animal.
Although
Steiner views human intelligence as a pinnacle of evolution, he believes that
humans once encompassed the present day animals and over time “cast
out” the archetypes of these forms. This makes sense if we remember
that all of our perceptions and ideas about animals are mediated by our own
thinking. We now apply the concept “subject-object” when we confront
the animal, but “subject-object” is simply a result of our own
thinking. It is possible that in a primordial past we did not apply this particular
concept to animals resulting in no subject-object dichotomy and hence a union
between human animals or more exactly a primordial human that contained all
the animal archetypes within.
Despite the complex epistemological foundations of Steiner’s philosophy it is interesting to consider the statements that result from his clairvoyance. One need not accept his statements as truth-they may be read as curious literature that has an inner effect on the reader; but I believe that reason doesn’t preclude the possibility of Steiner’s knowledge or the existence of an “Akashic” record.
Steiner’s horse comments:


“...
If we take a muddy liquid and allow the gross matter in it to settle to the
bottom, the finer part remains at the top. In the same way the grosser parts
which man would have been unable to use for his present condition of development
have been deposited like a sediment in the animal forms. Through man having
cast out of his line of development these animal forms-his elder brothers,
as it were ,he has reached his present height. Thus man rises by throwing
out the lower forms in order to purify himself and he will rise still higher
by separating out another kingdom of nature, the kingdom of the evil race.
Thus mankind rises upward. Man owes every quality he now possesses to the
circumstance that he has rejected a particular animal form. One who with spiritual
vision looks upon the various animals knows exactly what we owe to each one
of them. We look upon the lion form and say : If the lion did not exist in
the outer world, man would not have had this or that quality; for through
his having rejected the lion he has acquired this or that quality. This is
the case too with all the other forms in the animal kingdom.”