return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2029 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - "Getting With Goethe"
002 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: the race question (long)
003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: lines once again / Lisa child
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Steiner's word about race
005 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
006 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Dolls: Gender Issues
007 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Jewish wisdom
008 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: hyperbole by Sune
009 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: muck
010 - Terry Boardman (terry.boa - Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: "Getting With Goethe"
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 22:42:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
"Getting with Goethe" is the name of an article by Jon Spayde
published in the Utne Reader (No. 75, May, 1996). The full text is at
http://www.utne.com/bBooks.tmpl$search?db=dArticle.db&eqheadlinedata=Getting
%20with%20Goethe. The article is sub-titled "Germany's greatest sage is a
Green as ever."
The following consists of excerpts from that article. This is just
one of the many items I've found in the research which Dan Dugan and warm
regards inspired me to do by their dismissal of Goethe.
Bob Tolz
--------------------------
[Begin excerpts from Jon Spayde, "Getting With Goethe," Utne Reader #75,
May, 1996]
The poet, playwright, critic, scientist, and seer Johann Wolfgang
von Goethe (1749-1832)--whose collected works run to 143 fat
volumes--virtually founded German literature, gave German culture its
bearings, and seemed the equal of Shakespeare and Dante to many of our
great-grandparents. But German high culture was compromised by the horrors
of 1933-45, and the author of Faust faded into the stacks of the scholarly
libraries.
Or did he? Goethe, who was a master of metamorphosis while he
lived--changing from a young rebel novelist into a cool classicist, a
serious naturalist, a master of Gothic smoke and mirrors, and a vibrantly
sensual elderly poet--is a good candidate for reincarnation today as a
prophet of holism, [Note: "Holism" is apparently a dirty word to Dan Dugan.
You'll see his approach to this idea, which apparently is that holism cannot
coexist with the study of science, if and when he makes transcripts
available from his conference at the Green Meadow Waldorf School. -- Bob
Tolz] environmentalism, and the unity of reason and imagination.
....
And yet he was no gushing romantic but a tireless scientist. Though
his actual contributions to the advance of biology are minor (and he was
dead wrong in his decades-long struggle against Newton's theory of light),
Goethe was a major precursor of a new attitude toward the scientific task.
In our day scientists as disparate as René Dubos and Larry Dossey
have called for a science of contemplation that would keep the unity,
dynamism, and integrity of nature in view, abandoning the idea that the
world "out there" exists only to be cut apart and manipulated. Goethe was
passionate about this goal. "He who wills the highest must will the whole,"
he wrote. "He who treats of spirit must presuppose nature; he who speaks of
nature must presuppose . . . spirit."
For Goethe, examining plants was one way to behold this unity. To
describe the essential sameness of form that runs through all the variations
of leaf or stem from plant to plant, or all the stages of a single plant's
growth, to see this consistency as a kind of energy and each disparate form
as just one "moment" in the unfolding of that energy, was his method [Note:
The idea of the "recursion" of forms at different levels is one of the
essential elements of Chaos mathematics and science. -- Bob Tolz]; he
didn't merely taxonomize each leaf according to its differences from its
nearest neighbors. Ecologist Nigel Hoffmann, writing in Social Alternatives
(Jan. 1996), calls the Goethean view an "interpretive ecological art" and
suggests that it can be the foundation for a truly ecological style of
seeing landscape and doing design.
Goethe's spirit also seems very close to magician-writer David
Abram, who, in The Spell of the Sensuous (Pantheon, 1996), takes
contemporary science to task for removing our gaze from the sensory realm
into an unseeable, untouchable mathematical and subatomic limbo. Physicist
Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1894) [Note: Helmholtz was referred to by our
list-mate Peter Farrell in a post sent to the list today. -- Bob Tolz]
noted that the poet's voluminous writings on color theory were also "an
attempt to protect the immediate truth of the sensory perception against the
attacks made on it by the scientists." (Goethe argued that apparatus like
microscopes and prisms run the risk of distorting the realities they seek to
probe. He was wrong about prisms, but proved to be a prophet when physics
turned subatomic and Heisenberg enunciated his uncertainty principle.)
While Abram tends to emphasize the subjective, human, idiosyncratic
side of scientific seeing, Goethe's way of discovering unity in plant life
or nature as a whole is not emotion-laden intuition but "an exact form of
investigation into an objective reality," writes Nigel Hoffmann. Thus Goethe
challenges modern prophets of nature's unity to be less misty and more
rigorous at the same time that he wars against the reductive scientism that
can make eco-thought dull.
[End Excerpts From Utne Reader]
--------------------------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.2 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: the race question (long)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 03:41:01 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Lisa wrote]
) Take as an example some self-professed Christians I know -- )They say
)they believe in loving their fellow humans, and in not )judging, ``lest ye
)be judged.''***
) In the next breath, though, some of these people will admit that )they
)believe with all of their hearts that homosexual people are )sinners who
)will die and go to hell unless they change.
In other words, "love the sinner but not the sin"? I think that sheds some
light on why some of Steiner's defenders can insist Steiner was not racist.
He might have felt your race was inferior, but he didn't hold it against you
personally.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.3 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: lines once again / Lisa child
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 03:47:29 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[David wrote:]
)A Waldorf school is definitely more of a "everybody does it together"
)enterprise. One *might* say that the approach (overall) purports to )be
)more in sync with children's (in the universal sense) innate )tendencies.
Glad you pointed this out. Somebody today, might have been Harve but I've
lost track, said Waldorf considers the "individual child" (maybe about
reading readiness?) This is a common misunderstanding, sort of like Chand's
"they let them learn at their own pace." Yes, they are interested in your
child as an individual, but they are basically applying fairly rigid
"universal" timetables in terms of their understanding of children's
development. In many ways it's "one size fits all" in Waldorf.
Of course "everybody does it together" is a nice thing in some ways too.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Steiner's word about race
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 23:06:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) )
) )Lisa says:
) ) If the view that the white race is the most spiritually
) evolved, that
) )the ``yellow'' race is in the adolescence of its spiritual
) path and that
) the
) )black race represents the ``infancy'' of humanity is an
) accepted part of
) )Anthroposophy, wouldn't you want to know about that view
) before placing
) your
) )child in an Anthroposophical school?
[David McCann]
) Of course I would want to know that. It's just my opinion
) that it's better
) to find out by talking to the people involved than by
) interpreting eighty
) year old texts. Further, I see little evidence that this
) race issue has any
) serious role in waldorf schools today. By saying "I'm not
) that interested",
) I'm saying that I'm confident that the school I'm associated
) with is not
) furthering such as misguided notion.
[Bob Tolz]
Lisa, I really think that David is right on target.
Ask the teachers in your school what they think of these things that
make you uncomfortable. If you're not satisfied with their answers, then
don't stick around. If you don't ask them the questions that gnaw at you,
then, with all due respect, I think you're just engaging in mental
gymnastics. I have a feeling that if you ask with respect rather than with
a challenging attitude, you'll get a non-defensive response. I'd love to
hear back from you after you've had the conversation.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.5 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc. )
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 04:08:10 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Harve quoted Jane Healy -- I've snipped a lot, but a few relevant parts are
below]
Debra, I didn't want my son to be pushed into early reading or academics
either. It's one of the things that attracted us to Waldorf. But before you
conclude that Healy's theories support Waldorf's timetable, can you tell me
if Healy gives any specifics about what is "too early"? I couldn't find any
in the passage you quoted (is it elsewhere in the book? I once read part of
this book but I don't have it now). She says the process of myelinization is
not complete sometimes till we're in our 20's, which doesn't help much
unless you want to delay reading till age 20; also that the timetable may be
genetic, which would suggest to me it varies between individuals.
There are better indicators than either chronological age, or teeth. It's
more about the individual child, and Waldorf is not particularly interested
in an *individual* child's timetable. When other indicators are present,
holding a child back waiting for the teeth to change is just superstitious.
"Pushing" is damaging, and I am ready to protest when anybody is "pushing"
my son, but ignoring signs of readiness because it's "too soon" for this
child to be ready is also damaging. Healy's theories are interesting but
probably suggest more research is needed rather than supporting any
particular educational timetable.
Diana
Endangered Minds, by Jane Healy,
)states at
)page 66-67:
) Myelin continues to develop slowly all during childhood and
)adolescence in a gradual progression from lower-to higher-level systems.
)The process of mylenation in human brains is not completed at least )until
)most of us are in our twenties and may continue
)even longer
)scientists beleive its order of development is mainly predetermined )by a
)genetic system.
)the schedule of myelination appears to put some boundaries
)around 'appropriate' forms of learning at any given age.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.6 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Dolls: Gender Issues
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 01:17:38 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Non-mothers reading the discussion of boys' dolls might not quite
understand how agonizing this kind of situation can be. It truly is
delicate and complex. My son is 3, and my daughter is 5 and a half, so my
son gets dressed up (by his sister) in tutus and mommy-shoes, and plays
with really girly dolls all the time! He nurses his babies, pushes them
around in strollers (when we all go for a walk, my kids each have a doll in
a stroller), etc. I think it's great! (except maybe the tutu part, but I'm
not worried :)
He's not in school yet, so I don't know what kind of peer pressure might
come up in the future, but I think having a happy family, two involved
(work-at-home) parents, and a lovey-dovey older sister will ultimately be a
much stronger influence on him.
If I were in your situation, having already clued your son in that some
kids might not appreciate Isabelle the way he does, I would probably kick
myself for a while (because I do that kind of thing), and then I'd
underplay the whole thing for a while. Sometimes less discussion is better.
You can always get deeper into certain subjects when the child is older.
Sometimes it's good to just go into maintenance mode for a little while,
and let everyone grow up a little (as long as you're not ignoring a real
problem that needs to be addressed).
Maybe suggest to the teacher to give more specific suggestions for
show-and-tell? My daughter's pre-K teacher last year had different themes
each week -- something red, something round, something noisy. (Ask her not
to ask for something pink...)
Approaching the teacher about doing a unit about fathers, gender roles,
etc., is a nice idea, but if it were me in real life, I'd probably just
quietly go about modeling the kinds of attitudes I believe in (i.e., that
mothers and fathers should be affectionate and nurturing, both should
contribute to running the household -- both are perfectly capable of
cooking, cleaning, etc. -- and spend plenty of "on the floor" time with
their kids, and so on). I'd comment on how nice it is to see him taking
such good care of his dolls, what a great father he'll be when he grows up.
Those messages sink in (deep), become part of a child's value system, and
help kids get through minor social traumas with peers.
Just a few rambling thoughts -- hope it made some sense.
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
The only magazine dedicated to a Jewish perspective
on childraising and family health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.7 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 01:17:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sune posted:
)Also,
)
)Yael:
)
)) I feel uncomfortable when people who are not Jewish try to (re)define the
)) 'task' of 'Jewish culture.'
)
)I'm grateful that ca 9 of the ca 14 million Jews of the world have
)found it possible to continue to contribute to the life and
)development of the contexts in which they live around the world.
)
)I'm also grateful that the Swedish Prime Minister, at the The
)Stockholm World Conference on Holocaust Education / Towards a
)Millenium of Tolerance, 26-28 Jan this year fully supported Elie
)Wiesel's suggestion to continue the work of the conference by annually
)organising a Forum on Conscience and Humanity in Stockholm, starting
)next year (see link to 'The Stockholm International Forum on the
)Holocaust Closing remarks by the Prime Minister of Sweden, Mr G–ran
)Persson, 28 January 2000' at
)http://www.regeringen.se/inenglish/speeches.htm ).
)
)Hopefully it will be a contribution in solving the humanly difficult
)situation that has existed in the Middle East since more than 50
)years.
I may not have completely understood your point here, but I just want to
mention that there is no contradiction between Jews being dispersed around
the world, trying to be a force for good wherever they may find themselves,
and at the same time praying to be reunited in Israel when the time is
right.
The Lubavitcher Rebbe's told his Chassidim to make wherever they are,
Jerusalem. But that doesn't mean we stop praying for Moshiach; we just live
wherever we find ourselves as if the era of Moshiach has already come --
which, in itself, hastens its arrival, since good deeds (mitzvahs) "tip the
scale" of the world toward good, literally bringing Moshiach. (This, of
course, applies to all people, not just Jews.)
In another post, Sune wrote:
)With Israel, that I have not yet visited (my mother did many years
)ago), my personal distant perspective (3000 km away) is that I don't
)think it is quite yet clearly visible what good the hardships of the
)situation there will bring to the rest of the world in a somewhat
)longer perspective, as every passed, survived and overcome hardship
)will and does. From a distance, it gives me heartache.
It gives me heartache too. But when there is finally peace in Israel, we
will surely know Moshiach is here.
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
The only magazine dedicated to a Jewish perspective
on childraising and family health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.8 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: hyperbole by Sune
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 01:17:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Lisa wrote:
)Bob,
) I read your response with interest and take what you say quite
)seriously. As I am not Jewish, I cannot pretend to know what it feels like
)to have comparisons to Naziism and the Holocaust thrown about by either
)side.
) Thank you for offering your response as a Jewish person. I wonder what
)Yael's opinion on Sune's statement is, and I hope she offers it for our
)contemplation.
Lisa, the truth is, this kind of comparison gets tossed around so
frequently, both on this list and elsewhere, that I don't pay much
attention to it. It's just obviously hollow to me. I don't get offended;
this kind of statement comes out of not understanding the Holocaust
intimately, or not caring deeply about it the way people do who lost family
during that time.
Like most Jews, I have deep, personal feelings about the Holocaust -- it
was the reason my grandparents came to the US in 1935 (their siblings and
parents stayed in Hungary/Poland and were eventually killed in
concentration camps), and the cause of the deaths of my 86-year-old
great-aunt's brothers, sisters, and parents. Every Jewish person has
stories like these.
If I were Armenian, or Native American, or Chinese, I would have a better,
deeper understanding of the tragedies their people have endured. I can
understand intellectually, I can gain a more emotional understanding
through literature (I remember reading "My Name is Aram" in elementary
school), but I will probably never have that tears-in-my-heart feeling
about those periods of other peoples' histories, because they have not
touched my life in a tangible way. I can only hope I will never, out of my
own ignorance, unintentionally offend others whose people have suffered.
Yael
)----------
))From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
))To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
))Subject: RE: hyperbole by Sune
))Date: Sun, Feb 27, 2000, 1:15 PM
)))
))) Sune writes to Dan on the list:
)))
)))
))) ((But when you write something, based on the material Dan has
))) collected
))) on PLANS site, that I find to be as offensive to me and the work I've
))) tried to contribute to for 30 years, as the Jews probably experienced
))) the Nazi propaganda against them in the 30s' in Germany,))
)))
))) Lisa says:
)))
))) You have got to be kidding. How can you (how DARE you!)
))) compare the
))) facts, etc. offered by the PLANS website with the terrible, unethical,
))) hatefilled propaganda directed toward the Jewish people by
))) the Nazis in 30s
))) Germany????
))) If I were Jewish, I would be very offended that you would
))) compare the
))) two. Though PLANS is doing all that it can to carry out its
))) mission -- to
))) keep public money out of religious schools (read: Waldorf
))) charter schools)
))) -- its efforts, certainly cannot be compared in either spirit
))) or scope with
))) the anit-Semitic Nazi propaganda.
))
)) [Bob Tolz]
)) As you know, I am Jewish.
)) What Sune has said does not offend me.
)) On the other hand,I've said it before, and I'll say it again: What
)) Dan does in attempting to associate Nazism with Steiner and Anthroposophy I
)) find terribly offensive. By trying to exploit this alleged connection for
)) his anti-Waldorf political action purposes, he minimizes and diminishes the
)) Holocaust. This is my opinion, observation and feeling, as a Jew and as a
)) person who finds Waldorf Education perfectly satisfactory.
)) Bob Tolz
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
The only magazine dedicated to a Jewish perspective
on childraising and family health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.9 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: muck
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 10:18:07 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200002292137.NAA22980 lists1.best.com)
Steve wrote:
) So in addition to trying to show us that Steiner's statements aren't truly
) racist, I'd like to see strong statements to the effect that people who
) interpret Steiner in a racist way are not fit to teach.
I think that people who interpret Steiner in a racist way and have any
other central and primary perspective of children than as humans,
irrespective of any external quality they might have, are not fit to
be teachers of them!
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2029.10 ---------------
From: Terry Boardman (terry.boardman cableinet.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 11:47:19 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200003010337.TAA26566 lists1.best.com)
) Peter Farrell wrote:
)
) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 11:12:03 +1100
)
) After some deliberation I am convinced that Goethe is a reasonably
) significant scientist. More significant than me for example at least so
) far. I base this on the fact that I can trace through Helmholtz to Land a
) direct influence on some of the modern theories of human perception of
) colour. I also base it on an assertion by S J Gould, (More light on leaves,
) Natural History, Feb91, p16) that Goethe's work on plant morphology has an
) historical connection with modern work. There is more. But let's put this
) into perspective. When I do a search on Newton I get 3443 references that
) mention his name.Some could be other Newtons of course. Newton is an
) absolute giant. Goethe is insignificant.
You make some valid points Peter, and I respect your fairness of mind.
But I'd like to ask: how significant was Aristotle 170 years after his death
compared with what he'd become by, say, the year 1300? A view of his
significance (I am including of course his works on observation of the natural world
and not just his philosophical works) taken 170 years after his death which
asserted that he was not so significant a thinker would not exactly have been
prescient, would it?
Newton will always be important, of course, when it
comes to classical mechanics, but one of Steiner's key insights
- rejected by you possibly - is that
the last 300 years have been dominated by an approach to science based on the
exploration of *the inorganic world*. Thus physics is regarded as the "queen of sciences"
because it allows us to *control* the world to a tighter degree than the more organic
sciences. We are still in this "inorganics-based" phase of scientific thinking and are
only just beginning to emerge from it - hence all the hullaballo about the genetic revolution,
chaos theory etc. Steiner's point was that a new area of science will require a
completely new kind of thinking to cope with it,
and not one based on the inorganic predilections of the 17th
century. I can well understand how scientists who have invested their lives and especially
their *emotions* in the science based on inorganics over the last 300 years might bitterly
resist the assertion I am making here, because it would seem as if I am saying "you are
yesterday's men and women", but history and science are not sentimental, despite the
fact that they may be deeply bound up with human subjectivity. To me, as I look around the
world, it is self-evident that humanity is entering upon a new phase of science - one that is
concerned with the essential dynamics of life and wholeness, not of inorganic substance and
dissected death - the cadaver approach to knowledge.
Now if you look carefully at Steiner's approach to history, you will see that he often
called it "symptomatological". He was always looking for those phenomena that were
symptomatic evidence of coming change in culture and society - the pioneers, if you like.
This was because Steiner's view of history was dynamic. It was from this
aspect that he esteemed Goethe - not as the be-all and end-all of scientists, but as one
of the first to reach into a new realm of scientific thinking. Obviously Goethe's thought will be
limited, because he was at *the beginning* of something, but that does not lessen his
significance, which, I would argue, can be expected - like that of Aristotle - to grow
over the coming decades and even centuries. Steiner discussed
Goethe in remarkable depth and insight - check out his innumerable
comments and lectures about Goethe and I am sure you will come to the same conclusion;
it's not just my assertion; you can prove it for yourself. But equally, because
Steiner was a balanced individual, he was only too aware of Goethe's
weaknesses and often drew attention to them.
) Hemholtz who many on this list
) will not have heard of gets 2567 references. Goethe is insignificant
) compared to Helmholtz.
The number of references does not prove that Goethe in himself is insignificant
compared to Helmholtz. Helmholtz's work was particular to a certain limited area
of science. Goethe pointed to a new thinking which can fructify science as a whole,
especially in the organic sciences.
Take the case of architecture as an analogy: I happen to think that Steiner as
architect is far more
significant *for the future* (not just the 20th cent.) than modernist Mies van der Rohe
for example, or that Steiner's Goetheanums were far more fruitful for architecture than the Dessau
Bauhaus building. Compare them for yourself. Just because not many architects
at the end of the late 20th cent. have heard of the Goetheanums and have heard of,
even quote the Bauhaus as an influence
does not mean the latter is more *significant* in absolute terms than the former.
Ask yourself rather which is the more creative and which really belongs to the future.
Which is the more organic and dynamic? You surely cannot avoid the impression that
the modernists' arid box structures are not only the static products of an inorganic-based
thinking, but are already being consigned to the has-been pages
of architecture, whereas anthroposophically inspired architecture continues to blossom
and slowly but surely gain ground, because it is in tune with the deeper trends of the age.
As indeed is Waldorf - which is why more and more state school educationalists
become interested in it.
Darwin gets 1065 references. Note that these are
) name references. If you were to try and do a real measure of Newton's
) influence, you might not rule out any published scientific work of the last
) 7 years as being not influenced by Newton. Virtually every publication on
) the theory of evolution is influenced by Darwin. It's quite clear you have
) to search for Goethe's influence.
)
Again, this is very limited view in historical terms and says little or nothing
about the significance of these people in absolute terms. Darwin was/is big
because, besides being essentially *correct* about *the idea* of evolution,
his work both culminated with the crest of the wave of philosophical
materialism that had been rising since the 9th century, but also because he too
was one of the first to think in terms of "organic growth".
The intellectual milieu - which then consisted both of the followers of
philosophical materialism and of those who were alert to the coming idea of
devlopment and evolution - was ready for him. Such waves recede
only slowly in history. Indeed, Steiner insisted that materialism would
intensify in the coming centuries, but the resistance to materialism would
also intensify. Freud was very big 50 years ago - he's taken a battering
since. What's the betting that the current vogue for neo-Darwinism and
evolutionary biology will also have retreated by the end of this century?
)
) Is it appropriate to teach Goethe's science in the class room? Maybe. If
) you decide to use colour as a subject of study (a perfectly reasonable
) subject in my view), you might include the physical dimension of colour
) (ideas about waves, perhaps photons, colour relates to wavelength and so
) on) and human perception of colour (rods and cones, psychology of vision,
) etc) then it is reasonable to discuss Goethe's work.
)
I quite agree with you Peter, but I wouldn't say teach first the one then the other,
but rather both together.
)
) It is not reasonable to take Goethe's work and treat it as though it is the
) last word on the subject.
Steiner never said it was.
) It is not reasonable to discuss Goethe's work and
) not to say that modern scientific views are at odds with much or most or
) all of what Goethe said
Agreed. Recall that Steiner insisted that materialistic science needs to be
*complemented*, added to, not abolished. Such scientific thinking is fine
in its own sphere. It's when it insists on taking over all the other spheres
that problems arise.
) .
) Note that I am not saying that this is what happens in Waldorf schools or
) in any particular Waldorf school by any particular teacher. The extremes I
) am pointing to are roughly the extremes that are discussed on this list. I
) think that, for example, teaching that Goethe is the last word on plant
) morphology
He wasn't the last word, rather more like the first word - this is why he's
important. The Wright Bros weren't the last word in powered flight, but
their achievement was epoch-making nevertheless.
) is as bad as teaching creation science instead of or even side
) by side with evolution. I think the latter is simply dishonest. I think the
) former is the same.
)
As far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as "creation *science*", but nor do I
think the current materialist explanations of the beginnings of all and everything
are much further advanced than mere belief. 'Creation science vs evolution' is
a false dichotomy that goes back to the Darwinists vs clergy debates of the 19th cent.
which was but the latest version of the old mediaeval 'reason vs faith' dichotomy.
The *second* millennium was full of such *di*chotomous debates.
The view of evolution that Steiner brings forward leaves that false dichotomy
behind, as his emphasis on *three*folding in the natural and social worlds
was oriented towards the *third* millennium.
He was interested in creating the bases for a healthy future, not repeating the tendencies
of a fraught past.
Regards,
Terry
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2029 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2030 --------------
001 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
002 - "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2ga - race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
003 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Chand to Dan on Steiner and Nazism
004 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: the race question (long)
005 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
007 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Heart (Was: College of teachers (Was Re: ....)
008 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Chand to Dan on Steiner and Nazism
009 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: art and outlines (Chand)
010 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.1 ---------------
From: Sean Slovan (sean.slovan gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 15:24:12 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (200003011153.DAA20497 lists1.best.com)
)When I do a search on Newton I get 3443 references that
)mention his name.Some could be other Newtons of course. Newton is an
)absolute giant. Goethe is insignificant.
Sorry, but this is somehow ludicrous. So quantity determines quality and
value? Perhaps this is also because in the English-speaking hemisphere many
don't bother to (or just can't) read anything that is NOT written in
English, since they take it for granted that ex Occidente lux, etc.
How many entries would you find for the Czech Jan Evangelista Purkyne,
discoverer of the arbitrary heart fibres (known as an experimental reality
by many people in the Eastern hemisphere of this planet, who are trained in
certain techniques of meditation), who in the future will be reckoned much
higher than Robert Boyle and his "pump" -- because of medical reasons? And
for the Ukrainian Georgij Vernadskij, discoverer of the Biosphere decades
before John Lovelock (who of course took all the glory) and of Light
Therapy. And for the Russian A.L. Chizhevskij, discoverer of the influence
of the cycles of solar spots on life on earth, including human behavior?
In the holy Western Sciences, there is a popedom like in Rome, with a Curia,
cardinals and bishops. They decide what is important and what is not. They
sanctify and they condemn. They give you the catechism of what common people
are supposed to believe in, and name the Authorities, including the Church
Fathers (like Newton or Francis Bacon). And the true believers (who of
course believe in the "power of Reason" and worship their "reasonable"
Idols) say "Amen, Amen, be it so". Sometimes, after some 200 years, they
rehabiltate certain burnt and expelled heretics, like Rome did with Galilei
and recently with Giordano Bruno.
I would recommend to read "Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason
in the West" by John Ralston Saul, Random House, New York 1992.
Jan (Seán) Slován
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.2 ---------------
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 09:30:05 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
David cann says, in regard to our ongoing discussion as to whether Steiner's
words on the various races of humankind are relevant in WS today:
((
I just don't think the parochial school analogy works at all
well with relation to Waldorf schools, where they're not teaching any
particular belief system like a Catholic school does.))
Lisa answers:
There are a few of us out here who could argue with that! (Later)
I am considering your point that stereotyping each and every
Anthroposophist as a ``racist'' is as repugnant as the stereotyping of any
other group.
I would argue, though, that certain groups are in fact groups at all
because their belief systems are what hold them together -- in this case,
the belief system is what makes the person identify himself/herself and be
identified by others as an Anthroposophist. (Same with Catholics, Buddhists,
etc.) The commonality of that very belief system (whatever that belief
system contains) is what makes the group a group.
But stereotyping a person because of the amount of melanin in his or her
skin or the straightness or curliness of that person's hair is different, I
believe. Chinese people may share a certain coloring and texture of hair
(though not always -- I know a few curly-headed Chinese children!) but in
regard to the belief system -- the lens through which these people view the
world --- they are completely different!
I certainly would not look at each and every person I know who identifies
himself as an Anthrop. and immediately think ``racist.'' But I WOULD wonder,
based on the depth of that person's commitment to Anthrop. (take a dedicated
W. teacher, for instance -- one who is known for going ``by the book'')
whether they shared Steiner's feelings that one racial group is more
spiritually evolved than others. I still think it is a fair question.
Please note I have not called anyone a ``racist.'' I am merely asking
why devoted Anthropo. seem unable or unwilling to repudiate those things
that Steiner said about the races of humankind that, to today's ear, sound
very dated and yes, racist. (Perhaps the answer is: because these devoted
Anthroposophists believe what Steiner said ....)
* Also, David, I am sorry if I sounded annoyed. I am, in fact, quite
pleased that you have engaged yourself in answering my question, and I feel
I have benefitted from the exchange. I hope to hear more of what you might
have to offer on the matter.
I'm still waiting, though, for any of the devoted Anthros on the list to
answer me!! (G)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.3 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Chand to Dan on Steiner and Nazism
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:40:24 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Thank you for your message, Terry. I think there are a lot of things going on
with Dan, not just resentment against Waldorf schools. A lot of people today
reject 'science' because it does not minister to people, instead concentrating
on the manipulation of the physical. While 'science' does represent an
incomplete outlook, it still contains much that is worthy and that has
indirectly ministered to people (e.g. improving health). To people who make a
living in science and technology (e.g. Dan and I) it is frustrating to see
people closing their minds to science and rational thinking - just as it is
frustrating to listen to Dan on this list. I have to say, that this attitude is
not uncommon in the Waldorf communities of my experience.
Dan's reaction is, in my view, partly against what he sees as a return to
irrationality and the religion of ages past. There was a book a while back (I
only read about it) - something like "A Candle in the Darkness" about how
science was the light that lead out of the dark ages of superstition, and that
current tendencies might return us to a new "dark age." I think this view
(perhaps even this book) is why the issue of how science is taught is so dear to
Dan. I am now starting a book called The Decline of the Clockwork God (or
something like that) that seems to be more proactive and positive about the
limitations of conventional scientific thinking. I'll let you know if I think
it is worth recommending.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.4 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: the race question (long)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:59:06 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Lisa asks]:
) ``If there are people who follow Steiner's teachings to the extent that
)they wear the colors he said to wear on certain days of the week; that they
)eat the grains he prescribed on certain days of the week; that they use a
)system of medical treatment he devised to keep themselves healthy, or to
)treat ill-health; that they follow his educational prescriptions down to
)painting classrooms for each grade a certain color and introducing subjects
)not only in the order he suggested, but also in the manner he suggested;
)etc. etc.....
) ``then why would that devoted Anthroposophist who follows Steiner's
)indications in so many small details of life NOT view minority peoples
)through Steiner's lens, too? If a person eats millet on Wednesday because
)Steiner says it is good for the health and the spirit, why would that same
)person not also believe that my ``yellow-skinned'' Chinese child is in the
)``adolescent stage'' of spiritual development?''
) NO ONE ANSWERED THE QUESTION I POSED.
I'll answer, since you are so gung ho about it, even though I haven't read the
relevant Steiner. It should be obvious by now that if a critic were your
child's Waldorf teacher, you would certainly be in danger of that teacher
judging " ``yellow-skinned'' Chinese child is in the ``adolescent stage'' of
spiritual development?'' This is because, judging from the interpretations of
Steiner posted on this list, the critics read his words but are blind to his
meaning. In other words, while the critics trawl for juicy phrases for use in
their crusade against Waldorf schools, Steiner's insights, what he means and
represents to Waldorf teachers and Anthroposophists, slip through their nets.
That is not to say you will not find an unthinking person who fits Steiners
writings into his/her racists world view. This teacher in Holland seems to be
such a person. The Waldorf teachers I have know were not into racial
stereotyping. You mention that some Christians you know are judgmental, at
least as far as homosexuals are concerned. I have no doubt that such people
exist. Are you now going to interview your children's potential teachers,
rejecting the Anthroposophists who don't reject Steiner to your satisfaction and
the Christians who judge homosexuals? If you want to be sure that your
children's teachers are saints, or at least share your world view, you had
better stick to homeschooling. Many people do for precisely these reasons.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.5 ---------------
From: Sean Slovan (sean.slovan gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 16:05:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (200003011153.DAA20497 lists1.best.com)
Corrigendum:
I wrote:
)Robert Boyle and his "pump"
Should read (of course): William Harvey and his "pump".
Apologies for the ignorance of an inhabitant of the barbarian part of the
world.
Seán Slován
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:12:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Peter Farrell]
) )When I do a search on Newton I get 3443 references that
) )mention his name.Some could be other Newtons of course. Newton is an
) )absolute giant. Goethe is insignificant.
[Sean Slovan]
) Sorry, but this is somehow ludicrous. So quantity determines
) quality and value?
[Bob Tolz]
Peter can certainly speak for himself, but my reading of his post is
somewhat different from yours and that he was writing with brevity to
conclude that the *numbers* of references are insignificant as compared to
Newton and others. Of course, maybe he *did* mean to imply the plain
meaning of his short sentence, as you have read it.
Comments, Peter?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.7 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Heart (Was: College of teachers (Was Re: ....)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:10:43 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Dan, paraphrasing Steiner]:
)the blood, (is) "a very special fluid," (that) moved itself,
[Sune replies]:
)At the early embryological stage it does, before the formation of the
)heart out of the blood stream.
I don't think so. The developing embryonic heart "beats" or at least
rhythmically contracts even before the circulatory system is closed. It is sort
of meaningless to talk about blood flow before that. To be sure, the heart is
more of a tube at that stage, not the complicated organ found in adults.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.8 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Chand to Dan on Steiner and Nazism
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:20:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Chand]
) Dan. I am now starting a book called The Decline of the
) Clockwork God (or
) something like that) that seems to be more proactive and
) positive about the
) limitations of conventional scientific thinking. I'll let
) you know if I think it is worth recommending.
[Bob Tolz]
You might also want to take a peek at "The Marriage of Sense and
Soul : Integrating Science and Religion" by Ken Wilber (Random House, 1998).
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.9 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: art and outlines (Chand)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:23:20 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Diana - don't you even read what I write? You repeat:
[Diana]:
)Chand is not convinced there is any spiritual purpose to art instruction in
)Waldorf. Never mind that any Waldorf teacher who thinks you would like to
)hear about it will tell you *everything* in Waldorf has a spiritual purpose.
Yet for the second time last post I clarify: "I did not say that there is no
spiritual purpose to Waldorf education."
There likely is a spiritual component to Waldorf education, as they seek to
teach the "head, heart and hands" which to me means the physical, the
intellectual and the spiritual. It was you who wrote and fail to justify:
[Diana]:
))I think what's going on here is that art instruction in Waldorf is not at
))all about teaching children to perceive the "sensual world"...
Which means that you don't think art education in Waldorf schools is about
teaching art.
You go on to say that you son after three years in Waldorf is still insecure
about art, now being in the first grade of a public school. Someone recently
wrote that the art instruction in Waldorf began in the grades, not in
Kindergarten. This squares with my current experience with my son's class,
where they apparently draw anything they want. Perhaps your son's Waldorf
preschool and kindergarten teachers were mistakenly trying to introduce art
instruction before his myelin was ready.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2030.10 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Peter Farrell on Goethe and science teaching
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:44:39 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
Boundary="0__=rUxMb0sgaEajJljE7vLlCvPBkkcxb35mzsE9htkKLJGJFd8c8bZJhaxN"
Content-Disposition: inline
--0__=rUxMb0sgaEajJljE7vLlCvPBkkcxb35mzsE9htkKLJGJFd8c8bZJhaxN
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Se
--0__=rUxMb0sgaEajJljE7vLlCvPBkkcxb35mzsE9htkKLJGJFd8c8bZJhaxN
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
=E1n Slov=E1n]:
)Apologies for the ignorance of an inhabitant of the barbarian part of =
the
)world.
We named all our kids after barbarians: Anya, Danika and Miro. Just t=
urned out
that way - as far as I know we don't have barbarian ancestry. Isn't th=
is the
age of barbarians, according to Steiner?
Chand
=
--0__=rUxMb0sgaEajJljE7vLlCvPBkkcxb35mzsE9htkKLJGJFd8c8bZJhaxN--
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2030 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2031 --------------
001 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Weleda vs. NASA
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: Anthroposophical Scientists (was College of teachers)
003 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Weleda vs. NASA
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Anthroposophical Scientists (was College of teachers)
005 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
006 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Jewish wisdom
007 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
008 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Re: Waldorf vs. NASA
009 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
010 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.1 ---------------
From: Sean Slovan (sean.slovan gmx.net)
Subject: Weleda vs. NASA
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 16:57:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (200003010147.RAA10523 lists1.best.com)
Dear list-members, especially the Americans among you
I respect that some of you would go so far as to boycott Weleda products,
because they were sent to Dachau.
Well, but what about your income taxes that were and still are used by the
U.S. American (and Canadian and Australian and British) government to pay
the salaries and pensions of old Nazis, who enjoyed themselves and a jolly
good life after 1945 under the secure protection of an American (Canadian
etc.) passport.
After helping to exterminate the Jews and rotten Slavic subhumans like my
ancestors, they made a brilliant, Dr.Strangelove-like career as Cold War
freedom-fighters in Western laboratories, paid by your and your
(grand-)parents' money, developing nuclear, biological and chemical devices,
irradiating part of the U.S. American population (those who paid so
generously for them).
Thnaks to the efforts of a bunch of old Nazis, the Americans even made it to
the Moon. Great! But you should be aware that the progress in U.S. American
aeronautic and space medicine after the war is to a considerable extent due
to the "tests", i.e. tortures inflicted on helpless prisoners in the KZ
Dachau. And many of Dachau's "medical" staff escaped Nuremberg and got
employed by the U.S. Army and other Agencies, because the U.S. government
had already decided in 1944 to bring them to the States with "Operation
Paperclip", also known as the "Ratline". I won't mention the Dachau tests
concerning Mind Control -- the CIA had all reasons to rejoice in 1948, when
it took over research papers and staff.
If you would like to know more about the converted Nazis, to whom you still
generously donate part of your taxes (what about a boycott?), here you go:
Higham, Charles: Trading with the Enemy. An Exposé of the Nazi-American
Money Plot 1933-1949. New York: Delacorte Press 1983.
Higham, Charles: American Swastika. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday 1985.
Aarons, Mark and Loftus, John: Unholy Trinity: The Vatican, the Nazis, and
Soviet Intelligence. New York: St. Martin's Press 1991.
Bower, Tom: The Paperclip Conspiracy The Hunt for Nazi Scientists. London:
Michael Joseph 1987
Hunt, Linda: Secret Agenda. The United States Government, Nazi Scientists,
and Project Paperclip. 1945 to 1990. New York: St. Martin's Press 1991.
Lasby, Clarence G.: Project Paperclip. German Scientists and the Cold War.
New York: Atheneum 1971
Loftus, John / Mark Aarons: The Secret War Against the Jews. How Western
Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People. New York 1994.
Marks, John: The Search for the "Manchurian Candidate². The CIA and Mind
Control. New York 1979.
Simpson, Christopher: Blowback. America's Recruitment of Nazis and Its
Effects on the Cold War. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson 1988
Simpson, Christopher: Science of Coercion. Communication Research and
Psychological Warfare, 1945-1980. New York, Oxford: OUP 1994.
Simpson, Christopher: Universities and Empire: Money and Politics in the
Social Sciences during the Cold War. New York: The New Press 1999.
Simpson, Christopher: The Splendid Blond Beast. Money, Law, and Genocide in
the 20th Century. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press 1995.
Weleda surely should have known about the tortures in Dachau and should have
refused to "collaborate".
But what about your own governments? Take the conference of Bermuda, at
Easter! 1943: Churchill and Roosevelt knew already of what was going on in
Auschwitz, Treblinka etc. Were they ready to ACT (to bomb railways leading
to the camps, for example)? No, Sir. Of course we know of what happens to
the Jews, the documents explain, but nothing should be done about it. Fears
were raised that the Nazis would stop the gas chambers and, for cash,
release the Jews who would flee to the West. Nobody would favor such an idea
of Jewish mass emigration to the West. The Jews are expendable to the war
effort. In fact, even dead, they are rather useful with regard to the moral
war against Germany during and AFTER the war.
Cf. David Wyman: The Abandonment of the Jews, New York 1984;
Walter Laqueur: The Terrible Secret. London 1981;
Martin Gilbert: Auschwitz and the Allies, London 1981;
John Loftus/Mark Aarons: The Secret War against the Jews. N.Y. 1994;
Richard Breitman: Official Secrets. What the Nazis Planned, What the British
and Americans Knew. New York: Hill & Wang 1998.
There should be a general boycott.
-------
Seán Slován
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Scientists (was College of teachers)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 00:18:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200002291647.IAA24750 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200002291647.IAA24750 lists1.best.com)
)[Dan Dugan]:
) )No, thanks.
)
)Guess who has no data?
)
)Chand
Sorry, but I'm just too busy right now.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.3 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Weleda vs. NASA
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:17:59 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
Boundary="0__=IKQl7BG8kNoqBJD5G51rTzdXevrpjLb8D1StIfdJ3WAxiXchdJGQqs4h"
Content-Disposition: inline
--0__=IKQl7BG8kNoqBJD5G51rTzdXevrpjLb8D1StIfdJ3WAxiXchdJGQqs4h
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Dear Se
--0__=IKQl7BG8kNoqBJD5G51rTzdXevrpjLb8D1StIfdJ3WAxiXchdJGQqs4h
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
=E1n Slov=E1n,
Thank you for the list of references. I know this stuff in a gene=
ral way,
but it is nice to know where to look for details. Let us not forget th=
at in
every country the Germans occupied, they found people more that willing=
to hunt
and hurt Jews. Baba Yar happened without the benefit of a concentratio=
n camp.
[Se=E1n Slov=E1n]:
)There should be a general boycott.
Hear, hear! Lets live off of the grid! Throw out all of those washers=
and
vacuum cleaners and plant your gardens (no F1 hybrids, please!)!
Chand
=
--0__=IKQl7BG8kNoqBJD5G51rTzdXevrpjLb8D1StIfdJ3WAxiXchdJGQqs4h--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Scientists (was College of teachers)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:05:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) )[Dan Dugan]:
) ) )No, thanks.
) )
) )Guess who has no data?
) )
) )Chand
)
) Sorry, but I'm just too busy right now.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
[Bob Tolz]
Well, if the only problem is present time constraints, I can wait
for you, Dan. Give me some idea when you think you'll have sufficient time
and let's target that date.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.5 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc. )
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:15:42 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
))
)Debra, I didn't want my son to be pushed into early reading or academics
)either. It's one of the things that attracted us to Waldorf. But before you
)conclude that Healy's theories support Waldorf's timetable, can you tell me
)if Healy gives any specifics about what is "too early"? I couldn't find any
)in the passage you quoted (is it elsewhere in the book? I once read part of
)this book but I don't have it now). She says the process of myelinization
)is
)not complete sometimes till we're in our 20's, which doesn't help much
[Harve]
I read this book a few years ago. I'll look at it again and see if I can
answer your questions. I'm really busy right now, so I can't do it until
the weekend.
Obviously, Healy is not suggesting that we wait until our 20's to learn how
to read. As I understand it, different parts of the brain are coated with
mylenin at different times. Until that part of the brain is coated, it is
not operating at best efficiency/capacity. Yes, you can learn and perform
with that part of the brain before it is coated, but then you will be taking
away from a lower function that has already been coated. She does use the
example of algebra. Healy said that when she "learned" it in school, she
did not get it. Later, she attempted again and it came very easily and
hypothesized that that part of her brain had been mylenized when she learned
easily.
Last night I was reading the Sunday paper (yes I read it later in the week).
An item caught my eye about a study on Alzheimer's that was done in
Seattle. The study found that people who were members of a large family (5
or more siblings) were nearly 40% more likely to develop the disease than
those who grew up in smaller families.
The researcher's (Victoria Moceri) "theory is that the early environment
could affect brain development that may manifest itself as symptoms of
dementia when a person reaches old age." The researcher concluded that this
might have to do with socio-economic status.
Since the researcher really doesn't know the cause, I submit that it's open
to discussion. Perhaps children in large families (and I wonder about birth
order) out of necessity are called upon to do certain tasks before they are
really ready.
At any rate, as I said yesterday, it makes Steiner's sceloris/hardening
argument more credible.
When I read this article, I wondered about the long term effect of
one-year-olds pushing buttons on a computer and pushing the mouse button.
Quite frankly, it makes me want to run to the closest Waldorf school.
The article is in "Neurology." Chand or Alan, do you have access to it?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.6 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:23:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200002271736.JAA05421 lists1.best.com) (200002272146.NAA17167 lists1.best.com) (200002272228.OAA06459 lists1.best.com) (200002280058.QAA13549 lists1.best.com) (200002282232.OAA12462 lists1.best.com)
Joel writes:
) Dear Alan,
)
) Perhaps I don't understand history at all, but don't cultures get
born,
) then live, and then die. Where are the Sumarians? Greece still exists,
but
) does that ancient rich culture still exist? What about the Culture of Old
) Egypt? If I am correct that it is a fact of history that cultures mature
and
) then die, what is "offensive" to suggest that Jewish culture may
experience the
) same thing. Certainly England as a world power is in eclipse. Etc. etc.
etc.
Well, some cultures come and go quickly, too. That is another fact of
history. If I were to say that Anthroposophy is dying and its task is to
pass on its wisdom before it expires, would you find that offensive?
Alan Fine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.7 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc
. )
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:07:10 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Debra H.]:
) )It's like potty training: if you wait until the child is ready, it
) )can be done in a weekend. If you push it, it can leave scars and take a
) )long time.
[Chand]
))Is this where hemorrhoids come from?
)
I'm sorry, I couldn't help it.
I'm glad you took it in the right spirit. Anyway, in that same vein...don't you
think that this could be the answer to PLANS? I mean if Waldorf education can
really reduce baldness and those other things, well then, who would be against
it? Those Anthroposophical scientists should give up their silly attempts to
prove that the heart is not a pump and demonstrate that going to Waldorf schools
leads to hemorrhoid loss and hair gain.
I can see it now, Dan shambling up to the supreme court in 20 years or so with
his tired arguments After shifting around on those hard benches listening to
Dan go on and on about how Steiner was really Hitler's father, the chief justice
will slam down his gavel and declare - "Are your really trying to argue that
just because Waldorf schools are training proto Nazis who may well start WW III,
you want to shut down the only proven method for eliminating those things
affecting our arrears?!" "Mr. Dugan, I find you guilty to obstructing justice
and sentence you to 20 years moderating the Anthroposophical science internet
list! Case dismissed!
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.8 ---------------
From: Sean Slovan (sean.slovan gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Waldorf vs. NASA
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:00:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (200003011507.HAA19390 lists1.best.com)
Disclaimer:
The intention of my last post "Waldorf vs. NASA" was not to attack or to
make responsible for different faults anybody on this list because of
her/his belonging to a people/nation. Others in their respective countries,
like the author of these lines, have the honor to finance with their income
tax old communists, and they cannot be made personally responsible for the
crimes and murders commited by these "honorable" fellas.
The purpose of this post was to give you a blatent demonstration of how
history can be treacherous, when one is perhaps too convinced of one's own
crusading righteousness. I dislike groups, I only consider the moral deeds
of individuals. But there are many corpses in the closet, not only in
Austria and in Waldorf schools.
So, no attack intended, perhaps a provocation, and surely a call for
reflexion and vigilance.
Seán Slován
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.9 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc
. )
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 16:50:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Debra,
I tried to look up articles by Victoria Moceri but only came up with two
citations about breat cancer. Sorry.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2031.10 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:05:22 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Lisa quoting David]
) ((
) I just don't think the parochial school analogy works at all
)well with relation to Waldorf schools, where they're not teaching any
)particular belief system like a Catholic school does.))
)
[Harve]
I think that there is a danger in even stereotyping Catholic schools. Since
my son is currently at a parochial preschool and we are considering staying,
I have been asking a lot of questions about the religious program. I have
problems with very strict theologies.
In the grades, children have a period in the morning where they talk about
morality, and values, such as being kind and civil to each other.
Obviously, sacramental preparation is different, but that occurs in the
second grade and children can opt out. The children do attend a children's
mass, but our priest is very liberal and laid back and brings his dog to
these masses.
There are very few people of religious orders teaching at these schools
now--there aren't enough of them. The music teacher is a nun and when I saw
her teaching a class she had on jeans, sneakers and a sweatshirt.
When we had the diversity dinners last week, one of the guests was a teacher
in the middle school. He teaches 6th grade religion and science. When I
asked him what they were covering, he said that they had spent the entire
year on the Hebrew Scriptures and were touching on Islam. He said that his
class had visited the Spertus Museum and the rabbi and other staff had been
impressed with his students' knowledge, enthusiasm, and respect for another
tradition.
So, I don't think that there are wide differences even among Catholic
schools.
Harve
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2031 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2032 --------------
001 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re: Goethe and science
002 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
003 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
004 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: Weleda vs. NASA
005 - "debra harvey" (debharve - Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture
006 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Subject: Weleda vs. NASA
007 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Jewish wisdom
008 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
009 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: College of teachers (Was Re: correspondence from Pan
010 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.1 ---------------
From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re: Goethe and science
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 10:29:16 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200003011547.HAA17125 lists1.best.com)
Sean Slovan writes
Sorry, but this is somehow ludicrous. So quantity determines quality and
value?
Peter responds. You're right. Of course it's ludicrous if you are talking
about quality and value. I am talking about influence. A related but
different notion. Influence is a bit like fame. How do you find out whether
a person is famous or not. One way might be to count the number of times
the person is mentioned in the newspapers compared to someone who is
recognised as famous. You're right. There is an implied assumption that
quantity is related to value. It may or may not be true. On the other hand
if very few people pay any attention what is the value?
How many entries would you find for
Jan Evangelista Purkyne, 5
Georgij Vernadskij, 1
A.L. Chizhevskij, 0
)I would recommend to read "Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason
)in the West" by John Ralston Saul, Random House, New York 1992.
I have read it and other books by John Ralston Saul. Highly recommended. I
don't think this book says what you think it says. It is a criticism of the
power given to economists in the west who claim reason but in fact,
according to Saul, do not use reason.
Thanks also to Terry Boardman for a long and thoughtful response. I have no
comment to make unless there is a specific answer to something you
requested that I missed.
Cannon to the right of me, cannon to the left :-)
Peter
Peter Farrell Phone (+613) 9688 4282
Optical Technology Research Laboratory Fax (+613) 9688 4698
School of Communications and Informatics(F119)
Victoria University Email peter.farrell vu.edu.au
PO Box 14428 MCMC
Melbourne 8001 Australia
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.2 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:23:44 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Lisa]
) I certainly would not look at each and every person I know who
)identifies
)himself as an Anthrop. and immediately think ``racist.'' But I WOULD
)wonder,
)based on the depth of that person's commitment to Anthrop. (take a
)dedicated
)W. teacher, for instance -- one who is known for going ``by the book'')
)whether they shared Steiner's feelings that one racial group is more
)spiritually evolved than others. I still think it is a fair question.
[Harve]
What you are describing is a very anti-intellectual approach. Based on the
anthroposophists we have heard from on this list: e.g., Paulina, Joe, Sune,
Felix--that is clearly not the case. I do not think that these analytical
thinkers are going to wear certain colors and eat certain things simply
because Steiner said so. Nor are they going to subscribe to alleged racial
theories because Steiner said so. If they choose to follow Steiner on a
point, it is because they have thought about it and believe it.
I know that you have little patience with talk of folk groups and root
groups, but I think that it is necessary to explore Steiner's readings fully
on these issues, before making a decision on his racism.
I think that people who blindly follow Steiner or any ideology or religion
without thinking for themselves are either tremendously insecure and/or very
lazy. It is called fundamentalism. They have found an answer and now they
don't have to think anymore. Anthroposophy seems too complex and
contradictory (hence rich) to grab onto as the quick fix.
It seems to me that if people are blindly following what they perceive to be
Steiner, then they are not even getting it.
I think that most teachers in Waldorf schools today have probably never
heard of root groups and would be deeply offended by the material on Dan's
website. Most of them are probably so busy getting ready for the next day
and learning new material for the course block that they don't really have
time to ponder these issues.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.3 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc . )
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:26:39 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Chand
),
) I tried to look up articles by Victoria Moceri but only came up with
)two
)citations about breat cancer.
[Harve]
The good news is that I read in my same Sunday paper that researchers say
that girls born today will not have to worry about breast cancer.
Thanks for looking. This month's Neurology may not have hit the stands yet.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.4 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Weleda vs. NASA
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:36:52 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Sean]
)But what about your own governments? Take the conference of Bermuda, at
)Easter! 1943: Churchill and Roosevelt knew already of what was going on in
)Auschwitz, Treblinka etc. Were they ready to ACT (to bomb railways leading
)to the camps, for example)? No, Sir. Of course we know of what happens to
)the Jews, the documents explain, but nothing should be done about it. Fears
)were raised that the Nazis would stop the gas chambers and, for cash,
)release the Jews who would flee to the West. Nobody would favor such an
)idea
)of Jewish mass emigration to the West. The Jews are expendable to the war
)effort. In fact, even dead, they are rather useful with regard to the moral
)war against Germany during and AFTER the war.
[Harve]
Unfortunately, this has a ring of truth to it. When you refer to documents,
were these actual transcripts of meetings or testimonial accounts taken
later on? Which one of these sources do you most recommend?.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.5 ---------------
From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Reading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc . )
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:41:39 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Chand]
I mean if Waldorf education can
)really reduce baldness and those other things, well then, who would be
)against
)it?
[Harve]
Hell, if Anthroposophist can cure baldness, where do I buy the stock? Did
Steiner say anything about cellulite? We could make a mint on that.
)
[Chand]
)I can see it now, Dan shambling up to the supreme court in 20 years or so
)with
)his tired arguments
[Harve]
More like Cousin Vinny.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.6 ---------------
From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Subject: Weleda vs. NASA
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:57:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jan Slovan writes:
)Take the conference of Bermuda, at Easter! 1943:
)Churchill and Roosevelt knew already of what was going on in
)Auschwitz, Treblinka etc.
(snip)
)The intention of my last post "Waldorf vs. NASA" was not to attack or to
)make responsible for different faults anybody on this list because of
)er/his belonging to a people/nation.
I, for one, REALLY appreciated your post, but for an entirely off-topic
reason. My grandmother was personally chosen to serve Winston Churchill at a
summit meeting in Bermuda, presumably because she was a 'neutral' Swiss
citizen.
Any idea if there were any other summit meetings on Bermuda? I'd like to be
able to verify my granmother's story, but I have no idea when it happened -
only that it was during WW2. (Not that I think she was lying, but it would
be nice to actually document for posterity.)
Thanks.
---------------------------
Sarina McDonald
pandora aa.net
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.7 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:20:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)Joel writes:
)
)) Dear Alan,
))
)) Perhaps I don't understand history at all, but don't cultures get
)born,
)) then live, and then die. Where are the Sumarians? Greece still exists,
)but
)) does that ancient rich culture still exist? What about the Culture of Old
)) Egypt? If I am correct that it is a fact of history that cultures mature
)and
)) then die, what is "offensive" to suggest that Jewish culture may
)experience the
)) same thing. Certainly England as a world power is in eclipse. Etc. etc.
)etc.
)
)Well, some cultures come and go quickly, too. That is another fact of
)history. If I were to say that Anthroposophy is dying and its task is to
)pass on its wisdom before it expires, would you find that offensive?
)
)Alan Fine
There's a big difference between saying that, from a historical
perspective, a culture has already passed its peak, or has even died out,
and speculating or predicting that a currently vibrant culture is about to
die (or should have already). In my opinion, the latter is offensive; the
former not at all.
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
The only magazine dedicated to a Jewish perspective
on childraising and family health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.8 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:10:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lisa E, regarding my assertion that WE is not like a parochial school:
) There are a few of us out here who could argue with that! (Later)
I've read this list long enough to realize that! Doesn't mean I should shy
away from confronting such a misguided notion.
Lisa again:
) * Also, David, I am sorry if I sounded annoyed. I am, in fact, quite
)pleased that you have engaged yourself in answering my question, and I feel
)I have benefitted from the exchange. I hope to hear more of what you might
)have to offer on the matter.
Don't worry, I'm not annoyed. I was surprised, that's all.
All I really have to add is that on this list I feel like I am expected to
answer, answer, answer, and that the questions I ask seem to disappear into
the ether.
My second brief whine is that it's usually the least important sentence in
my post that gets pulled out and used as grist, when the part that I think
is meatier and more comment-worthy gets dropped.
No biggie, though. If it really bothers me, I can always go away.
David
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.9 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: College of teachers (Was Re: correspondence from Pan
Forrest)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:49:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200002292303.PAA29440 lists1.best.com)
Dear Peter,
I would like to address this, but please be assured I am not out to change
your diet.
As in the case of the remarks I wrote to Lisa (I think), about the "forces"
concerning "hardending" etc., I would like to (in a playful way) express some
thoughts regarding the "heart".
As you know Peter, many "forces" science has so far found in nature are
"invisible", at least to our normal sense organs. We don't see gravity, for
example, just its "effects".
We also do not normally see a magnetic field, but if we place some iron
filings on a piece of paper etc etc (as you well know), we can see something of
the "lines of force" of the field.
Steiner tried to steer away from the "life" force idea, because his view
was it caused a lot of confusion. He most often wrote of etheric formative
forces, or as George Adams Kaufman liked to say: ethereal forces.
In Kaufman's book, "Universal Forces in Mechanics", he made an attempt to
speak of these ethereal forces using the more ordinary understanding of
physics. For example, he wrote of the capacity of certain types of matter to
"flex", that is certain metals could be bent. Now one of the consequences of
bending repeatedly a piece of metal is that it gets "hot". Our bending changes
the "coherence" of the material and "releases" something bound up in the
metal. Now interestly enough, if you "weigh" it afterward, it "weighs" the
same, even though it has given up "heat". That is there is no oxidation, no
chemical change. Where does the "heat" from?
Now a human being is a "warm" blooded animal (opps, not anthroposophically
poltically correct, but what the heck, this is the critics list, it isn't
necessary to be really logical and systematic, is it.). Our langauge has
acquired over the many years of human existence, a number of metaphors for
various states of emotional being, using the imagery of "heat": hot blooded,
warm hearted, cold hearted etc.
Emperical science, hard evidence, and double blind experiments to the
contrary, these terms (and all their relatives) have deep and important meaning
in human relationships. We all experience them. We know, for example, that a
mere glance can "warm" us, or, if something more sinister is happening, "make
our blood run cold".
Yes, yes, I know it's supposed to be all hormones and chemical reactions,
and evolutionary biology and psychology and stuff. Not really talking about
what the current "paradigm" believes. Not talking about that at all. Going in
an entirely different direction.
The question is do you want to "experience" the ethereal forces flowing
through your heart center? To an open minded, adventureous person, that might
sound very "cool". To a professed skeptic, who doesn't want anything
interferring with his already made up mind, then, gosh, don't bother at all.
Just kiss it off. It's probably some cult trick anyway, right?
For those willing to hazard a few sacred cows ...
Lets back up a bit first. Remember in my earlier post about "upbuilding"
forces and how they became involved in using the "intellect" and that's why
"hardening" could arise too early, if these "upbuilding" forces were put to an
inappropriate use too early in the development of a child's life?
Anyway, thinking is an "ethereal" activity. Again, all one has to do is
look at language, where human experience is recorded. We speak of a "bright"
idea, or call someone "bright" or draw pictures of someone having a "bright
idea" by having a "light bulb" go off over their head. I am sure you are
aware of the biographies of scientists regarding their "experiences" of
intiution, and of "thinking" in pictures. There is nothing new here.
In my "paradigm" this "light" is an experience of the ethereal, which is
kin to the light described by Goethe as the "deeds and sufferings of light".
Yeah, okay, but this is anecdotal. Sure it is, but do you want to try an
experiment? See, one of the problems has been that this "intuitional"
experience, this "flash of insight" (isn't insight a delightful word -
in-sight, sight within?), hasn't been found by those who occassionally
experience it to be reproducible. You can have it apparently spontaneously,
but can't generate it (at least that's the rumor).
Now here is what you do (and by the way, it will take some time for this to
show itself. Somethings need to be practiced). When you are involved with
another human being try to pay attention to the flow of thoughts. Don't dwell
on them, just be a little bit more awake. While doing this try to notice your
attitude. In particular, do I care about this person, or am in basically
indifferent.
When the opportunity arises, try to move your attention to your heart. Not
a lot of effort need to be involved here. Just try to image that you are
thinking about them with your heart instead of your head. You let yourself
care about them, be open to them, vulnerable to them, even (dare we speak the
dreaded L-word) love them.
This intention, using the will (obviously you have to "will it"), brings it
about that a current arises in the will aspect of ones own ether body, a
current which rises up through the heart, and which current becomes then a
dynamic "field" of etherealized blood in the head. Thoughts "produced" in this
field will start to have "intuitional" or "light filled" qualities.
Now circle back to the beginning of this post (in your mind of course) and
remember what I said about invisible forces and iron filings and being able to
see the magnetic field in the filings. So it is with our thought life. We
activate the heart forces, using the imagination and the attention and our
"intention" to create a "current", which then leaves its "traces" in the life
of thought.
By the way, a small note of caution. Love is not excessive sympathy. Love
doesn't involve sacrificing "judgment". Rather, at this stage anyway, it is
about "concerned interest".
Now what does this have to do with "the heart is more than a pump, in fact
maybe not a pump at all, but rather a pneumatic ram"? Well, to "know" what the
heart does, you have to learn to give to thinking a whole other quality. The
above concerns learning about that "quality" in the most immediate aspects of
our life, our personal relationships.
warm regards,
joel
Peter Farrell wrote:
) Peter Farrell responding to Dan.
)
) I am aware of some of the nonsense that Steiner and followers have written
) with repect to blood movement. In my words the Steiner belief is something
) like the blood moves on its own due to a life force, and the role of the
) heart is to slow it down, perhaps acting more like a valve than a pump.
)
) I find it absolutely astonishing that anybody can believe this nonsense.
) And yet I know they exist. If it were some sort of allegory or spiritual
) metaphor that would take it into the realms of religion alone, and that
) might be ok. But that is clearly not the case. Some of the books I've read
) make it clear that the life force stuff is what makes it go and this is the
) actual physical fact.
)
) My hats are safe.
)
) Peter
)
) Peter Farrell Phone (+613) 9688 4282
) Optical Technology Research Laboratory Fax (+613) 9688 4698
) School of Communications and Informatics(F119)
) Victoria University Email peter.farrell vu.edu.au
) PO Box 14428 MCMC
) Melbourne 8001 Australia
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2032.10 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:54:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lisa
)
)) I certainly would not look at each and every person I know who
))identifies
))himself as an Anthrop. and immediately think ``racist.'' But I WOULD
))wonder,
))based on the depth of that person's commitment to Anthrop. (take a
))dedicated
))W. teacher, for instance -- one who is known for going ``by the book'')
))whether they shared Steiner's feelings that one racial group is more
))spiritually evolved than others. I still think it is a fair question.
)
)[Harve]
)
)What you are describing is a very anti-intellectual approach. Based on the
)anthroposophists we have heard from on this list: e.g., Paulina, Joe, Sune,
)Felix--that is clearly not the case. I do not think that these analytical
)thinkers are going to wear certain colors and eat certain things simply
)because Steiner said so. Nor are they going to subscribe to alleged racial
)theories because Steiner said so. If they choose to follow Steiner on a
)point, it is because they have thought about it and believe it.
David: Apart from all that, who the heck knows (and how would you tell?)
which teachers are more anthroposophist or less anthroposophist? There just
isn't very much objective evidence you can use to make that determination
(other than simply asking). Nor is this a topic I ever remember coming up
in parking lot conversation, at parent council meetings, at board meetings,
anywhere.
All our teachers are engaged at some level in studying anthroposophy as it
relates to their teaching. I (and most if not all of the parents I've met)
are far more interested in how well our teachers teach than in whether they
follow a nonexistent Waldorf / anthroposophic "book".
David
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2032 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2033 --------------
001 - Felix Hau (felix.hau anth - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
002 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Peter Staudenmaier's use of sources
003 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Jewish wisdom
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Jewish wisdom
006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
007 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Jewish wisdom
008 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: Avoid computReading, abstractions and sclerosis (was domin
009 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: lines once again / Lisa's child
010 - Joe Serio (jserio01 earth - Re: Peter Staudenmaier's use of sources
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.1 ---------------
From: Felix Hau (felix.hau anthroposophie-heute.de)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:10:15 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200003012327.PAA26945 lists1.best.com)
Dear Harve!
harve wrote:
) What you are describing is a very anti-intellectual approach. Based on the
) anthroposophists we have heard from on this list: e.g., Paulina, Joe, Sune,
) Felix--that is clearly not the case. I do not think that these analytical
) thinkers are going to wear certain colors and eat certain things simply
) because Steiner said so. Nor are they going to subscribe to alleged racial
) theories because Steiner said so. If they choose to follow Steiner on a
) point, it is because they have thought about it and believe it.
That's it, indeed. If there has been one "rule" for me not
only in view to Steiner, but to all "theories",
"thought-systems" and so on, then it has been to be
sceptical about them - until I can say: I know (I find it
very difficult to define what "knowledge" means, by the
way!). And even then I continue to check and verify it with
respect to every situation I meet with.
Maybe it's surprising: But I would call myself still an
atheist. I find that this matches extraordinarily well with
anthroposophy.
By the way: Do you know one of my favourite Steiner's?
"It's better to eat some ham than to think some"
:-)))
Regards,
Felix
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.2 ---------------
From: Sean Slovan (sean.slovan gmx.net)
Subject: Peter Staudenmaier's use of sources
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 00:15:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (200003011821.KAA24655 lists1.best.com)
Another posting, I got too much spare time tonight, but this won't happen
very often, I promise.
As I have access to and am familar with a rather big research library, I
took the pains to check the "proofs" P. Staudenmaier recently gave here on
this list for his claim that Rudolf Hess was "Anthroposophist" -- a question
that caught my interest. Now let us see.
Subject: [Staudenmaier] one more for the list
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 23:49:50 -0800
) But while Hess was hardly the only high-up Nazi who was a
) convinced anthroposophist, he was the best known, so Detlef's laughable
) claim deserves at least to be tested against the scholarly consensus. [...]
)The matter is complicated in this instance by the fact that after
) Hess lost the internal party struggle over offical attitudes toward
) organized anthroposophy, it wasn't a wise career move to voice one's
) favorable opinions of it. Nevertheless scholarly opinion is not divided on
) this question. Aside from the sources cited in my article (both Haushofer
) and Bramwell document Hess's Steinerite worldview), evidence for the
) determinate influence of anthroposophy on Hess's thinking is provided in
) biographies of Hess (see Wulf Schwarzwaeller, Der Stellvertreter des
) Fuehrers, p. 159),
Schwarzwaeller's book is a popular account, without references nor
footnotes. On p. 159 he mentions that Hess was a greedy reader of obscure
writings on Homeopathy, nature healing and eye diagnostics, that he tried to
get into contact with all kind of prophets, astrologers and diviners, and
that he studied books on Theosophy and Anthroposophy as well. He was
especially interested in bio-dynamical agriculture (as he was very concerned
with healthy nutrition and always afraid of being poisoned) and in Waldorf
education. No statement as to Hess being an Anthroposophist. No sources are
given.
)general accounts of the Nazi leadership (see Joachim
) Fest, Das Gesicht des Dritten Reiches, p. 264),
Fest is indeed a renowned conservative historian. But: Nada, nothing at all.
Hess "was convinced of the influence of stars on the destiny", was
surrounded by diviners, radioesthesians and pendulum swingers (how do you
say in English??), used homeopathic drugs brought to him by Sven Hedin from
Tibet. No mentioning of Steiner nor of Anthroposophy on p. 264 and in the
whole essay on Hess. The same is true for the best historical account (not
quoted by Staudenmaier) by Dietrich Orlow in: Die braune Elite, edited by
the American historian Ronald Smelser (whom I happen to know personally) and
the rather conservative German historian Rainer Zitelmann, Darmstadt 1989.
)overviews of the esoteric
) movement (see James Webb, The Occult Establishment, p. 308), and studies of
) the link between esoteric and fascist philosophies (see Peter Orzechowski,
) Schwarze Magie - Braune Macht, p. 121).
Hmm, I like Webb's book a lot, but in many details it is simply unreliable,
as Webb had to refer to already existing literature, in the case of Hess to
the multitude of books which make a well-selling story out of the "occult
history of the Third Reich", from Tibet to Aleister Crowley. His statement
on Hess is only cursory, a bit like Schwarzwaeller's. He had no access to
sources at all. Orzechowski is much worse, as he recopies almost every crude
story that can be found in trashy books like the ones by Pauwels/Bergier and
Brennan.
Strange that Staudenmaier has a preference for the kind of irrational
"historical" literature he tries to refute. But that's the way it goes: as
long as it serves the means, print the legend.
)I am unaware of a single
) non-anthroposophist historian who disputes this interpretation. That
) doesn't, of course, necessarily mean that this interpretation is "correct",
) but it does mean that you need to adduce more than a lone deprecating
) remark by Hess to disprove it.
Hess was an early member of the notorious Munich Thule Society (already in
1918/19); the same secret society tried to kill "Jewish revolutionaries" who
came to government in Munich at that time.
(For details see Hermann Gilbhard: Die Thule-Gesellschaft Vom okkulten
Mummenschanz zum Hakenkreuz. München 1994; Detlev Rose: Die
Thule-Gesellschaft. Legende Mythos Wirklichkeit. Tübingen 1994; Reginald
H. Phelps: Before Hitler Came: Thule Society and Germanenorden. In: Journal
of Modern History 35 (1963), pp. 245-261; M. Plewnia: Auf dem Weg zu Hitler.
Der »völkische« Publizist Dietrich Eckart. Bremen 1970.)
And on May 15, 1922, the Thule Society (Hitler, too, was close to it at that
time) tried to assassinate the "Jew and Anthroposoph" Rudolf Steiner during
a public lecture in Munich in the hotel Vier Jahreszeiten. Steiner escaped
thanks to his alert bodyguards and never held a public lecture in Germany
again. After the attempted Ludendorff-Hitler putsch in Munich in 1923, he
said that he would not even touch German soil again, if these people would
come to power.
Hess at that time was quite open for all kind of "occult" phenomena, but not
particulary for Anthroposophy, even if some Anthroposophists had the
illusion that Hess, if only addressed, could intervene in their favour to
protect them from persecution. Much more important: Hess' wife Ilse Hess
wrote in a letter from June 14, 1984 that her husband was not interested in
Anthroposophy at all ("ihr Mann [hat] sich überhaupt nicht für
Anthroposophie interessiert"), even if others held the opinion that they
both were Anthroposophists ["die Meinung, wir seien Anthroposophen, [sich]
beharrlich hielt"; quoted in "Anthroposophy and Nationalsocialism", in:
Flensburger Hefte no. 32 (1991), p. 23], -- especially after Hess' flight to
Scotland in 1941, when Martin Bormann and Heydrich started their diffamation
attack against Hess.
As Marco Pasi could prove in his excellent Ph.D. thesis "Aleister Crowley e
la tentazione della politica", Milano 1999, chap. 3, Hess was attracted to
go to Scotland by British occultists like Aleister Crowley who cooperated on
this with the secret service M.I.5 (among the contact persons was Ian
Fleming -- yes 007's father). Crowley, the Beast, had been in Berlin from
1930 until 1932. The documents from this very period are missing among his
papers in the London Warburg Institute.
The most authoritative scholarly books on the "occult" side of the NS, e.g.
Ellic Howe: Astrology and the Third Reich. Wellingborough 1984; Nicholas
Goodrick-Clarke: The Occult Roots of National-Socialism. London 1985; Hans
Th. Hakl: Nationalsozialismus und Okkultismus, in: Gnostika nos.1, 4 and
7/1997; Brigitte Hamann: Hitler's Wien. Lehrjahre eines Diktators. München
1996; Friedrich Heer: Der Glaube des Adolf Hitler. Anatomie einer
politischen Religiosität. München-Esslingen 1968, all NEVER mention either
Rudolf Steiner or Anthroposophy in this context.
It can be stated: Hess was NOT an Anthroposophist, nor was he basically
influenced by Anthroposophy. Sorry.
An old sworn enemy of Rudolf Steiner since 1920, Jakob Wilhelm Hauer, who
was eager to prove already in the early 1930s that A. was contrary and
harming to the (un-)spirit of New Nazi Germany, came forward with this story
in 1941, when Hess was in Scotland. Hess had been manipulated -- Hauer wrote
in a letter to Himmler on May 13, 1941 -- by "the great demonical seducer"
Rudolf Steiner, certainly of Jewish origin, who had according to Hauer
already manipulated by occult means General von Moltke back in 1914, when
the German army under the command of the latter lost the battle on the
Marne. This Steiner was an anti-German Cagliostro. Hess was his victim.
Hauer relied on Mathilde Ludendorff's and her followers' attack against
Steiner from February 1933 in a Berlin newspaper (National-Zeitung) where
she had claimed that because of his influence on the German general H. von
Moltke in 1914, Germany lost the first, decisive battle at the Marne and as
a consequence the entire war. Germany's defeat in WW I therefore was the
work of the "Theosoph, Jew, Freemason and Communist Rudolf Steiner". In
another pamphlet by the NS propaganda office Hochmuth, Steiner is depicted
as being involved in the Jewish-Masonic world conspiracy, being a "Half-Jew,
the agent of the [Masonic] Grand Orient [of France]".
That's why Hess went to Scotland when he fell under the "Anthroposophical
spell".
And that's how fairy tales start. Many books just copy and recopy the old
Nazi propaganda on Hess written AFTER 1941. So did Staudenmaier. I won't
comment his knowledge of historical sources, which is equal to nil, any
further. Nor his non-existing care for historical accuracy.
Seán Slován
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.3 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:00:22 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200003011439.GAA29389 lists1.best.com)
Lisa Ercolano wrote:
) I'm still waiting, though, for any of the devoted Anthros on the list to
) answer me!! (G)
Dear Lisa,
I will be a devoted anthro for you, but I hope you won't mind if I don't fit
what appears to be assumptions on your part. In fact, I would guess from your
posts that you don't know many anthroposophers, and that a lot of what you think
you know, you have learned on this list.
Personally, if I wanted to know something about the Jewish religion, I would
not go to Louis Farakan with my questions. This list is a very poor place to
learn about anthroposophy.
You speak of anthro beliefs. If you will remember, Paulina recently asked
Dan (I think it was Dan) to tell her what he thought her beliefs were, so she
could see if it was true. I am of the same mind. I don't know what you are
talking about, even though I have been acquainted with Steiner for over twenty
years, and a member of the Society for that long and a member of the Class for
fifteen (if you want to know about the Class, please don't ask Dan, unless you
don't want to know about the Class).
I do know many anthroposophers who sometimes act like "true believers" in
the sense of Eric Hoffer. But that characteristic is a human one, not limited
to anthroposophers. "True believers" of any persuasion will always leave one a
bit put off. So, I am not surprised to find that condition in anthroposophy or
any where else for that matter.
Also, regards Steiner's "racist" ideas: If you collected those ideas you
have been posting from this list, then consider the source. If not, than
perhaps you didn't understand what you read.
Also, I am sorry to tell you, that since I am not a type of human being that
is a "true believer", I don't carry a lot of Steiner-ideas in my head as
beliefs. To me, being an anthroposopher means being interested in the truth,
and in being very careful about "how" I think. Not "what" I think, but about
the "qualities" of intention etc. that happen precedent to, and coextensive
with, the act of thinking. Most, not "true believing" anthroposophers that I
know, wouldn't touch a racist Steiner idea wherever they found it (and he did
seem to have some stereotypes of his own). Most anthroposophers I know (again
of the non-true believing type of person), struggle, like most good willed
people (such as you appear to be), to overcome what is repugnant in our culture
and to improve it.
warm regards,
joel
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:50:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200002271736.JAA05421 lists1.best.com) (200002272146.NAA17167 lists1.best.com) (200002272228.OAA06459 lists1.best.com) (200002280058.QAA13549 lists1.best.com) (200002282232.OAA12462 lists1.best.com) (200003011925.LAA26716 lists1.best.com)
Alan wrote:
) Well, some cultures come and go quickly, too. That is another fact of
) history. If I were to say that Anthroposophy is dying and its task is to
) pass on its wisdom before it expires, would you find that offensive?
Dear Alan,
I'm grateful for your response to my small efforts of sorting some
possible thoughts on anthroposophy and Judaism. I had not thought much
about it or expressed them before. Seeing your response, and thinking
for some time about it, I can understand you and see your point. The
history of the Jewish people is a complex story and I have no final
'answers' on the subject.
During the hard time of its (only Juda or all tribes the tribes of
Israel?) abduction to Babylonia by Nebukadnezar II c 590 B.C. it was
promised by Jehova through the Profets that it would be allowed to
come 'back' to its 'home' country. It also did 538 B.C.
To what extent can that be used as an argument, if that is the case
(?), also after that return, for having been promised to return also
after the Diaspora that started 350 years later, or are there other
promises for that renewed return this century? The question is not
meant to be offensive, as I hope you understand, I'm just curious
about the argumentation.
I'm also aware of the two heavenly congregations of the one of
144 000, related to the 12 tribes of Israel (?) and the innumerable
members of the white-dressed congregation described in the Apocalypse
of St John, related to the rest of mankind(?). It's still a subject I
haven't dived into.
(Also, Yael writes:
'There's a big difference between saying that, from a historical
perspective, a culture has already passed its peak, or has even died
out, and speculating or predicting that a currently vibrant culture is
about to die (or should have already). In my opinion, the latter is
offensive; the former not at all.'
Integrating the culture of different Jewish groups around the world in
a natural way into the cultural environment where it exists, that has
to a large extent also been the case is, I think, something that is a
good development that should be striven for.
What I think upset a number of members of also the Jewish community
around the world when the thought came up of a return to a sort of
pre-Diaspora state, was the concept of today to found a new/old
_state_ based on the dominance of a more or less purely
_ethnic/cultural_ group, with laws for all the members of the state
based on that _ethnic/cultural_ group, not more generally human
perspectives.
This is an unlucky tendency that has become increasingly common with
always unhappy results around the world, one of the latest one being
Nigeria (?), where the Government the last period decided to impose
the Islamic law of Sharia to all, leading to violent conflicts between
Muslim and 'Christian' groups and many dead.
The same has been the case in Yugoslavia, when US decided to support
the separation and special formation of Kosovo as a separate new
state, based on the Albanian part of its population, dragging the rest
of NATO and Europe into a war, that has just lead to renewed human
disaster to all involved in the region, with no light yet at the end
of the tunnel.
It is a sort of renewed mini National Socialism, based on the
'special' rights of a special ethnic group 'over' the rights over
other ethnic groups.
The problem can, I think, only be solved, if one looks at what is the
issue; the awareness of the necessity to distinguish between
_cultural_ rights and basic _civil_(?) rights, equal for all, the last
of which is what holds for states as _legal_ areas.
The problem can be solved and _has_ been solved without violence in
different parts of the world, one being for 'Åland', the 'Finnish'
island with a Swedish speaking population, that has its special status
within mainly Finnish speaking Finland without separating from Finland
to become part of Sweden, or forming a fullblown 'state' of its own.
There are surely other examples around the world, that I'm not just
now aware of right now.)
As for anthroposophy being old already ... that is not my feeling,
when seeing how much it has developed so far. I more have the feeling
it is still in a very early phase that will continue to develop over
at least some two hundred more years in its present form before
declining.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:50:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200002271736.JAA05421 lists1.best.com) (200002272146.NAA17167 lists1.best.com) (200002272228.OAA06459 lists1.best.com) (200002280058.QAA13549 lists1.best.com) (200002282232.OAA12462 lists1.best.com) (200003011925.LAA26716 lists1.best.com)
Alan wrote:
) Well, some cultures come and go quickly, too. That is another fact of
) history. If I were to say that Anthroposophy is dying and its task is to
) pass on its wisdom before it expires, would you find that offensive?
Dear Alan,
I'm grateful for your response to my small efforts of sorting some
possible thoughts on anthroposophy and Judaism. I had not thought much
about it or expressed them before. Seeing your response, and thinking
for some time about it, I can understand you and see your point. The
history of the Jewish people is a complex story and I have no final
'answers' on the subject.
During the hard time of its (only Juda or all tribes the tribes of
Israel?) abduction to Babylonia by Nebukadnezar II c 590 B.C. it was
promised by Jehova through the Profets that it would be allowed to
come 'back' to its 'home' country. It also did 538 B.C.
To what extent can that be used as an argument, if that is the case
(?), also after that return, for having been promised to return also
after the Diaspora that started 350 years later, or are there other
promises for that renewed return this century? The question is not
meant to be offensive, as I hope you understand, I'm just curious
about the argumentation.
I'm also aware of the two heavenly congregations of the one of
144 000, related to the 12 tribes of Israel (?) and the innumerable
members of the white-dressed congregation described in the Apocalypse
of St John, related to the rest of mankind(?). It's still a subject I
haven't dived into.
(Also, Yael writes:
'There's a big difference between saying that, from a historical
perspective, a culture has already passed its peak, or has even died
out, and speculating or predicting that a currently vibrant culture is
about to die (or should have already). In my opinion, the latter is
offensive; the former not at all.'
Integrating the culture of different Jewish groups around the world in
a natural way into the cultural environment where it exists, that has
to a large extent also been the case is, I think, something that is a
good development that should be striven for.
What I think upset a number of members of also the Jewish community
around the world when the thought came up of a return to a sort of
pre-Diaspora state, was the concept of today to found a new/old
_state_ based on the dominance of a more or less purely
_ethnic/cultural_ group, with laws for all the members of the state
based on that _ethnic/cultural_ group, not more generally human
perspectives.
This is an unlucky tendency that has become increasingly common with
always unhappy results around the world, one of the latest one being
Nigeria (?), where the Government the last period decided to impose
the Islamic law of Sharia to all, leading to violent conflicts between
Muslim and 'Christian' groups and many dead.
The same has been the case in Yugoslavia, when US decided to support
the separation and special formation of Kosovo as a separate new
state, based on the Albanian part of its population, dragging the rest
of NATO and Europe into a war, that has just lead to renewed human
disaster to all involved in the region, with no light yet at the end
of the tunnel.
It is a sort of renewed mini National Socialism, based on the
'special' rights of a special ethnic group 'over' the rights over
other ethnic groups.
The problem can, I think, only be solved, if one looks at what is the
issue; the awareness of the necessity to distinguish between
_cultural_ rights and basic _civil_(?) rights, equal for all, the last
of which is what holds for states as _legal_ areas.
The problem can be solved and _has_ been solved without violence in
different parts of the world, one being for 'Åland', the 'Finnish'
island with a Swedish speaking population, that has its special status
within mainly Finnish speaking Finland without separating from Finland
to become part of Sweden, or forming a fullblown 'state' of its own.
There are surely other examples around the world, that I'm not just
now aware of right now.)
As for anthroposophy being old already ... that is not my feeling,
when seeing how much it has developed so far. I more have the feeling
it is still in a very early phase that will continue to develop over
at least some two hundred more years in its present form before
declining.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.6 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 03:06:44 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200003012327.PAA26945 lists1.best.com) (200003020115.RAA27162 lists1.best.com)
Felix wrote:
) Maybe it's surprising: But I would call myself still an
) atheist. I find that this matches extraordinarily well with
) anthroposophy.
New thought provoking perspective! :-)
Hm. Is God, not?
) By the way: Do you know one of my favourite Steiner's?
) "It's better to eat some ham than to think some"
) :-)))
'think ham'? Or was it 'hamburger ...'? :-)
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.7 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Jewish wisdom
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:50:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200002271736.JAA05421 lists1.best.com) (200002272146.NAA17167 lists1.best.com) (200002272228.OAA06459 lists1.best.com) (200002280058.QAA13549 lists1.best.com) (200002282232.OAA12462 lists1.best.com) (200003011925.LAA26716 lists1.best.com)
Alan wrote:
) Well, some cultures come and go quickly, too. That is another fact of
) history. If I were to say that Anthroposophy is dying and its task is to
) pass on its wisdom before it expires, would you find that offensive?
Dear Alan,
I'm grateful for your response to my small efforts of sorting some
possible thoughts on anthroposophy and Judaism. I had not thought much
about it or expressed them before. Seeing your response, and thinking
for some time about it, I can understand you and see your point. The
history of the Jewish people is a complex story and I have no final
'answers' on the subject.
During the hard time of its (only Juda or all tribes the tribes of
Israel?) abduction to Babylonia by Nebukadnezar II c 590 B.C. it was
promised by Jehova through the Profets that it would be allowed to
come 'back' to its 'home' country. It also did 538 B.C.
To what extent can that be used as an argument, if that is the case
(?), also after that return, for having been promised to return also
after the Diaspora that started 350 years later, or are there other
promises for that renewed return this century? The question is not
meant to be offensive, as I hope you understand, I'm just curious
about the argumentation.
I'm also aware of the two heavenly congregations of the one of
144 000, related to the 12 tribes of Israel (?) and the innumerable
members of the white-dressed congregation described in the Apocalypse
of St John, related to the rest of mankind(?). It's still a subject I
haven't dived into.
(Also, Yael writes:
'There's a big difference between saying that, from a historical
perspective, a culture has already passed its peak, or has even died
out, and speculating or predicting that a currently vibrant culture is
about to die (or should have already). In my opinion, the latter is
offensive; the former not at all.'
Integrating the culture of different Jewish groups around the world in
a natural way into the cultural environment where it exists, that has
to a large extent also been the case is, I think, something that is a
good development that should be striven for.
What I think upset a number of members of also the Jewish community
around the world when the thought came up of a return to a sort of
pre-Diaspora state, was the concept of today to found a new/old
_state_ based on the dominance of a more or less purely
_ethnic/cultural_ group, with laws for all the members of the state
based on that _ethnic/cultural_ group, not more generally human
perspectives.
This is an unlucky tendency that has become increasingly common with
always unhappy results around the world, one of the latest one being
Nigeria (?), where the Government the last period decided to impose
the Islamic law of Sharia to all, leading to violent conflicts between
Muslim and 'Christian' groups and many dead.
The same has been the case in Yugoslavia, when US decided to support
the separation and special formation of Kosovo as a separate new
state, based on the Albanian part of its population, dragging the rest
of NATO and Europe into a war, that has just lead to renewed human
disaster to all involved in the region, with no light yet at the end
of the tunnel.
It is a sort of renewed mini National Socialism, based on the
'special' rights of a special ethnic group 'over' the rights over
other ethnic groups.
The problem can, I think, only be solved, if one looks at what is the
issue; the awareness of the necessity to distinguish between
_cultural_ rights and basic _civil_(?) rights, equal for all, the last
of which is what holds for states as _legal_ areas.
The problem can be solved and _has_ been solved without violence in
different parts of the world, one being for 'Åland', the 'Finnish'
island with a Swedish speaking population, that has its special status
within mainly Finnish speaking Finland without separating from Finland
to become part of Sweden, or forming a fullblown 'state' of its own.
There are surely other examples around the world, that I'm not just
now aware of right now.)
As for anthroposophy being old already ... that is not my feeling,
when seeing how much it has developed so far. I more have the feeling
it is still in a very early phase that will continue to develop over
at least some two hundred more years in its present form before
declining.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.8 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Avoid computReading, abstractions and sclerosis (was dominant culture etc. )
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 03:32:40 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
[Harve, about the Healy book:]
)I read this book a few years ago. I'll look at it again and see if I can
)answer your questions. I'm really busy right now, so I can't )do it until
)the weekend.
I just wondered. Don't feel you must. I could look at it somewhere else too.
[Harve]
)She does use the example of algebra. Healy said that when she )"learned"
)it in school, she did not get it. Later, she attempted )again and it came
)very easily and hypothesized that that part of her )brain had been
)mylenized when she learned easily.
I had to take algebra twice too. The first time through I was completely
confused and panic-stricken and barely passed. The next year it was suddenly
obvious to me and I breezed through.
)I wondered about the long term effect of one-year-olds pushing )buttons on
)a computer and pushing the mouse button. Quite frankly, )it makes me want
)to run to the closest Waldorf school.
Well, I agree about one year olds on the computer, there's much better
things for a one year old to spend their time on. I just don't know if I
agree any more about 5 year olds, or 8 year olds. I think in today's world
not letting your child use the computer would be sort of like not letting
them learn to use the telephone. There may be drawbacks to it, even grave
dangers, but you have to deal with them, you can't just pretend it doesn't
exist, or you're solving one problem (maybe, or just postponing it) but
you're creating others.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.9 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: lines once again / Lisa's child
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 21:52:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)[David wrote:]
))A Waldorf school is definitely more of a "everybody does it together"
))enterprise. One *might* say that the approach (overall) purports to )be
))more in sync with children's (in the universal sense) innate )tendencies.
Diana Winters
)Glad you pointed this out. Somebody today, might have been Harve but I've
)lost track, said Waldorf considers the "individual child" (maybe about
)reading readiness?) This is a common misunderstanding, sort of like Chand's
)"they let them learn at their own pace." Yes, they are interested in your
)child as an individual, but they are basically applying fairly rigid
)"universal" timetables in terms of their understanding of children's
)development. In many ways it's "one size fits all" in Waldorf.
)
)Of course "everybody does it together" is a nice thing in some ways too.
I do not think that "everybody does it together" is inconsistent with "learn
at their own pace." In a Waldorf school, everybody may "do it" together,
but everybody certainly will not "get it" at the same time.
I think you either misinterpreted my post or decided to make a different
point from the one I intended. I would not use the word "rigid" in
describing Waldorf education.
All children undertake each subject.
All children participate in the music, language, math, reading, painting,
beeswax, movement, etc.
How the children respond to the subjects and the various approaches to the
subjects are highly individual. Some are better at some things, others not
so. The "individual child" figures strongly into this. I see no attempt to
make everybody the same, to make (using your words) "one size fit all."
Is this what you meant above?
David
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2033.10 ---------------
From: Joe Serio (jserio01 earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Peter Staudenmaier's use of sources
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:19:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200003020119.RAA00884 lists1.best.com)
Sean Slovan wrote:
)
)
) And that's how fairy tales start. Many books just copy and recopy the old
) Nazi propaganda on Hess written AFTER 1941. So did Staudenmaier. I won't
) comment his knowledge of historical sources, which is equal to nil, any
) further. Nor his non-existing care for historical accuracy.
)
) Seán Slován
Thanks Sean, for taking the time to do the research.
Joe
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2033 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2034 --------------
001 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: lines once again / Lisa child
002 - "joseph robinson" (joseph - From Heyatawin: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
003 - Felix Hau (felix.hau anth - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: From Heyatawin: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
005 - Sean Slovan (sean.slovan - Re: Weleda vs. NASA
006 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Chand to Dan on Steiner and Nazism
007 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
008 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Jewish wisdom
009 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
010 - "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2ga - Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2034.1 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: lines once again / Lisa child
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:18:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)[David wrote:]
))A Waldorf school is definitely more of a "everybody does it together"
))enterprise. One *might* say that the approach (overall) purports to )be
))more in sync with children's (in the universal sense) innate )tendencies.
Diana Winters
)Glad you pointed this out. Somebody today, might have been Harve but I've
)lost track, said Waldorf considers the "individual child" (maybe about
)reading readiness?) This is a common misunderstanding, sort of like Chand's
)"they let them learn at their own pace." Yes, they are interested in your
)child as an individual, but they are basically applying fairly rigid
)"universal" timetables in terms of their understanding of children's
)development. In many ways it's "one size fits all" in Waldorf.
)
)Of course "everybody does it together" is a nice thing in some ways too.
I do not think that "everybody does it together" is inconsistent with "learn
at their own pace." In a Waldorf school, everybody may "do it" together,
but everybody certainly will not "get it" at the same time.
I think you either misinterpreted my post or decided to make a different
point from the one I intended. I would not use the word "rigid" in
describing Waldorf education.
All children undertake each subject.
All children participate in the music, language, math, reading, painting,
beeswax, movement, etc.
How the children respond to the subjects and the various approaches to the
subjects are highly individual. Some are better at some things, others not
so. The "individual child" figures strongly into this. I see no attempt to
make everybody the same, to make (using your words) "one size fit all."
Is this what you meant above?
David
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2034.2 ---------------
From: "joseph robinson" (joseph_robins hotmail.com)
Subject: From Heyatawin: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 00:01:21 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
)From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Subject: Re: race stereotypes/Anthro stereotypes
)Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:23:44 GMT
)
)[Lisa]
)
)) I certainly would not look at each and every person I know who
))identifies
))himself as an Anthrop. and immediately think ``racist.'' But I WOULD
))wonder,
))based on the depth of that person's commitment to Anthrop. (take a
))dedicated
))W. teacher, for instance -- one who is known for going ``by the book'')
))whether they shared Steiner's feelings that one racial group is more
))spiritually evolved than others. I still think it is a fair question.
(Heyatawin to Lisa)Hello Lisa. I was going to respond to your post re: your
child's experience two days ago - I have decided to relate the following:
I had a long talk with my little girl's principal today. This past
week, my daughter's school has been doing various workshops, healing circles
and sharing re; issues of abuse and violence with an emphasis on connecting
the feelings and emotions induced by these issues. One of the teachers (who
my daughter adores) included, in his particular workshop, a little booklet
aimed at teaching the children to trust their feelings and to talk to
parents they trust when or if they feel scared etc. . One of the pages of
the booklet is blank, save for a title over a frame within which there is no
picture. The title reads, "Violence can Make People Feel Scared" and
underneath the frame in smaller letters is the sentence, "It is ok to feel
scared" - the teacher wanted the children to understand that they were/are
allowed to have feelings of fear, confusion, dislike etc. re: someone who
hurts them and not to feel guilty or ashamed for their feelings. The
children were then given the choice to draw a picture inside of the empty
frame - my little girl drew a picture of her fear.
My daughter's drawing is a depiction of one of the incidences of abuse
that she sustained in Waldorf. The picture shows my daughter's teacher
standing behind her, the face is contorted in anger, the mouth drawn
downward. The teacher's arms are reaching outward encircling my daughter -
the hands are drawn large, the fingers grasping toward my child, the eyes
are filled in with dark purple, the eye brows drawn down heavy over the eyes
in anger. My daughter is positioned seated at her desk directly in front of
the teacher, the large hands of the teacher positioned on each side of her
body. My little girl's arms are stretched upward and outward - as though
she were drowning and waving for help, my little girl drew in her long black
hair falling forward over a depiction of her desk which hides the rest of
her body. The expression on my little girl's face in this drawing (this is
difficult) is haunting . . . her face is tilted slightly upward, her mouth
is an upside down "U". My daughter has drawn her eyes wide open, she filled
them in with no colour - they are just wide empty circles - never has my
daughter before drawn eyes like she has depicted hers to look in this
picture . . .she has drawn her fear, her bewilderment and the emptiness that