return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2257 --------------
001 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Critics pseudo science
002 - "el redon" (elredon hotma - change of address, Q's & high flying
003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
004 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re: Peter and Joel discuss objective introspection; was: Re:on
005 - "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik - Re: Open House was: which school?
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: which school?
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: No religious fervor/was "Go Mike"
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: ad hominem warning
010 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.1 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Critics pseudo science
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 23:36:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Chand]:
))no control group,
[Dan]:
)Again, given the hypothesis that most parents at a private Waldorf
)school don't know about and wouldn't agree with some of the major
)Anthroposophical beliefs that often leak into the classroom, how
)would you make a survey and how would it be controlled? Or is that
)two hypotheses and should there be two surveys?
You would have to ask the same questions to non-Waldorf schools and to other
Waldorf schools. To support whatever hypothesis you are testing, one would
expect to see consistent results among Waldorf school answers and a clear (and
statistically significant) difference between the answers from Waldorf schools
and other school systems.
[Chand]:
)) no statistics - which would be
))meaningless on such a small sample size.
[Dan]:
)A self-canceling statement. The surveys went to every family in the
)school, can't do much better than that. Someone told me the response
)rate was pretty good for something like this, but I don't know social
)research, and I don't think you do either.
In a way self-cancelling, but clearly indicting any conclusions made from such a
small sample. You also have to have a way of determining if the responders (and
the non-responders) are representative of the population you are sampling.
[Chand]:
))This list of critiques is endless.
[Dan]:
)No it isn't, I assume you've already pointed out the important ones.
No, I am just not interested enough in this subject to do the work that you
should do before pasting something on your website. Here is another critique -
as someone with a vested interest in the outcome, there is no way you should be
asking the questions. Nor should you know the identities or the school of the
respondents. The old double blind method that you like to foist upon others.
[Dan]:
)Ok, how would you do it?
Start with a hypothesis. Design non-leading questions (i.e. allow the answers
to support conclusions that you do not like). Use controls. Hire people to ask
your questions. Etc.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.2 ---------------
From: "el redon" (elredon hotmail.com)
Subject: change of address, Q's & high flying
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 05:10:42 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hate to do this on the list, but I've been having problems with my e-mail
account. I now have this address at hotmail.com, so can someone delete my
old address? I believe there are two old ones, both redon yahoo/geocities.
Thank You
P.S. Dan or Deby if you have answered my past questions could you please
forward your answers to the list again, otherwise I am still waiting for a
response.
*******
A high-flying balloon which soared over Antarctica has answered one of
cosmology's greatest questions by revealing that the universe is "flat".
To astronomers, flat means that the usual rules of geometry are observed -
light travels in straight lines, not curves. But since Albert Einstein
proposed that the universe was "curved", the debate has been open.
Scientific opinion has moved towards a flat universe and the latest data
confirm this with greater certainty than ever before.
Another result of the study is the prediction that the universe will
eventually stop expanding from the Big Bang, but will not collapse into a
"Big Crunch".
"It's a tremendously exciting result - and one that will mean rewriting the
text books on the history of the universe," said one of the research team,
Professor Peter Ade at Queen Mary College, University of London.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.3 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 23:05:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005010413.VAA28291 lists1.best.com)
)[Deby]
))You are wrong, Joel. History (the archives) will show that PLANS has
))repeatedly asked to be disproved. History will show that the Anthros just
))attack the credibility of the critics instead of providing meaningful
))evidence that we are wrong.
[Chand]
)This is ridiculous. Why should anyone bother to disprove what PLANS says?
)Why
)doesn't PLANS disprove what I say, or anyone else on this list? You make
)broad
)generalizations based upon anonymous posts or anecdotal evidence. Last I
)heard,
)you are innocent until proven guilty. That, Deby, is PLANS job.
[Deby]
We will see what the judge says, Chand. That will be the final decision.
Stay tuned, we'll have their day in court. Your thinking over ours. Let us
see who wins.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.4 ---------------
From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re: Peter and Joel discuss objective introspection; was: Re:on
Mongolian spots and race - revised
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 17:01:44 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Once again I have to thank Joel for a thoughtful reponse. I have commented
on Joel's response below. My comments are prefaced by ***
)
) You have said a lot in your latest reply and for the benefit of our
list-mates
)I will be just making some remarks, rather than get involved in lots of ((
and
)quotes.
)
) As regards my reply to Diana, I was only replying to the part of the
astronomy
)course she quoted, and not to any other part. I thought that was clear, but
)apparently you thought I was doing something else.
)
) Let me try to organize things a little bit differently, but still
using some
)of the language we have built up.
)
) I see spiritual science (and its relations) as a different "paradigm"
from
)natural science. Spiritual Science (Anthroposophy) is based upon a very
specific
)epistomological foundation, experiential in nature, which is quite
different from
)the epistomology in which natural science is rooted.
***
Fine
)
) The epistomology of Natural Science is Kantian in nature, in that it
answers
)the question of knowledge by deciding that there are limits to human thinking
)beyond which it cannot go (it can't know the "thing in itself", nor can it
[human
)thinking] "know" the divine). Natural Science makes the effort to
surmount this
)limitation by the application of methods (hypothesis, emperical study and
tests,
)followed by new hypothesis etc.), hopefully leading to an ever more accurate
)"approximation" of the nature of "the thing in itself". Natural Science
does not
)seek to study the "divine".
***
I find little to argue with here. I would perhaps have rephrased the last
comment to read "notions of the divine have shifted in the face of the
understanding gained by the methods of natural science".
)
) In the course of these investigations, Natural Science has seen arise
two very
)interesting ideas, which are somewhat in contradistinction to each other.
One is
)the idea of "matter" ("the thing in itself"?) and the other is the idea of
)"consciousness" (the divine?). Natural Science comes late to the
investigation of
)consciousness (mind), but as regards "matter" has had a lot to say.
***
I think this is pretty right.
)
) Clearly to ordinary understanding, if I hit you in the face, my
"matter" will
)interact with your "matter" such that your consciousness will know that it's
)"matter" has been hit. Those, who may have seen the movie "Mindwalk", may
have
)encountered the idea that "matter" is to the modern physicist, not only
mostly
)"empty space", but that its points of locus (once called atoms, and then
smaller
)and smaller parts of atoms) may actually not be "stuff" at all (a surprise to
)ordinary understanding), but rather merely potential (quantum)
intersections of
)fields of force, so that in the end there is no "stuff" at all, just
indeterminate
)states of "energy" (whatever that is).
)
) Natural Science assumes that (or at least over its history has assumed
that)
)consciousness (mind) has appeared at some undefined point in the evolution of
)organic "matter", apparently after some level of complexity has been
reached in
)the "nervous" system. There is no "evidence" for this assumption and
there may
)never be a way to test this hypothesis, at least for Natural Science.
Barfield
)speaks of the assumption that matter preceeds mind in evolution as a
modern taboo
)(c.f. Speaker's Meaning), suggesting by this that when a natural scientist
follows
)various kinds of evidence in thought, at that point where the evidence might
)suggest that mind was prior to matter, the scientist's thinking turns from
really
)considering this conclusion, because it is too at odds with the existing
paradigm
)(Halton Arp, for example, doesn't really follow his work out to its natural
)conclusion, because that is too much of a leap even for him.).
***
I don't agree that there is NO evidence for this assumption. I MIGHT agree
that there is not much direct evidence. I would say this differently. I
would say that the assumption of natural science is that the world
(including human consciousness) operates without the intervention of
supernatural processes. Another way of trying to say this is that all the
events in the universe are subject to the same physical laws. This is an
assumption. So far it has been a very productive and illuminating
assumption. I would argue very much more productive and illuminating than
any other assumption has been. The point is that it is subject to test. If
one follows this assumption (and it is wrong) then at some point (maybe
millenia from now) we will find a serious dead end, or a serious
contradiction which we can only solve by reconsidering the assumption. Joel
may argue that we are already at this point. I don't see any evidence that
we are.
)
) Bafield has investigated langauge, in ways quite remarkable. In
Speaker's
)Meaning he discusses what the "history of meaning" can tell us about
)consciousness. He shows that this history (changes over time in how
language is
)used) is also a history of consciousness, a kind of trail left by the
"evolution
)of consciousness". When one clearly has this "trail" in mind, such is its
nature
)that it reveals that mind must have arisen prior to matter. The argument
is very
)subtle in nature, yet it is very "emperical" in its studies of the history of
)meaning (and the meaning of history).
***
How many philologists accept this view. I suspect the answer is very few. I
would like to see evidence that more than a small fraction are convinced.
)
) Barfield has written many books and has a virtually spotless
reputation in the
)field of philology. Of specific note is his work World's Apart, a dramatic
)presentation of a series of conversations between some scientists and others
)(including a Waldorf teacher). Barfield, in this work, is attempting to
show how
)incomprehensible various fields of knowledge are to each other, and how
much work
)needs to be done for them to have real dialogues.
)
) Anthroposophy arrives at different epistomological conclusions from the
)Kantian. These conclusions are reached by "objective introspection", so
that the
)individual thinker has clearly before their own consciousness the nature
of the
)act of thinking. These investigations of "thinking" itself are emperical and
)scientific in nature, and can be replicated (and are being replicated) by any
)individual with the requisite good will.
)
) You have mistaken these remarks of mine (which I continually limited
to a very
)narrow field) for being applicable to spiritual research itself. Once one
learns
)directly that it is possible to "know the thing in itself" and to "know" the
)divine, then one is within the new paradigm and all the rules change.
Even so,
)the essential nature of the scientific impulse is not lost.
)
) In Natural Science, an aspect of the methodology is the use of
instruments,
)which enable the scientist to get ever more refined and exact observations
of the
)nature of "matter", in its various forms and relationships (physical,
chemical,
)physiological etc.). In Spiritual Science the "instrument" is one's own
)consciousness. Forces of will and intellect are applied to the life of
mind (soul
)and spirit) in order to forge the ability to investigate not "matter", but
)"consciousness" itself.
)
) This work needs to be carried out carefully and rigorously. There are
dangers
)and possible errors. There are arguments (I just sent a highly critical
response
)to some people wanting to make an "anthroposophical" foray into modern
social life
)on a global scale). However, just like in Natural Science, in Spiritual
Science
)one's work must be on the same level as the one being critisized in order to
)really have the necessary background and standing to make these kinds of
)judgments. A first year physicist is unlikely (though not impossible) to
knock
)off the theories of someone with forty years in the field. Likewise in
Spiritual
)Science, while there may be youthful genius, there is required just long
years of
)work leading to an eventual, but necessary, maturity of understanding.
)
) So it is unlikely for me to criticize Steiner (although I recently did,
)concerning some of his social thinking). If you want to get into the
debates at
)the level of most of Steiner's work, you would have to study Tomberg.
However,
)like most communities of interest, the internal arguments do not often appear
)before the public mind, for all the obvious reasons. If you were to
become more
)intimate with the anthroposophical world, you would find plenty of
disagreement,
)controversy and so forth.
***
If this is so it must be easy for you to cite various arguments.
)
) Now you have attempted, and it is understandable, to apply the ideas and
)standards of Natural Science to the conclusions which Spiritual Science makes
)about the natural world (for example, Steiner's remarks in the Astronomy
Course
)about the inner nature of the Sun). The problem is that Spiritual Science
does
)not arrive at the same conclusions about "matter" and "consciousness" that
Natural
)Science does. What this does then is change the field of activity of
criticism.
)
) You would like to test homeopathy with certain methods. It all seems
most
)reasonable. Yet, you forget that the whole structure of the test, its
nature, its
)fundamental inferences as a vehicle for finding knowledge (or heaven
forbid, the
)truth!), is consistent with the views of Natural Science. For example,
you insist
)that if the diluted remedies work, then a double blind study should find
this, and
)apparently those double blind studies of some homeopathic remedies do not.
The
)fact is, of course, the double blind study doesn't determine if the
remedies work,
)only that in those studies they didn't appear to work. These studies also
have
)only looked at a few remedies out of a much larger interrelated dynamic of
)diagnosis and remedy. Moreover, the whole approach goes to great pains to
ignore
)the fact that clearly the doctor and the patient are satisfied. That
satisfaction
)"result" is incomprehensible since it can't be measured or otherwise
counted, and,
)since highly diluted substances shouldn't exist in the first place, so how
can
)there be an effect.
***
This completely misses the point. I am perfectly happy for the doctor and
patient to be satisfied. I even believe that measures of doctor patient
satisfaction could be developed and measured. In fact such measurements
already take place. The point I am making is this. When an Anthroposophical
medical practitioner says homeopathy works, what does the practitioner
mean? It can't be just that the patient and the doctor are satisfied. If
that were so Anthroposophical practitioners wouldn't care if their death
rates for some diseases were statistically worse than for standard medical
practitioners. Anthroposophical medical practitioners must do it because
they think it is better. In what sense is it better? As soon as this
question is answered it can be measured by standard scientific techniques,
because essentially any statement of difference can be turned into a
numerical comparison and statistically tested if there are sufficient
samples. The problem is that the claims made by Anthroposophical medical
practitioners to their patients about homeopathic remedies are relatively
straight forward and are open to the kind of standard statistical testing
that they have already failed.
)
) Whereas for Natural Science, matter dissappears into indeterminate
interacting
)fields of force, in Spiritual Science these "forces" become the will of
Beings
)(there is actually not the huge ideal gap here some assume, it is just
that the
)"explanation" of Spiritual Science can't be "tested" according to the Natural
)Scientific paradigm. Moreover, Spiritual Scientific investigations
discover that
)there are two boundaries to the sense world (where Natural Science begins its
)investigations), an upper boundary into the supersensible world of higher
Beings,
)and a lower bondary into the world of subnature, or the world of the
"fallen".
)Remember these discoveries are not made by investigating the sense world
itself,
)but by the investigation that opens up to thinking when it actually
awakens to its
)own true nature. This investigation discovers that our "consciousness" is
)interacting with a much larger array of "consciousnesses", standing behind
the
)world of the senses.
***
The continuing claim of non testability is just false. I have said this
over and over again. If claims are made which can be distingushed then they
can be tested. This is a very simple idea. Let me make a stupid example.
Joel might claim he is taller tham me. Fine. Even though we are on
different continents this claim could be tested by the use of standard
rulers and the use of appropriate witnesses. I might be able to get the
University Chaplain to determine my height using a standard ruler and
agreed measuring technique, and Joel might get a local Rabbi to do the same
for him. Then we could compare the results and decide if the claim was true
or not. Joel might instead claim that his spirit was taller than mine. That
would be a bit trickier, because my measurement technique is not going to
work for spirits. So we need to continue dialogue and discuss the
consequences of having a taller spirit than someone else. If there are no
consequences, in what sense can one say that one has a taller spirit? If
there are consequences one of these consequences is likely to lead to a
measureable observable. Let me translate this silly example back to
homeopathy. Let's say Joel were to argue that homeopathy works on the
etheric body and not on the physical body. That's fine except that there
are consequences (according to Anthroposophy) of the state of the etheric
body on the the physical body. Therefore I can use the physical body to
measure an effect on the etheric body.
)
) Now Spiritual Science does not leave the sense world behind. In
Goetheanism
)the method for investigating the sense world is uncovered. But here as
well, one
)begins first with an examination of thinking in order to appreciate that the
)construction of artificial idea-forms (theories) is unnecessary, and that
it is
)possible to understand the sense world by just penetrating more and more
into its
)actual facts (through imaginative descriptive processes, or phenomenology
- or as
)Goethe puts it: "exact sensorial phantasy").
)
) Barfield discusses this problem in his Saving the Appearences: a Study in
)Idolatry. The theory is an "idol", and this is especially significant
when one
)realizes that the sense world is the Creation (an act of Beings). To
"theorize"
)about the Creation is to erect a "false image", when it is the nature of the
)Creation itself to be perfectly discernible, that is it is a kind of "speech"
)about Itself.
)
) Now it is in such ideas, as outlined above, that Spiritual Science is
)completely heretical with respect to Natural Science. This antagonism is
deeply
)felt, for if Spiritual Science is true (to the minds of many), then Natural
)Science is false. Unfortunately, this attitude is unnecessary. The two
can blend
)into each other very easily, for the way Spiritual Science is laid out
(again, one
)enters throught the Door of objective introspection), it is possible to
confirm
)everything at each step, without ever having to have faith in the ideas.
When
)Spiritual Science is grasped, it becomes clear that not only was Natural
Science
)quite "true" within its own frame of reference, but that it (Natrual
Science) was
)quite necessary as a phase in the evolution of consciousness. While Spritual
)Science will succeed Natural Science, Spiritual Science will itself be
eventually
)succeeded. ("And this too shall pass.")
***
Here the problem appears in stark relief. This is called having your cake
and eating it too. On the one hand Joel is making the claim that objective
introspection and natural science are both true, and at the same time
refusing to deal with contradictions between them. This sleight of hand is
done by confusing the issue with irrelevant discussion. At least one tenet
of Anthroposophical medicine (homeopathy) fails standard scientific
testing. A choice has to be made here.
)
) It is necessary, however, to make the epistomological experience
first, and
)then to follow with rigor the obvious methods that arise from that
understanding.
)It is here, Peter, where you continually seem not to understand me. By
wanting to
)test the results of Spiritual Science by the methods of Natural Science,
you are
)wanting to fathom a heretical view with the theology of the norm. It
can't work,
)it won't work, and if you think the situation clearly through, you
wouldn't expect
)it to work. It is oil and water.
)
) The epistomological experience produces a certain preliminary result.
This is
)an awareness of there being different kinds of thinking, that is that the
)"instrument" of consciousness can be "tuned" in different ways in accord
with the
)object of knowledge. Or to put it another way, a specific question has a
specific
)thinking method according to the nature of the matter under study.
)
) I would like now to go into the problem of heresy a little more,
because it is
)here, in the psychological-emotional environment, that much of the apparent
)misunderstandings are born. Judgments are made here, which then become
)rationalized into arguments (chains of reasoning), rather than the
opposite (the
)judgment being suspended, and the chain of reasoning free to investigate the
)facts, without reference to the heretical nature of the matter being
considered).
)
) Human beings have egos. The ego itself is much studied in the mind
sciences
)(Tibetan and Zen Buddhism, Sufism, Anthroposophy, Hermetic Science, Christian
)Hermeticism, Yoga, etc. etc. etc.). Even the "art" of psychiatry (and its
)relatives) has investigated this (although often under the influence of
Natural
)Science and its assumptions about knowledge).
)
) One of those whose work I have studied in some depth (the Tibetan Llama
)Choygam Trungpa) spoke of ego's "collection". To objective introspection it
)becomes clear at some point that I, as an ego being, very often identify
myself
)(or my conception of self) with matters which I am, in fact, not. For
example,
)the I is not a natural scientist or a spiritual scientist, althought these
)activities may be taken up by the I. In itself the I is something else
entirely.
)Nevertheless, through this process of identification with my "collection"
(ideas
)and habits of being), it can happen that when some idea, or act of another,
)appears to disagree with the "collection", I will be offended, will take it
)personally.
)
) So, to continue the example, both the natural scientist and the spiritual
)scientist can interact with each other in such a way that one or the other
(or
)both) experiences the point of view of the other as a "threat", because
that which
)the I has identified itself with, has been challenged. Ego's judgments are
)instantaneous, and in order to deal with what appears as a conflict
between the
)held view and the challenging view, a motive will arise which is then
followed by
)the rationalization (chain of reasoning). Ego's assumed identity needs to
be made
)safe, so the reasoning capacity is set in motion to justify the apparent
conflict
)in ideologies.
)
) The Buddhist masters treat this problem by requiring long periods of
sitting
)meditation, such that ego begins to separate itself from its "collection".
In a
)very specific and intentional way, a "watcher" is created, where the
activity of
)ego comes under observation. The process used is not one of intellectual
)examination of the problem, but of a kind of wearing it out. Ego's
)identifications are dissolved and its apparently pure nature as "being" is
slowly
)uncovered, almost like an archeological dig (except that what is found is
not dead
)or past, but very much living and fresh).
)
) In Anthroposophy a "watcher" is also created by the attempts at objective
)introspection, and/or by the admontion in Steiner's Knowledge of Higher
Worlds to
)begin to look at one's self as if at a stranger. In this way the second
attention
)arises (somewhat masking the first attention - although one could call one
the
)first and the other the second, for the terms are totally arbritary).
This is why
)we get Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind, because in the end the "watcher" has to
be let
)go of, and a return made to original attention, forgetting the self
absorbtion
)(navel gazing as Michael Kopp so fondly called it - if memory serves)
introduced
)in the beginning.
)
) What all this ego stuff means, is that as between you and me (or I and
thou),
)there is no need to resolve the apparent collision between our individual
)"collections", as what we each are in essence is transcendent of these
passing
)fancies. The true I is eternal, and the world views (whatever we want to
hold
)true about matter and consciousness - the thing in itself and the divine) are
)nothing but a mid-summer night's dream.
)
) So we argue and dance on this list and sometimes act against each other's
)interests (after all, in many instances it appears that the psychological
)well-being of our children is at stake). Some people's distress is so
huge (to
)them) that tolerance of the "other", the thou, is impossible. So there are
)"wars", not unlike in nature between the "wars" out in the larger social
world.
)These make me sad.
***
I can't see the point of all of this. I continue to approach what Joel and
others have to say with an open mind. I don't believe I have insulted
anyone. I don't believe I have acted against any other person's interest
(at leat on this list). What I have continually done is attempt to make
understood what the notion of independent evidence ought to mean. It should
be a clear notion to many of the lawyers on the list. The various legal
situations have reasonably well defined definitions of what constitutes
evidence and what does not. I say that the same thing applies to claims of
science. If the claim is made, the evidence must be shown. I continue to
claim that Joel has provided no evidence which would stand up in either a
scientific or a legal sense. The best he has is the claim that a few well
known people in a few disciplines are interested and have been influenced
by Anthroposophy. I can probably come up with as many scientologists. Would
that make Joel switch to scientology?
)
) For those list-mates with some sense of the Week and its nature, it is
early
)Good Friday morning for me, and while I did sleep some, I found myself
unable to
)remain so and thus fell to ruminating in the wee hours, carrying in the
back of my
)mind Christ's aloneness the eve before the Crucifixion.
)
) One last set of comments, Peter, as you asked me about the Sun. As
you know
)certain theories of astro-physics require the existence of large amounts
of "dark
)matter" (up to 90% of the total mass of the Universe), in order for the
various
)gravometric equations to balance and account for all the motions and
active forces
)since the big bang. Spiritual Science would "solve" this anomolous
problem from a
)rather different direction.
)
) Spiritual Science discovers that the Universe is made up of an
interactive
)balance between (among many other things) gravity (point centered forces) and
)levity (peripherially oriented forces - the ethereal). We can begin to form
)something of an understanding of the ethereal when work with the idea of
)counter-space, in the light of projective geometry. Counter-space is a
)qualitatively different structure to space (and because it is qualitative, it
)can't be quantified - counted or measured). Our imaginations can begin to
work
)with the idea of counter-space by trying to appreciate what happens to the
surface
)of a sphere when its radius is extended to infinity.
)
) At infinity the surface of a sphere becomes a plane. This
"transformation" is
)not just a geometric ideal, but an actual condition of space itself, so
that at
)the periphery (the Stars - remember my remarks about Halton Arp not
realizing the
)real implications of his discoveries) we have one kind of space, and at
the Center
)(the Earth - point centered space) we have that kind of space with which
we are
)most familiar.
)
) Now this phenomena (ethereal or counter-space) is not just "out
there", but is
)actually localized in the Sun. The Sun is a local condition of
counter-space,
)where "suctional" effects arise. It is at the boundaries of space and
)counter-space that natural light originates, as well as other radiational
)phenomena which Natural Science has so far discovered and worked with. It is
)these "light" (ethereal-levity) effects which alter the chemistry of
plants in
)photosynthesis.
)
) Life on the Earth occurs in an interactive field of gravity and levity
forces,
)which when understood will eliminate the need for the "dark matter" theory
(an
)idol).
)
***
I keep returning to very similar issues with Joel. Let me see if I can
summarise them again in the light of the above discussion. Whenever Joel
goes from the general to the particular (eg note the photosynthesis
reference immediately above) statements are made which lead to comparison
with various scientific results. In most cases the statements are
sufficiently vague (as in the photosynthesis case above) that no immediate
conclusion can be drawn. However I believe that with discussion we could
arrive at a difference between the description of a natural phenomenon from
an Anthroposophical point of view and from a standard scientific point of
view. If there is an agreed difference we can measure it and determine
which of the descriptions is closer to the observed phenomenon. Joel is
claiming exact. I am claiming approximate but in many circumstances
extremely good. This ought to be easy to tell. There is now another one on
the table, photosynthesis. How is the chemistry of plants altered? Is there
a reference? This is a good example because a great deal of detail about
the process of photosynthesis has been obtained in the last few years.
Simple comparisons might be able to be made between the observed phenomena
and the Anthroposophical description.
Another interesting claim is "It is at the boundaries of space and
counter-space that natural light originates." The sun and stars are sources
of natural light. What about fires? What about matches and candles? How
about gas lights? What about a piece of iron taken from a fire glowing? How
about a glow worm? What about lightning? What about an arc lamp? What about
a sodium lamp? What about a light bulb? What about a helium neon laser?
What about a semiconductor laser? Answers to these might allow the dialogue
to come to a measuring point.
The discussion of dark matter is also revealing. In what sense does
Spiritual Science solve this problem? The "dark matter" problem arises
precisely because astronomers measure. They put their cards on the table.
Joel continues to tell me that measurement is the old paradigm. Yet here a
problem which arises from measurement is solved by a non measuring paradigm.
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.n2257.5 ---------------
From: "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik cybertrails.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 00:25:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello Deb,
I just got your last post from the 29th and did not have a chance to read
it before I left. Sorry I missed asking the questions. I took as good of
notes as I could and will see if I can glean from them any info relevant to
your last questions. Below is a description of the question/answer session
conducted after the teacher presentations. The presentations were really
good. I have about 12 or 15 pages of notes that need sifting. I tried to
keep them according to the presentation schedule. It was hard to take notes
when Judith was answering questions. So much information, so little time,
such slow hands on my part. I think though that I have pretty good
information on the presentions. They lasted about 10 or 15 minutes each.
The teachers all showed up on a Sunday afternoon. I think that is pretty
amazing in itself. It turned out that the open house was attended pretty
much exclusively by parents thinking of enrolling children in the fall of
2000.
After her presentation in the 5th grade classroom Judith Quarrington called
for questions. I raised my hand and read the following question.
1. In Terra Rosa's charter proposal, Steiner's theory of child development
is referenced as one of the foundations of Terra Rosa. What books explain
Steiner's theory of child development as it is applied at Terra Rosa?
Judith said she would have to "give it some thought" and could not think of
a reference. Marc Bruehl mentioned Steiner's Individual Discussions with
Teachers a Practical Course. Judith then said that Torin Finser's School
as a Journey and Teaching as a Lively Art might be good.
I was the first to ask a question and immediately after Judith called for
refreshments and people started to leave their seats. I had to raise my
hand and almost shout that I had other questions. She said that people
could get refreshments then we would sit and they could address more
questions. When people sat I again raised my hand. I read the following
question
2. Abbey has been asking me about animals and their special abilities.
What books or references do you recommend that can acquaint me with the
foundations of the man/animal unit Debra May is teaching in 4th grade.
Judith said something to the effect that it is a complex topic and that I
could ask the class teacher. Debra May said she did not know of any books.
Judith then said that "after we embrace the concept we look to ourselves
for the information." She did not say where the concept came from. She
said "It is up to us to search within ourselves" for the information about
the man/animal unit and that there is not a simple text book. She said
that in response to my comment that someone trained Ms. May to teach what
she is teaching in the classroom so there must be a source of some sort.
Other parents began asking some questions. One parent asked about the
children being with the same teacher for 8 years. Judith said that is
their intent to follow the children for 8 years. The woman needed to
repeat the question three or four times before getting a direct answer.
They talked a bit about the expansion of the school because it does not yet
include 6th, 7th, or 8th grades. At some point in here someone asked about
how successful students are coming from regular public school to Terra Rosa
or Waldorf in say the 4th grade. The gist of the response as I remember it
was that the teacher would probably have to catch the student up in things
like singing, recorder playing, handwork and all the other things the
student would not have exposure to in a regular public school.
I was raising my hand and finally got called on again. I read the
following question:
3. Anders has asked me about Michael and the dragon. What books do you
recommend that explain the significance of Michael and the dragon as it
relates to Waldorf education at Terra Rosa. Judith first said that the
story is about St. George, and I had to repeat that Anders was talking
about Michael and said Michael and the dragon. Judith did not refer to
books but said that I could use various pictures of knights and dragons to
held the child understand the concept. As she was talking I asked for
books that I could read and mentioned to the first grade teacher behind me
that we had talked about Festivals and their meanings. The first grade
teacher began to respond but Judith did not let him finish his sentence.
Judith went on about knights and explaining the concept to the child. It
was difficult to follow her and take notes so I did not get much of what
she said. My question went unanswered.
Other individuals asked some questions and I continued to raise my hand. I
was called upon again. I said that again I was going to ask for a book to
read even though it did not seem like I was having much luck. I read the
following question
4. What books to you recommend that explain the significance of the Winter
Garden or Advent Spiral and the reason it is celebrated at Terra Rosa.
Judith responded that "I don't know if there are any books that explain the
significance of the winter garden." She went on to say something about a
universal perception or something of darkness coming and it is a good way
for children to acknowledge darkness coming and that there will be an end
to it in the spring or something like that. As before it was hard to
follow her and take notes. I listened but lost most of what she said
before I could write it down. A woman seated next to me (who turned out to
be a former Waldorf student from Brazil) piped up and suggested the book
Life Ways. At this point Judith announced that it was 3:00 and that if
anyone had any more "burning questions" they could be addressed to the
class teacher. People got up and left their seats.
As I was returning to the 1st grade room to look at Anders' main lesson
book the remedial teacher approached and said that there might be a copy of
Life Ways in the library. She went to check and I looked at the main
lesson book. She came back and did not have the book but said that the
book called Encountering the Self might be a good book about child
development. The first grade teacher and she were trying to remember the
author's name when the first grade teacher suggested the book The Nine Year
Change by Eugene Schwartz. He said that the other book might have a
European slant or cultural influence that might confuse the issue and that
Schwartz's book might be better to read.
I thanked the teachers for the wonderful presentations, shook their hands
and left. On the way through Flagstaff I stopped at a used bookstore and
found a copy of Encountering the Self: Transformation and Destiny in the
Ninth Year by Hermann Koepke.
----------
) From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: Re: which school?
) Date: Friday, April 28, 2000 6:32 PM
)
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: which school?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 00:30:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004290517.WAA25225 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004290517.WAA25225 lists1.best.com)
Looks like Terra Rosa is well over the line.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: No religious fervor/was "Go Mike"
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 23:10:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004281724.KAA21685 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004281724.KAA21685 lists1.best.com)
)The newly converted are always ardent.
)
)Chand
Were you speaking about yourself?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 20:53:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004272110.OAA26200 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004272110.OAA26200 lists1.best.com)
Joel Wendt, you wrote,
) Darwinian "evolution" (or neo-darwinian etc.) is
)not a fact, but a theory. It is hotly disputed by
)many, including quite reputable scientists.
You're blowing smoke. There is -no- dispute in science over whether
Darwinian evolution is the only tenable explanation of the history of
life on earth. There is lively debate about the -details-. Steiner's
version is so far out in left field it isn't in discussion at all.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 00:33:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004291618.JAA18973 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004291618.JAA18973 lists1.best.com)
At 12:20 PM -0400 4/29/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
)Dear Folks new to this list,
)
) Michael Kopp is what some might call a "good"
)writer. He does have a way with words, and organizes
)his thoughts well (even apparently logically). His
)language is often rich and powerful - full of a kind of
)strength of feeling and apparent certainty of belief).
Etc. This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics
because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.
Michael, do not respond to this, and Joel, you will be unsubscribed
if you continue in this tone.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2257.10 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 20:58:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004272056.NAA17587 lists1.best.com)
(200004272158.OAA03095 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004272158.OAA03095 lists1.best.com)
At 11:55 PM +0200 4/27/00, Sune Nordwall wrote:
)Chand wrote:
)
) ) I doubt that anything
) ) Steiner wrote aboout pedagogy would be considered a sacred text.
)
)(Actually, I don't know of anything published that he actually _wrote_
)on waldorf education. All I'm aware of are transcripts of lectures and
)teachers conferences. All I know of him actually having _written_ on
)education are more principle essays/articles from earlier in life.)
Right Sune, so the argument that quoting lectures isn't fair because
Steiner didn't "write" them falls apart doesn't it, when you consider
that all of Waldorf education is built on lectures!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2257 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2258 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
002 - Detlef Hardorp (hardorp g - Kopping out (was: DD's "ad hominem" warning)
003 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: projective geometry
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: projective geometry
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - One true way to perfect knowledge (?) and Jesuit training (Was
006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Imagination - basic for development of science (Was: Re: imagi
007 - "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet. - RE: projective geometry
008 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
009 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: No religious fervor/was "Go Mike"
010 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 20:55:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004261704.KAA23479 lists1.best.com)
(200004270857.BAA29669 lists1.best.com)
(200004272127.OAA09424 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200004272127.OAA09424 lists1.best.com)
Given that it happened, Joel, why don't you do some research among
your Anthroposophical friends to find out why?
-Dan Dugan
At 5:30 PM -0400 4/27/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
)Dear Dan,
)
) You have a sentence below which begins: "I assume". I take this to
)mean that you have no real knowledge whatsoever of why the material was
)"off limits", and have just invented that motive most convient to your
)theory (belief system) about Waldorf and Anthroposophy. Very
)scientific. Quite rigorous in logic too.
)
)warm and epistomological regards,
)joel
)
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) ) Parts of the library containing esoteric Anthroposophical books were
) ) off-limits to the public school teachers attending the short-course
) ) teacher training. I assume it was because they hadn't had the
) ) Foundation Year, and wouldn't have the proper attitude when they read
) ) something about root races or whatever. This was told to me by a
) ) teacher who was there. Can you imagine a scene like that at any other
) ) kind of school? Ain't Anthroposophy weird?
) )
) ) -Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.2 ---------------
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Kopping out (was: DD's "ad hominem" warning)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 12:00:50 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Dear Joel,
thank you for your excellent description of HOW some "critics" on this list operate.
I find it revealing that the list administrator didn't like this, and went as far as issue an ad hominem warning (after having sent a mail just before that with the comment "describing yourself?").
Dan wrote:
[Joel:]
)Dear Folks new to this list,
)
) Michael Kopp is what some might call a "good"
)writer. He does have a way with words, and organizes
)his thoughts well (even apparently logically). His
)language is often rich and powerful - full of a kind of
)strength of feeling and apparent certainty of belief).
[Dan:]
)Etc. This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.
Michael, do not respond to this, and Joel, you will be unsubscribed if you continue in this tone.
[I add:]
Dear Mr. Moderator, this is anything but moderate. Joel is not fighting a personal battle. He is characterizing the WAY some battles are being fought on this list. It was a very good characterization. That, it seems, hit too close to home. Thus it must be forbidden?!
Dan, you are coming awfully close to censorship. I know you pride yourself of never wanting to censor anything. But, in fact, you do.
Ad hominems should be issued for attacks on a personal level which have nothing to do with the issues involved.
They should not be misused if someone decides to respond not only to individual shotgun wounds but looks at the method with which someone is machine-gunning bullets.
This list is often violent in the way Waldorf is attacked. It cannot be that taking a step back and soberly describing the way the violence is committed elicits an ad hominem warning.
Best regards,
Detlef
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.3 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 12:39:30 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
geo wrote:
) I do not know what projective geometry is and
) would like to learn more. You obviously know what it is not
) so please share with us what it is, if you know.
It is a study of the basic elements of geometry; points, lines and
surfaces and their relations to one another from a general
perspective. It studies what properties remain constant under
perspective projection and was born out of problems related to making
pictures of objects in threedimensional space on a twodimensional
surface; paintings, starting with the Renaissance, reflecting a
developing change in the relation to and experience of space, looking
at it from a "point"-perspective.
It was developed by a number of mathematicians, like Pascal and
Desargues during the 17th century, and later by other French and
German mathematicians, like Poncelet, Chasles, M–bius, Pl¸cker and von
Staudt during the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.
Projective geometry makes it possible among many things to understand
different and more general aspects of "space", of which Euclidian
space, as also the other, non-euclidian spaces are only special cases.
Doing projective geometry, as partly is done in waldorf schools,
profoundly trains and deepens your basic geometrical thinking and
understanding. Later an even more general geometry has been developed,
topology, that logically viewed is even more basic than projective
geometry.
In an essay on the subject in "The world of mathematics", Morris Kline
writes:
"It is of course true that other areas of mathematics, mostly
differential equations, have meant more for the development of
science, than projective geometry. But no other area of mathematics
can compete with projective geometry when it comes to originality of
ideas, the coordination of intuition by the discoveries with
strictness in proof, purity in thought, logical completion, elegance
in proof and voluminousity of the concepts. The science that was born
out of art also turned out to belong to the arts."
http://www.anth.org.uk/NCT/ leads to a short introduction to the
subject of projective geometry.
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.n2258.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:38:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
geo wrote:
) I do not know what projective geometry is and
) would like to learn more. You obviously know what it is not
) so please share with us what it is, if you know.
It is a study of the basic elements of geometry; points, lines and
surfaces and their relations to one another from a general
perspective. It studies what properties remain constant under
perspective projection and was born out of problems related to making
pictures of objects in threedimensional space on a twodimensional
surface; paintings, starting with the Renaissance, reflecting a
developing change in the relation to and experience of space, looking
at it from a "point"-perspective.
It was developed by a number of mathematicians, like Pascal and
Desargues during the 17th century, and later by other French and
German mathematicians, like Poncelet, Chasles, M–bius, Pl¸cker and von
Staudt during the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.
Projective geometry makes it possible among many things to understand
different and more general aspects of "space", of which Euclidian
space, as also the other, non-euclidian spaces are only special cases.
Doing projective geometry, as partly is done in waldorf schools,
profoundly trains and deepens your basic geometrical thinking and
understanding. Later an even more general geometry has been developed,
topology, that logically viewed is even more basic than projective
geometry.
In an essay on the subject in "The world of mathematics", Morris Kline
writes:
"It is of course true that other areas of mathematics, mostly
differential equations, have meant more for the development of
science, than projective geometry. But no other area of mathematics
can compete with projective geometry when it comes to originality of
ideas, the coordination of intuition by the discoveries with
strictness in proof, purity in thought, logical completion, elegance
in proof and voluminousity of the concepts. The science that was born
out of art also turned out to belong to the arts."
http://www.anth.org.uk/NCT/ leads to a short introduction to the
subject of projective geometry.
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.n2258.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: One true way to perfect knowledge (?) and Jesuit training (Was: Re: Answer for MK...)
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 13:48:24 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004262142.OAA11269 lists1.best.com)
(200004262303.QAA29434 lists1.best.com) (200004270108.SAA01040 lists1.best.com)
By mistake I misdated the following answer, when responding before,
probably misplacing it in a number of mail programs. I'm sorry.
Michael Kopp wrote:
) though most claim -- like Steiner -- that they are the one true way
) to perfect knowledge.
Pray, Sir, can You tell me the source of this (except yourself and mr
Dan Dugan, of course); that there is perfect knowledge, that there is
one true way to it and that mr Steiner somewhere claimed that he was
that way?
) secret) that it's hard to detect and argue against (especially with
) many Jesuitically-trained SWA people on this list).
Can you tell me who they all are on this list who have been
"Jesuitically-trained", as you say?
(Also, moderator, does not "jesuitically trained" normally fall within
the "ad hominem" category?)
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.n2258.6 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Imagination - basic for development of science (Was: Re: imagination ...)
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 13:49:29 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004141945.MAA09052 lists1.best.com) (200004261820.LAA28695 lists1.best.com)
By mistake I misdated the following answer when responding before. I'm
sorry.
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Goethean Science (a false front for Spiritual Science) says that the
) appearances contain all the information you need to know. This
) springs from occultism's theory of correspondences, where the forms
) of things tell you what they are related to.
That is not true. Goethean Science is part of the phenomenological
tradition, of which Hegel was one of its most outstanding
representative
http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/stanford/entries/hegel/ .
It does not spring from "occultism's theory of correspondences", but
is part of the more general tradition of objective idealism, which is
a philosophical tradition, going back to Plato
(http://www.ltn.lv/~podnieks/gt1.html
http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/Tanner/_5340Disc/00000031.htm).
One of those working in this tradition was Heisenberg
(http://www.racai.ro/books/doe/chap3-1.html).
) This kind of analogizing
) is rarely useful in science.
Analogizing plays a central part in the scientific process
http://www.uia.org/metaphor/13sigana.htm Being familiar with and at
home in the world of metaphors and analogies is probably basic to
creativity in science.
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.n2258.7 ---------------
From: "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet.att.net)
Subject: RE: projective geometry
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 06:56:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005011041.DAA00118 lists1.best.com)
Thanks for the information. Point perspective is what I knew
it as. When I was into Drafting as a child and teenager I
spent many hours doing this with my protractors,
straightedges, and especially compasses. I did not know what
it was called but I did enjoy the relationships discovered
in point line radii. I think that from this simple piddling
around with drafting tools that I honed a sense of space
which has proved quite useful to me in many areas of
practice and study. (structural geology, photography,
driving, rock climbing, basket ball, white-water canoeing,
mechanical repair, etc...) I find that my 'experiments' in
what is called projective geometry have been quite useful in
my ability to 'see the lines', that, is I am able to use
depth/size relationships efficiently. My spiritual ideas are
far from the constraints of geometry.
)
) http://www.anth.org.uk/NCT/ leads to a short
) introduction to the
) subject of projective geometry.
)
)
. " Steiner's spiritual research showed that there is
another kind of space in which more subtle aspects of
reality such as life processes take place."
This quote is from the above web site. I would like to read
Steiner's 'research' on projective geometry.
If Steiner says that projective geometry can be used to
related to life process, dose this pose somewhat of a
contradiction to the 'there are no line in nature' notion?
If there indeed no lines in nature then would we not be
missing a great deal if we were to apply lines to explain
the lineless nature?
somewhat confused. please enlighten.
George
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.8 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 08:47:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Deby]
)))You are wrong, Joel. History (the archives) will show that PLANS has
)))repeatedly asked to be disproved. History will show that the Anthros just
)))attack the credibility of the critics instead of providing meaningful
)))evidence that we are wrong.
[Chand]
))This is ridiculous. Why should anyone bother to disprove what PLANS says?
))Why
))doesn't PLANS disprove what I say, or anyone else on this list? You make
))broad
))generalizations based upon anonymous posts or anecdotal evidence. Last I
))heard,
))you are innocent until proven guilty. That, Deby, is PLANS job.
[Deby]
)We will see what the judge says, Chand. That will be the final decision.
)Stay tuned, we'll have their day in court. Your thinking over ours. Let us
)see who wins.
OK. You are working assiduously for your day in court. In the mean time, do
this list the courtesy of backing up what you say with evidence instead of
asking us to disprove your opinions.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.9 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: No religious fervor/was "Go Mike"
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 09:00:51 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Chand]:
))The newly converted are always ardent.
[Dan]
)Were you speaking about yourself?
Perhaps you were not following the thread, or my posts concerning my history
with Waldorf. One suspects your ability to think logically when you ask such a
question.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2258.10 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 09:07:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Dan]:
)Right Sune, so the argument that quoting lectures isn't fair because
)Steiner didn't "write" them falls apart doesn't it, when you consider
)that all of Waldorf education is built on lectures!
But not the one's from which you extract provocative exerpts.
Chand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2258 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2259 --------------
001 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
002 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - RE: Deb was pushed/was spelling
003 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - RE: Deb was pushed/was spelling
004 - "el redon" (elredon hotma - Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training
005 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Open House was: which school?
007 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Admin: ad hominem warning
008 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Scotoma
009 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Anthroposophical evidence (Was Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.1 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 09:05:54 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
[Joel]:
)) Michael Kopp is what some might call a "good"
))writer. He does have a way with words, and organizes
))his thoughts well (even apparently logically). His
))language is often rich and powerful - full of a kind of
))strength of feeling and apparent certainty of belief).
[Dan]:
)Etc. This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics
)because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.
)Michael, do not respond to this, and Joel, you will be unsubscribed
)if you continue in this tone.
Dan, surely you have a better example of ad hominems than this? Calling someone
an apologist, a label certain critics like to apply to their list opponents, is
far more denigrating. In fact, Joel's opinion of Michael's very long posts is
certainly reasonable. As he points out, there is not much more than style to
take issue with.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.2 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: RE: Deb was pushed/was spelling
Date: 1 May 2000 10:32:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)posted:
)Luke, you are picking on the wrong person. Harve had to push and pick at
)Debra quite a bit (and quite nastily) before Debra finally relented and let
)Harve have a taste of her own stuck-up medicine. Read the "spelling" thread
)all the way through and you will see what I mean. Debra held back for much
)longer than most of us would, I am sure. After all, it was "Harve" who
)started the "spelling matters" argument, and initially, Debra Snell
)responded with the simple admission that she struggles with spelling and
)hopes that her children's education will be better than was her own. I have
)never seen "Harve" offer any such humility in her own statements.
[luke]
Huh? What are you going on about?
I responded to this post: (I'm pretty sure I got the thread heading right.)
Begin repost------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner's good ideas?was mystery mongering
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 23:13:38 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200004280432.VAA04455 lists1.best.com)
[Chand]
)Furthermore, as you and Lisa seem to agree that Steiner's idea's and,
)by extension, Waldorf education are crackpot, why not let Steiner rise
)and fall to the dictates of the "marketplace of ideas?"
[Deby]
My position exactly, Chand. Religions should live or die on their own
merrit. If Waldorf provided a full disclosure document, a disclosure that
allowed parents to either agree or disagree with Steiner's (weird) beliefs
from the onset, then a true accounting for Waldorf would begin. But Waldorf
is too afraid. (See the recent posts by VERONICA KLOS (VKLOS PRODIGY.NET)
on the SJU list for resource.) Waldorf would rather die alone by using
Steiner's esoteric beliefs, andwe all know it. They depend on the unknowing
parent for survival, even if they are in-and-out. There are more temporary
suckers around the corner... _That_ will keep them alive. (Can you tell
that I have served on the enrollment committee?)
{MY new insert here: No wonder YOUR school went bankrupt.}
Waldorf's move into the public sector, under the guise of nonsectarian,
tops the cake for deciet. But if Anthroposophists can fool even one person
in the room it is worth it, because the cause is greater than anyone
understands...
I double dare Waldorf to disclose what they are doing, instead of
re-inventing words to obtain attendance in their schools. Then we can
measure the true value of Anthroposophy's worth. It is not about academic
education, I can promise you that.
Currently Waldorf is cheating. They don't give parents enough information
to make an informed decision. Shame on Waldorf. PLANS is blowing the
whistle on you.
Truth does matter,
Deby
End of repost --------------
)From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
)To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Subject: RE: Steiner's good ideas?was mystery mongering
)Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000, 1:10 PM
)
)
) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)posted:
)
) Truth does matter,
)
) Apparently not as much as winning matters to you. It seems being the
) framer of the debate matters to you more as well.
)
)
It seems Deby can't put twenty-five words together on waldorf education without trashing it and all the people in it, based on the *yet undecided determination* of waldorf and whether or not it constitutes a religious education in the public sector. It's just bash bash bash. Reread the post.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.3 ---------------
From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Deb was pushed/was spelling
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 10:06:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
It seems that I miss a lot of the posts around here. I never saw the original
post from Deby, but got it on a repost from Luke. If anyone has posted
something to me that I have ignored, I probably didn't get the post. If you
think this is the case, repost it to me off list and I will respond.
[Chand]
))Furthermore, as you and Lisa seem to agree that Steiner's idea's and,
))by extension, Waldorf education are crackpot, why not let Steiner rise
))and fall to the dictates of the "marketplace of ideas?"
[Deby]
)My position exactly, Chand. Religions should live or die on their own
)merrit. If Waldorf provided a full disclosure document, a disclosure that
)allowed parents to either agree or disagree with Steiner's (weird) beliefs
)from the onset, then a true accounting for Waldorf would begin. But Waldorf
)is too afraid. (See the recent posts by VERONICA KLOS (VKLOS PRODIGY.NET)
)on the SJU list for resource.) Waldorf would rather die alone by using
)Steiner's esoteric beliefs, andwe all know it. They depend on the unknowing
)parent for survival, even if they are in-and-out. There are more temporary
)suckers around the corner... _That_ will keep them alive. (Can you tell
)that I have served on the enrollment committee?)
)
)Waldorf's move into the public sector, under the guise of nonsectarian,
)tops the cake for deciet. But if Anthroposophists can fool even one person
)in the room it is worth it, because the cause is greater than anyone
)understands...
)
)I double dare Waldorf to disclose what they are doing, instead of
)re-inventing words to obtain attendance in their schools. Then we can
)measure the true value of Anthroposophy's worth. It is not about academic
)education, I can promise you that.
)
)Currently Waldorf is cheating. They don't give parents enough information
)to make an informed decision. Shame on Waldorf. PLANS is blowing the
)whistle on you.
Well, this describes your political position but not your actions. If Waldorf
schools are as deceitful as you say, they should quickly be lost from the
educational scene - parents would in general be unhappy and new students would
stop coming. But you wish to impose upon Waldorf your idea of "full disclosure"
which is based partly upon the experiences you had at your dysfunctional school
and partly (it seems to me) on your post facto reading of Steiner whether
relevant to Waldorf or not. This is clearly shown by the amount of time and
effort spent on this list trying to link Steiner to Nazis and juxtaposing this
with Waldorf and racism, when in fact few on this list have a problem with
racism in the Waldorf classroom (not Dan's experiences with books).
Furthermore, you are taking an advocate position in your PLANS lawsuit. All of
this speaks against letting the ideas speak for themselves. You want to win and
want people to see things your way. You use whatever tools are at hand - the
courts, the internet, etc. to portray Waldorf in a way that is far from the
reality that I have had with it.
When it comes to cheating, what do you call asking a father to tape record a
meeting? If he does not have permission to do this, I bet he could be in legal
jeopardy if he used those recordings in a way not sanctioned by those being
recording. This type of tactic is deceitful and immoral, yet these are the
terms you apply to your opponents.
My daughters have received excellent academic training in their Waldorf school.
Obviously your sons have not. There are many reasons why this could be. You
choose to blame it on your now defunct Waldorf school. I will not insult you
by coming up with numerous other possibilities that I could come up with, based
upon the information on this list and my own experience, that are just as likely
to be an accurate description of reality as your explanation.
[Deby]:
)Truth does matter,
Only, it seems, if you can tell it and still win.
Chand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.4 ---------------
From: "el redon" (elredon hotmail.com)
Subject: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 17:08:53 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
)From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
)Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading Given
)that it happened, Joel, why don't you do some research among
)your Anthroposophical friends to find out why?
)-Dan Dugan
Whoa!!!! You make an _ASSUMPTION_ with nothing to back it up and then you
put the burden of proof on Joel?
In this post you have further lead the reader that your alligation is indeed
a fact by stating:
"why don't you do some research among your Anthroposophical friends to find
out why?"
"why" being the misleading factor.
Unless you are Ed McMan knocking at my front door your tactic seems very
deceptive and again misleading and with the advent of this last statement,
unless you produce a direct quote from a person who can testify, a lie.
Your past alligation alone on this topic has already led people to regard
your statement as a fact.
I am not a lawyer, but it seems that there are more and more libelous
statements being tossed around here.
I'd ask for an opinion by a attorney on the list, but I wouldn't be
so rude to ask for free advice. Having an attorney in the family I know
thier time is very valuble.
Dan, I believe that before you use these types of tactics you should really
consult with an attorney.
BTW, part of the topic alone sounds like an ad hominem.
Moderator, Moderator Thyself.
) ) ) Parts of the library containing esoteric Anthroposophical books were
) ) ) off-limits to the public school teachers attending the short-course
) ) ) teacher training. I assume it was because they hadn't had the
) ) ) Foundation Year, and wouldn't have the proper attitude when they read
) ) ) something about root races or whatever. This was told to me by a
) ) ) teacher who was there. Can you imagine a scene like that at any other
) ) ) kind of school? Ain't Anthroposophy weird?
) ) ) -Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.5 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 10:22:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (200005011711.KAA02576 lists1.best.com)
On 1 May 2000, at 17:08, el redon wrote:
) )From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
) )Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading Given
) )that it happened, Joel, why don't you do some research among
) )your Anthroposophical friends to find out why?
) )-Dan Dugan
)
) Whoa!!!! You make an _ASSUMPTION_ with nothing to back it up and then you
) put the burden of proof on Joel?
) I am not a lawyer, but it seems that there are more and more libelous
) statements being tossed around here.
I see nothing remotely resembling libel in that exchange.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://members.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 10:50:16 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005010729.AAA24501 lists1.best.com)
)Hello Deb,
)
)I just got your last post from the 29th and did not have a chance to read
)it before I left. Sorry I missed asking the questions.
[Deby]
That is OK. I was grandstanding for the Anthros anyway...
The list died after that... I could picture them organizing underground.
Terra Rosa will be informed, if they weren't already. Perfect that you
didn't ask any of my questions - in case they were prepared...
I took as good of
)notes as I could and will see if I can glean from them any info relevant to
)your last questions. Below is a description of the question/answer session
)conducted after the teacher presentations. The presentations were really
)good.
[Deby]
They are good, and why they are so hard to bust.
[Jim]
I have about 12 or 15 pages of notes that need sifting. I tried to
)keep them according to the presentation schedule. It was hard to take notes
)when Judith was answering questions. So much information, so little time,
)such slow hands on my part. I think though that I have pretty good
)information on the presentions.
[Deby]
Cheap tape recorders are worth their weight in gold...
[Jim]
They lasted about 10 or 15 minutes each.
)The teachers all showed up on a Sunday afternoon. I think that is pretty
)amazing in itself.
[Deby]
Catholic nuns are very dedicated too. This is more than just a job...
[Jim]
It turned out that the open house was attended pretty
)much exclusively by parents thinking of enrolling children in the fall of
)2000.
)
[Deby]
)From the agenda, I expected that. It was an enrollment procurement meeting.
[Jim]
)1. In Terra Rosa's charter proposal, Steiner's theory of child development
)is referenced as one of the foundations of Terra Rosa. What books explain
)Steiner's theory of child development as it is applied at Terra Rosa?
[Deby]
Great question, but indirect and not likely to raise flags for other people
thinking of Waldorf...
[Jim]
)Judith said she would have to "give it some thought" and could not think of
)a reference. Marc Bruehl mentioned Steiner's Individual Discussions with
)Teachers a Practical Course. Judith then said that Torin Finser's School
)as a Journey and Teaching as a Lively Art might be good.
[Deby]
I have two copies of School as a Journey. It is pure propaganda, but if you
know what to look for, there are a few nuggets of information. I categorize
this book as promotional material.
[Jim]
)I was the first to ask a question and immediately after Judith called for
)refreshments and people started to leave their seats.
[Deby]
These guys are good. I warned you that it looked like it would be highly
controlled...
[Jim]
I had to raise my
)hand and almost shout that I had other questions. She said that people
)could get refreshments then we would sit and they could address more
)questions. When people sat I again raised my hand. I read the following
)question
)
)2. Abbey has been asking me about animals and their special abilities.
)What books or references do you recommend that can acquaint me with the
)foundations of the man/animal unit Debra May is teaching in 4th grade.
)Judith said something to the effect that it is a complex topic and that I
)could ask the class teacher. Debra May said she did not know of any books.
) Judith then said that "after we embrace the concept we look to ourselves
)for the information." She did not say where the concept came from.
[Deby]
You have to be more direct in your questioning, and ask where the concepts
come from. This describes the hidden ways they treat questions perfectly.
[Jim]
She
)said "It is up to us to search within ourselves" for the information about
)the man/animal unit and that there is not a simple text book.
[Deby]
She is right. One must have the whole indoctrination to understand, and
"Steiner is difficult."
[Jim]
She said
)that in response to my comment that someone trained Ms. May to teach what
)she is teaching in the classroom so there must be a source of some sort.
[Deby]
Much of what the teachers bring to the classroom is handed down orally. New
teachers always have mentors...
[Jim]
)Other parents began asking some questions. One parent asked about the
)children being with the same teacher for 8 years. Judith said that is
)their intent to follow the children for 8 years. The woman needed to
)repeat the question three or four times before getting a direct answer.
[Deby]
Do you think this parent was supportive of this concept?
[Jim]
)They talked a bit about the expansion of the school because it does not yet
)include 6th, 7th, or 8th grades. At some point in here someone asked about
)how successful students are coming from regular public school to Terra Rosa
)or Waldorf in say the 4th grade. The gist of the response as I remember it
)was that the teacher would probably have to catch the student up in things
)like singing, recorder playing, handwork and all the other things the
)student would not have exposure to in a regular public school.
[Deby]
...but clearly they'll need no academic catch-up.
[Jim]
)3. Anders has asked me about Michael and the dragon. What books do you
)recommend that explain the significance of Michael and the dragon as it
)relates to Waldorf education at Terra Rosa. Judith first said that the
)story is about St. George, and I had to repeat that Anders was talking
)about Michael and said Michael and the dragon. Judith did not refer to
)books but said that I could use various pictures of knights and dragons to
)held the child understand the concept. As she was talking I asked for
)books that I could read and mentioned to the first grade teacher behind me
)that we had talked about Festivals and their meanings. The first grade
)teacher began to respond but Judith did not let him finish his sentence.
[Deby]
Sounds like Judith is the professional deceiver. The first grade teacher
may say something wrong. I'd bet she has been teaching much longer.
[Jim]
)Judith went on about knights and explaining the concept to the child. It
)was difficult to follow her and take notes so I did not get much of what
)she said. My question went unanswered.
[Deby]
Most of those parents likely didn't notice your question went unanswered.
These guys are good...
[Jim]
)4. What books to you recommend that explain the significance of the Winter
)Garden or Advent Spiral and the reason it is celebrated at Terra Rosa.
)Judith responded that "I don't know if there are any books that explain the
)significance of the winter garden." She went on to say something about a
)universal perception or something of darkness coming and it is a good way
)for children to acknowledge darkness coming and that there will be an end
)to it in the spring or something like that.
[Deby]
Universal perception? NOT! It is an Anthroposophical tenet.
[Jim]
As before it was hard to
)follow her and take notes. I listened but lost most of what she said
)before I could write it down. A woman seated next to me (who turned out to
)be a former Waldorf student from Brazil) piped up and suggested the book
)Life Ways. At this point Judith announced that it was 3:00 and that if
)anyone had any more "burning questions" they could be addressed to the
)class teacher. People got up and left their seats.
[Deby]
They know how to control a meeting...
)
)As I was returning to the 1st grade room to look at Anders' main lesson
)book the remedial teacher approached and said that there might be a copy of
)Life Ways in the library. She went to check and I looked at the main
)lesson book. She came back and did not have the book but said that the
)book called Encountering the Self might be a good book about child
)development. The first grade teacher and she were trying to remember the
)author's name when the first grade teacher suggested the book The Nine Year
)Change by Eugene Schwartz. He said that the other book might have a
)European slant or cultural influence that might confuse the issue and that
)Schwartz's book might be better to read.
[Deby]
Can't recommend a book that doesn't shield Anthroposophy! Europeans are
more honest. Schwartz is pretty open as well...
)I thanked the teachers for the wonderful presentations, shook their hands
)and left. On the way through Flagstaff I stopped at a used bookstore and
)found a copy of Encountering the Self: Transformation and Destiny in the
)Ninth Year by Hermann Koepke.
[Deby]
Read it with a highlighter. I hope you get a chance to post on list.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.7 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 14:19:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Chand]
)
) )I think this is typical of your reasoning on this list -
) make nice in the face
) )of substantive criticism and use what every means you can to further
) )your goals
) )at other times.
[Dan Dugan]
)
) Ad hominem argument.
[Bob Tolz]
Very neat trick, Dan: Deflect a criticism of your reasoning by
calling it "ad hominem." Is this what Michael Kopp would call a
"propaganda" technique if used by someone he didn't agree with?
At 2:10 am on May 1, 2000, Dan Dugan writes:
)
)
) )The newly converted are always ardent.
) )
) )Chand
)
) Were you speaking about yourself?
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
[Bob Tolz]
Then at 3:34 AM on May 1, 2000, Dan Dugan writes:
) )
) ) Michael Kopp is what some might call a "good"
) )writer. He does have a way with words, and organizes
) )his thoughts well (even apparently logically). His
) )language is often rich and powerful - full of a kind of
) )strength of feeling and apparent certainty of belief).
)
[Dan Dugan]
) Etc. This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics
) because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.
) Michael, do not respond to this, and Joel, you will be unsubscribed
) if you continue in this tone.
)
) -Dan Dugan
) Moderator
[Bob Tolz]
This is a joke, Dan, right?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.8 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Scotoma
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 14:19:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
A week or so ago, I promised to deliver a post describing a
well-respected scientist's current views describing why Goethe has been
ignored for such a long time and why more attention is being given to him
today. This is that post.
A flashback to January of this year is in order:
[warmregards to Bob Tolz] (jan. 26, 2000)
)
) The evidence of science's disdain for Zajonc, and their
) indifference to
) Goethe as a scientist, is in their deafening silence.
[snip]
) But I asked you first: show me a reputable, mainstream,
) highly-regarded
) scientist who DOES give Zajonc or Goethe any credibility for
) fundamental
) knowledge that overturns any laws or principles of nature, or
) adds to them
) substantially in a material way.
[Bob Tolz]
Warmregards inspired me to a research project. In the past couple
of weeks, I've described many such highly-regarded scientists who do give
Goethe credibility in this regard. Now it's time to address what
warmregards perceives as a "deafening silence."
This alleged "deafening silence" can be attributed to a virtual
"scotoma."
"Goethe's insights have been confirmed." These are the words of
well-known neurologist/psychiatrist Oliver Sacks, M.D. in his essay,
"Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science," in Robert B. Silvers, ed.,
"Hidden Histories of Science," New York Review Books, 1995. ISBN
0-940322-05-6. There are a number of other contributors to that volume, but
the only name I recognize is Stephen Jay Gould.
Sacks (you may be more familiar with him in his incarnation as Robin
Williams playing him in the movie "Awakenings" with Robert DeNiro) devotes
an entire section of his essay to Goethe at pp. 154-158. In that essay he
concludes: "Goethe's insights have been confirmed." I will not spend any
bandwidth on relating specifically why Sacks believes this to be true, since
that analysis has nothing to do with warmregards' challenge. The book is
readily available to anyone who wants to follow the analysis.
The wider thesis of Sacks' essay is that scientific knowledge is
subject to figurative "scotomas," a neurological term denoting a
disconnection or hiatus in perception produced by a neurological lesion.
There are many areas of scientific inquiry which fell on deaf ears at the
time of their origination but which can be found to be significant and
useful when revisited. According to Sacks, Goethe's work is one of those
areas.
On February 2nd, 2000, I received a short note from Dr. Sacks in
response to an inquiry I made of him. The relevant content follows:
[Oliver Sacks, M.D.]
"Goethe made a fool of himself inas far as he contradicted Newton,
and misunderstood the (reductive) methods of science -- on the other hand he
paid attention to various phenomena --- such as after-images, colored
shadows, the importance of context in determining perceived color (etc) ---
issues which cannot be resolved by physics, but which have great relevance
to the neurology (and psychology) of color perception; and to this extent
there has been renewed interest in the Farbenlehre."
[Bob Tolz]
Is Oliver Sacks, M.D. a person who could qualify as a reputable,
mainstream, highly-regarded scientist? Most certainly.
For those who are unfamiliar with him, take a look at his
credentials. There are actually a number of sites that are about him and
his writings, but http://www.oliversacks.com/ is his own home page. Dr.
Sacks is currently Clinical Professor of Neurology at Albert Einstein
College of Medicine and Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry at New York
University Medical Center. Sacks was one of 7 speakers at the 1994 Nobel
Conference on "Unlocking the Brain: Progress in Neuroscience."
Education: Medical Education: B.M., B.CH. Oxford University, UK,
1958; Internship: Middlesex Hospital, London, internships in medicine,
surgery, and neurology (1958-60); Mount Zion Hospital (UCSF), San Francisco
(1961-62); Residency Training: UCLA (Neurology) (1962-65); Postdoctoral
Training: Laboratory of Human Nutrition, Oxford University, Research Fellow
(1954-55).
Books: Migraine [Take note, Lisa]; Awakenings; A Leg to Stand On;
The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat; Seeing Voices: A Journey Into the
World of the Deaf; An Anthropologist on Mars: Seven Paradoxical Tales; The
Island of the Colorblind. Sacks' books are read around the world. They
have been translated into many languages, including for instance (but not
limited to) Chinese, Croatian, Greek, Hebrew, Japanese, Korean, Turkish,
etc.
Dramatizations: "Awakenings" inspired the play "A Kind of Alaska"
by Harold Pinter and the movie "Awakenings," starring Robin Williams and
Robert DeNiro. "The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat," a bestseller in
1985, was adapted into a play by Peter Brook and an opera by Michael Nyman,
both produced worldwide. One of the tales from "An Anthropologist on Mars"
inspired the feature film At First Sight (1998), starring Val Kilmer and
Mira Sorvino. A four-part BBC-TV series featuring Sacks called "Oliver
Sacks: The Mind Traveler," has run on PBS.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.9 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 14:51:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
A number of recent items on this list have heightened my
appreciation of just how surreal this whole conversation has become.
Examples:
* Dan selectively defines what's an "ad hominem" in an attempt to
short-circuit any criticism of the Critics' methods of reasoning. Scotoma?
[See my recent post on scotomas as described by Oliver Sacks]
* Lisa recently introduced an excerpt from a listmate's post with
the following literary homage to Michael Kopp:
) In a recent ranting post on Michael Kopp's writing style, SWA apologist
and
) defender Joel Wendt says the following:
Lisa not only admires Michael Kopp's prose, she has *become* Michael
Kopp.
* Alan shows his fuzzy logic in his repeated linking of Steiner and
Anthroposophy with the Nazis and his repeated sidestepping of criticism of
that "logic." Alan calls for others to repudiate concepts that they've
probably never thought of, yet he refuses to repudiate or even address his
own mis-statements. Scotoma?
* Deby makes the comment that PLANS makes allegations and that
these allegations are never answered by anyone on this list. Are you deaf
Deby? Or do you just have a scotoma?
* Dan, warmregards and Raison raise issues with the way science is
taught based on their criticism of phenomenology and its roots in Goethe.
In the face of strong evidence presented on this list to the contrary, they
continue to insist that this approach to science is not science at all and
is practiced only in the "lunatic fringe." Yet another scotoma? When
Raison claims I've provided no proof at all, I restate the evidence in
detail and invite him to inspect it, and then Raison disappears from the
list.
(By the way, Peter Farrell doubted that anyone could show him a
scientist currently working and publishing in a serious way in a Goethean
tradition, offering a chocolate ice cream as a reward. Peter is an
honorable man and is paying up on his wager, unlike warmregards who, I'm
quite sure, has yet to eat his fedora.)
* Meanwhile, some anonymous Critic has been harrassing the
legendary (the Critics would probably use the adjective "notorious") Lefty
Shlesinger, threatening to assume his identity and cause all sorts of
mischief. ...and Dan Dugan and Deby Snell worry about the anonymity of
their fellow Critics lest they be subjected to harrassment! I think we now
see who has the greater cause for concern.
I agree with another list-member who recently stated that the point
of crticizing the Critics' post is not to try to change any Critic's mind
(that would clearly be a futile endeavor) but to speak for the benefit of
the lurkers on the list. I've been posting here for close to 2 years with
that in mind, but at this point I find myself skimming over the Critics'
posts because there's nothing I haven't seen before, and I find myself
reluctant to respond to assertions which really demand responses because I
don't enjoy repeating myself.
It's gotten to the point that I can't take the surrealism, so I'm
getting out of the kitchen: unsubscribing from the list.
I welcome those of you (Critics and Critics' Critics alike) who
consider me a friend to continue to maintain a relationship off-list.
Recipes for chocolate mousse are available off-list.
Bob Tolz
P.S. If Michael Kopp, Raison and/or warmregards ever get into an argument
on this list, even a discussion, someone please email me a copy of the
thread. I'd dearly love to see it. It would blast my Tooth Fairy theory
right out of the water.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2259.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Anthroposophical evidence (Was Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist
Rhetoric)
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 10:20:38 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005011351.GAA15800 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005011351.GAA15800 lists1.best.com)
)[Deby]
))))You are wrong, Joel. History (the archives) will show that PLANS has
))))repeatedly asked to be disproved. History will show that the Anthros just
))))attack the credibility of the critics instead of providing meaningful
))))evidence that we are wrong.
)
)[Chand]
)
)))This is ridiculous. Why should anyone bother to disprove what PLANS says?
)))Why
)))doesn't PLANS disprove what I say, or anyone else on this list? You make
)))broad
)))generalizations based upon anonymous posts or anecdotal evidence. Last I
)))heard,
)))you are innocent until proven guilty. That, Deby, is PLANS job.
)
)[Deby]
))We will see what the judge says, Chand. That will be the final decision.
))Stay tuned, we'll have their day in court. Your thinking over ours. Let us
))see who wins.
)
)OK. You are working assiduously for your day in court. In the mean time, do
)this list the courtesy of backing up what you say with evidence instead of
)asking us to disprove your opinions.
)
)Chand
Sauce for the gander department:
Mr Desai, a professional scientist, says he wants "evidence" for
critics' remarks.
Perhaps, since this list is open to Anthroposophists to expound on
their beliefs, it would be good to start a question-and-answer round
about Anthroposophy. One which asks *Anthroposophists* for *evidence*
about their claims.
Perhaps Mr Desai is the wrong person to ask the first question of, as
he IS an evidence based scientist, and he says he is NOT and
Anthroposphist -- indeed he says he doesn't know much about it.
But there must be some Anthroposophist (or Defender of the Faith, or
even acolyte) who can answer a simple question to the standard of
evidence that Mr Desai, as an evidence-based scientist, would desire.
Here's the question:
Can you show me some *evidence* of the "supersensible higher worlds"
that Rudolf Steiner said he had clairvoyant access to?
(It would be churlish of me to add any comments about present-day
Anthroposophists' relative degrees of "sufficient clairvoyance", as
we have discussed on this list before.)
Science can show me evidence of most things it says about the
Universe (or show me evidence that is persuasive of the existence of
those things we can't directly see). And science progresses by not
holding to its findings any longer than the next discovery. But not
Anthroposophy: there is no change in the world-view of Rudolf Steiner.
So where is the *evidence* of a supersensible world-- or even the
evidence of a physical event which points to the existence of a
supersensible world?
This question I've asked, by the way, is one which has been discussed
here ad nauseam, without any result to satisfy critics.
It all comes down to epistemology, and Steiner, Waldorf and
Anthroposophy's epistemology is totally without evidence, while the
rationalist's epistemology has plenty of evidence -- just as
evolution has plenty of physical, incontrovertible evidence.
So I think my question is more a rhetorical device to say to Mr
Desai, enough already with the demands for evidence, unless the SWA
folks can provide us with some evidence of their basic, fundamental
claim, on which rests EVERYTHING else in the SWA firmament.
Methinks never the twain epistemologies will meet or satisfy each
other in any way. It's in the nature of the beast.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2259 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2260 --------------
001 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: projective geometry
002 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
004 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
005 - "el redon" (elredon hotma - Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
006 - "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet. - RE: projective geometry
007 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
008 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
010 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.1 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 19:07:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
Dear George,
Please reread Lisa's statement below. She was not
interested in what "SWA appoligists" thought, but rather in
non-anthroposophical views. I wasn't invited to respond, and as
I had not read Michael's post, which she refered to (and which I
had deleated as a matter of course), I was surprised at
Michael's pretense of understanding this matter.
Nothing mean-spirited about wanting Michael to fall on his
face when he steps in it out of his own choices and arrogance.
I should be sad when a critic oversteps his real knowledge?
warm regards,
joel
geo wrote:
) ) Lisa Ercolano wrote:
) )
) ) ) In his recent post about how mathematics is
) ) taught at Waldorf schools,
) ) ) Michael Kopp mentions that students in Waldorf
) ) take something called
) ) ) "projective geometry" -- a small mathematical
) ) specialty which is usually not
) ) ) taught at all to primary and secondary school students.
) )
) ) snip
) )
) ) ) Can anyone tell me what the purpose of
) ) projective geometry is -- OUTSIDE
) ) ) of Waldorf, why would anyone study it and who
) ) would study it? And then,
) ) ) perhaps Michael or someone else (or both!)
) ) could explain how projective
) ) ) geometry is used to help Waldorf advance its
) ) spiritual agenda. (My immediate
) ) ) reaction to Michael's statement that projective
) ) geometry deals with
) ) ) three-dimensions makes me think: There's that
) ) number "3" again! Big number
) ) ) in Waldorf, 3-folding, etc.)
) )
) ) Dear Lisa,
) )
) ) This is so wonderful! I am so glad you asked
) ) this question and look forward
) ) to the critics (especially Michael) demonstrating
) ) their ignorance (it doesn't
) ) have anything special to do with "three
) ) dimensions", by the way).
) )
) ) What fun!
) )
) ) warm regards,
) ) joel
) )
) Joel: Why waste our time with posts of no substance. If
) you know something of projective geometry why not share your
) knowledge?
) This post seems to be childish ,at best, perhaps even 'mean
) spirited'. I do not know what projective geometry is and
) would like to learn more. You obviously know what it is not
) so please share with us what it is , if you know.
)
) George
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.2 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 19:21:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005010603.XAA02891 lists1.best.com)
Debra Snell wrote:
) We will see what the judge says, Chand. That will be the final decision.
) Stay tuned, we'll have their day in court. Your thinking over ours. Let us
) see who wins.
Dear Deby,
Be careful what you think the judge will decide (if there is a decision).
Courts are notorious for confining their judgments to very specific sets of
facts. Of all the kinds of claims made by critics on this list, the court is
likely only to express itself on a very small corner. In addition, the court
will not be deciding the "truth" of the matter (for example - whether
anthroposophy is factually a religion), only whether it is a "religion" for
purposes of "establishement" clause of the U.S. Constitution.
PLANS could get a decision banning Waldorf from the Schools sued, but not a
decision banning Waldorf from all public Schools. This issue could be in other
courts in other jurisdictions, if there are public schools elsewhere that
decide to incorporate Waldorf methodology. Best not to count your chickens
....
warm regards,
joel
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.3 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 16:42:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200005010603.XAA02891 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005012317.QAA29375 lists1.best.com)
) Dear Deby,
)
) Be careful what you think the judge will decide (if there is a decision).
)Courts are notorious for confining their judgments to very specific sets of
)facts. Of all the kinds of claims made by critics on this list, the court is
)likely only to express itself on a very small corner.
In addition, the court
)will not be deciding the "truth" of the matter (for example - whether
)anthroposophy is factually a religion), only whether it is a "religion" for
)purposes of "establishement" clause of the U.S. Constitution.
That is all we need, Joel.
)
) PLANS could get a decision banning Waldorf from the Schools sued, but
)not a
)decision banning Waldorf from all public Schools.
Don't worry, I fully understand the court case and all of it's implications.
This issue could be in other
)courts in other jurisdictions, if there are public schools elsewhere that
)decide to incorporate Waldorf methodology.
Yes, in the best case senario, PLANS wins, the schools will appeal and we'd
win again. We're ready, but I doubt the schools will fight that hard. The
public school districts have been duped by the religious and unaccredited
Rudolf Steiner College and their big-coat lawyers. If PLANS wins, the
school districts should turn around and sue RSC for fraud, and get their
money back. PLANS would jump in on that battle in a heartbeat.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.4 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 19:49:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004291618.JAA18973 lists1.best.com) (200005010757.AAA00397 lists1.best.com)
Dear Dan,
Help me get this right. It is against your rules for me to refer to
a specific person and describe their good qualities, but okay on this
list to make disparaging general remarks about large groups (waldorf
appologists, anthroposophist mumbo-jumbo etc). Have I correctdly stated
the rules?
warm regards,
joel
Dan Dugan wrote:
) At 12:20 PM -0400 4/29/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
) )Dear Folks new to this list,
) )
) ) Michael Kopp is what some might call a "good"
) )writer. He does have a way with words, and organizes
) )his thoughts well (even apparently logically). His
) )language is often rich and powerful - full of a kind of
) )strength of feeling and apparent certainty of belief).
)
) Etc. This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics
) because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.
) Michael, do not respond to this, and Joel, you will be unsubscribed
) if you continue in this tone.
)
) -Dan Dugan
) Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.5 ---------------
From: "el redon" (elredon hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 23:43:14 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
)From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
)Subject: Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers
)On 1 May 2000, at 17:08, el redon wrote:
) ) Whoa!!!! You make an _ASSUMPTION_ with nothing to back it up and then
)you
) ) put the burden of proof on Joel?
) ) I am not a lawyer, but it seems that there are more and more libelous
)statements being tossed around here.
)I see nothing remotely resembling libel in that exchange.
)Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
Like I said Steve I am not an attorney, but since you took the time to
noticed that there was 'nothing remotly resembling libel' in that exchange
have you by any chance noticed any other exchanges that might have been?
I know this maybe an imposition upon your time and I realize that your time
is valuable at least in terms of legal advice and that it is at least as
valuable as mine is for giving any educational advice or my knowledge
concerning Waldorf or Education in general. So when you notice a statement
that might be 'something resembling libel' could you please address its
legal nature?
I do have one question, perhaps you could answer...
Is it wise to even discuss Waldorf Education on this list while a law suit
is pending?
My apologies for any imposition I do not mean to take advantage of your
legal expertiese without compensation.
Thank You Much
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.6 ---------------
From: "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet.att.net)
Subject: RE: projective geometry
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 18:54:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005012303.QAA19007 lists1.best.com)
) Nothing mean-spirited about wanting Michael
) to fall on his
) face when he steps in it out of his own choices
) and arrogance.
) I should be sad when a critic oversteps his real
) knowledge?
)
then...
) I had not read Michael's post, which she refered
) to (and which I
) had deleated as a matter of course), I was surprised at
) Michael's pretense of understanding this matter.
)
I don't get it. You did not read his post but you can
comment on what his understanding of a matter is.?!
Joel, Please read my last post on projective geometry and,
if you can, answer the questions.
George
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.7 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 20:04:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004272056.NAA17587 lists1.best.com)
(200004272158.OAA03095 lists1.best.com) (200005010757.AAA00402 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) all of Waldorf education is built on lectures!
Dear Dan,
This is not true. Waldorf education is built upon the activity of
living school teachers, who work very hard at educating the child. The
"inspiration" for much of their work is Steiner lectures, which if blindly
followed leads to some of the excesses on this list. But even that "blind
following" is the act of an individual, and clearly not desired by Steiner.
The same is true of public school teachers. Only their "inspiration"
is different.
Now you might say the teacher is also influenced by the community of
other teachers, which is also true in Waldorf and public schools. In
addition, public school teachers suffer under the abuses of state control
bureaucracies (my daughter teaches public school in L. A.). But in
Waldorf, the ideal at least is to place the teacher's freedom in the
forefront. We could in fact say that Waldorf is based upon pedagogical
freedom, in theory. Although in practice there is considerable evidence on
this list of many failures to achieve this ideal.
But perhaps you disagree. What in your mind is public education based
upon? What are its essential pedegogical sources of inspiration? What are
its ideals? How well does it achieve its ideals? Shouldn't we be a little
comparative in the process of judging Waldorf?
warm regards,
joel
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.8 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 20:07:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004261704.KAA23479 lists1.best.com)
(200004270857.BAA29669 lists1.best.com)
(200004272127.OAA09424 lists1.best.com) (200005010757.AAA00452 lists1.best.com)
Dear Dan,
Cool! Does this mean we all get to answer questions with questions now?
It will get kind of boring though.
warm regards,
joel
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Given that it happened, Joel, why don't you do some research among
) your Anthroposophical friends to find out why?
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
) At 5:30 PM -0400 4/27/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
) )Dear Dan,
) )
) ) You have a sentence below which begins: "I assume". I take this to
) )mean that you have no real knowledge whatsoever of why the material was
) )"off limits", and have just invented that motive most convient to your
) )theory (belief system) about Waldorf and Anthroposophy. Very
) )scientific. Quite rigorous in logic too.
) )
) )warm and epistomological regards,
) )joel
) )
) )Dan Dugan wrote:
) )
) ) ) Parts of the library containing esoteric Anthroposophical books were
) ) ) off-limits to the public school teachers attending the short-course
) ) ) teacher training. I assume it was because they hadn't had the
) ) ) Foundation Year, and wouldn't have the proper attitude when they read
) ) ) something about root races or whatever. This was told to me by a
) ) ) teacher who was there. Can you imagine a scene like that at any other
) ) ) kind of school? Ain't Anthroposophy weird?
) ) )
) ) ) -Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 18:05:01 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200004272056.NAA17587 lists1.best.com)
(200004272158.OAA03095 lists1.best.com)
(200005010757.AAA00402 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005020002.RAA00117 lists1.best.com)
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
)) all of Waldorf education is built on lectures!
)
)Dear Dan,
)
) This is not true. Waldorf education is built upon the activity of
)living school teachers, who work very hard at educating the child. The
)"inspiration" for much of their work is Steiner lectures, which if blindly
)followed leads to some of the excesses on this list. But even that "blind
)following" is the act of an individual, and clearly not desired by Steiner.
But educating the child towards what? Clearly the focus is not on
academics, or there would be core academic classes in the teacher training
program. Training colleges would at least insist on credentials teachers as
a prerequisite. But they don't require anything other than a committment to
Anthroposophy.
As for Steiner's inspiration, based on his halucinations..., I mean
"clairvoyance" is not enough. Teachers are spoon-fed his "inspirations" and
then turned loose on their own to "spread Anthroposophy to the world" , as
Schwartz instructed a new teacher hired to teach at a public Waldorf
school...
)
) The same is true of public school teachers. Only their "inspiration"
)is different.
Yes, thankfully.
)
) Now you might say the teacher is also influenced by the community of
)other teachers, which is also true in Waldorf and public schools. In
)addition, public school teachers suffer under the abuses of state control
)bureaucracies (my daughter teaches public school in L. A.).
That may be true, Joel, but Waldorf ius not the answer...
But in
)Waldorf, the ideal at least is to place the teacher's freedom in the
)forefront.
How free is a brainwashed person, Joel?
We could in fact say that Waldorf is based upon pedagogical
)freedom, in theory.
BS alert. Waldorf curriculum is standard, no matter where you live. The
teachers may be better or worse, but the curriculum is the same. How many
Waldorf schools choose Ballet instead of Eurythmy? How many Waldorf schools
choose stipple or paper-making instead of wet on wet (color meditation)?
Although in practice there is considerable evidence on
)this list of many failures to achieve this ideal.
It's all hear-say, Joel. That is the problem. There are no studies, no
tests. Not even AWSNA concerns itself with quality control. Bad Waldorf
schools give the entire movement a bad name.
) But perhaps you disagree. What in your mind is public education based
)upon? What are its essential pedegogical sources of inspiration? What are
)its ideals? How well does it achieve its ideals? Shouldn't we be a little
)comparative in the process of judging Waldorf?
Public schools admit there are problems. Waldorf is not the answer. In my
area, we have the top schools in the state. These good schools give local
Waldorf the reputation of special needs based education. (You should talk
with the local school administrators who take in the Waldorf kids.)
Sure, they can keep their test scores up. They do it by testing only a
select amount of students. Since they have no regard for the law, because
they believe they are working for a greater good, they actually teach to
the test. I wouldn't believe their test scores unless I was in the room
when the students took the test and I watched the teachers hand them over.
And then I would have to know the teachers had not viewed the test prior to
their students taking it.
Remember, I was part of the start-up of the school. I attended meetings
where teachers were very frank. One teacher said, "I suppose I could get my
kids through a test, as long as I knew what it was." Teachers get a sneak
preview of the standardization tests. These tests are carefully guarded. No
copying is allowed. One standardized test was given to a Waldorf parent so
that she could give her daughter this test. (The parent refused and took
the test back to the school. Now she wishes she had kept it for evidence.)
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2260.10 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 21:02:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
So long, Bob. I'll miss your wit.
David
Bob Tolz:
)
) It's gotten to the point that I can't take the surrealism, so I'm
)getting out of the kitchen: unsubscribing from the list.
)
) I welcome those of you (Critics and Critics' Critics alike) who
)consider me a friend to continue to maintain a relationship off-list.
)Recipes for chocolate mousse are available off-list.
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2260 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2261 --------------
001 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
002 - "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet. - RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
003 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
004 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re:Science and Belief
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re:Science and Belief
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
008 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Oh come on Dan
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Oh come on Dan
010 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.1 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 20:44:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Debra Snell:
)Yes, in the best case senario, PLANS wins, the schools will appeal and we'd
)win again. We're ready, but I doubt the schools will fight that hard. The
)public school districts have been duped by the religious and unaccredited
)Rudolf Steiner College and their big-coat lawyers. If PLANS wins, the
)school districts should turn around and sue RSC for fraud, and get their
)money back. PLANS would jump in on that battle in a heartbeat.
David:
What is a "big coat" lawyer? Is that synonymous with "high powered"? I am
not trying to be snide, I've just never heard the expression before.
Also, from what I've seen of the "Waldorf movement", the idea that Rudolf
Steiner College would have high-powered lawyers at its disposal is
ludicrous.
Deby, do you have anything to offer that supports this characterization?
This just doesn't seem right to me, in the same way that you recently
characterized rural California school boards as, well, bumpkins, easy marks
for those smooth-operating Waldorf people .
I've never heard of anything associated with Waldorf education that had
money to burn on fancy lawyers, and I've never heard of any successful
politicians (and school board members are politicians) who are careless
about alienating their voters. Those who do, aren't politicians very long.
David
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.2 ---------------
From: "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet.att.net)
Subject: RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 20:10:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005020002.RAA00117 lists1.best.com)
Joel wrote:
) In addition, public school teachers suffer under the
) abuses of state control bureaucracies (my daughter teaches
public school in L. A.).
)
Blanket generalization alert!! This non-exclusionary
statement is only supported by a single experience?!.
I'll butt in an respond to these questions
) But perhaps you disagree. What in your mind
) is public education based
) upon?
Public education is based on the responsibility that we as
parents and we as society have for insuring our future,
whatever it may be. The structure of the public school is
generally based on the foundations of democracy. The public
schools (in the USA) are a direct reflection of the ideals
set forth in our nations charter. The hierarchy of the
public school system has its roots in a system of varying
degrees of representation. From the appointed positions to
the elected officers to the PTA and even the individual the
public school is for the people by the people.
What are its essential pedegogical sources
) of inspiration?
The sources of the public schools inspiration is the huge
number of dedicated people who work towards fulfilling the
prom mess of a brighter future which lies in the children of
today. These people are parents, students, teachers,
SCIENTIFIC researchers, psychologists, and yes even
bureaucrats. The point being that there are many people
spending a lot of time trying to do the right thing for our
children. The responsibility that is the foremost impetus
for the public school is the responsibility to do what is
right for the child. What is right for the child has both
parental and societal aspects.
) What are its ideals?
To do the best that can be done for the students and to be
adaptable.
)How well does it achieve its ideals?
That is subjective. I think the important issue is that
public schools strive to measure their success at attaining
the goals and much time is spent critically analyzing its
effectiveness.
) Shouldn't we be a little comparative in the process of
judging Waldorf?
Why don't we be very comparative and not necessarily start
with a judgment. No judgment can be made with out
comparative research between individual Waldorf and
individual public schools. Broad judgments may not be
possible.
George
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.3 ---------------
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 21:24:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Debra Snell:
)But educating the child towards what? Clearly the focus is not on
)academics, or there would be core academic classes in the teacher training
)program. Training colleges would at least insist on credentials teachers as
)a prerequisite. But they don't require anything other than a committment to
)Anthroposophy.
David:
As I once said on this list, education courses (which are required, at least
here in the East, to be a "credentialed" teacher) are blamed with keeping
otherwise qualified teachers out of classrooms.
Also, since a baccalaureate degree is required to become a teacher
hereabouts, and it's much easier to obtain one than to find and complete
waldorf teacher training, why lump them together?
It's an independent school movement, let the independent schools decide what
they need. From what I've seen, it's REALLY an independent school movement.
Very little formal structure exists to tie together all these schools.
Seems to me that these schools, which have individual state license issues,
are in a better position to decide what their faculty needs to be than a
couple of teacher training programs.
Joel:
)We could in fact say that Waldorf is based upon pedagogical
))freedom, in theory.
)
Debra:
)BS alert. Waldorf curriculum is standard, no matter where you live. The
)teachers may be better or worse, but the curriculum is the same. How many
)Waldorf schools choose Ballet instead of Eurythmy? How many Waldorf schools
)choose stipple or paper-making instead of wet on wet (color meditation)?
)
A half-truth. The overall shape of the curriclum is quite similar. What
happens in the classroom on a day-to-day basis is completely controlled by
the individual teacher. To say they're all the same is incorrect. You must
know this, Deby. Why attempt to deny it?
Actually, my daughter's class did do paper-making (papyrus of a sort),
during their Persia or Mesopotamia blocks. They didn't do it instead of
anything else, though...
David
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.4 ---------------
From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re:Science and Belief
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 09:16:21 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Bob Tolz retold the story of plate tectonics with reference to the belief
systems of science. I want to put a different slant on that story and the
cosmological reference at the end of Bob's post.
The issue I want to stress is one of evidence. Claims can be made. The
appropriate evidence needs to accompany the claim in order for the claim to
be accepted. In the case of plate tectonics, in the first half of the
century there was insufficient evidence, not because scientists wanted to
hang on to their belief systems, but because the lack of mechanism for
continent motion was too much of a barrier. This particular required
feature of the theory was just too improbable without the appropriate
evidence. Once the appropiate evidence is in, plate tectonics is rapidly
accepted. Now, the motion can be detected and measured with appropriate tools.
The same thing is true of the cosmological story. Evidence which is
appropriate to the crime is required to take a legal metaphor.
How do you know how much or what evidence is necessary? Well that's a hard
question. It depends on how much of the existing theoretical framework you
want to overthrow. Part of the training in scientific research is getting a
feel for this. When a paper is sent for publication, there is normally
discussion (at least for multiauthor papers) about what weaknesses the
reviewers might find. This discussion usually leads to attempts to repair
those weaknesses either by including further data or argument, or by being
upfront about the weakness. One way of interpreting this last part is
fitting the claims to the evidence. You can't claim more than that for
which you have evidence.
I can't see a problem with this. I think scientists get this right in the
long run. Some theories might gain some currency without sufficient
evidence and fall by the wayside soon after. Others might keep competing
better theories out for too long. The trouble is that the amount of
required evidence is what I would call an emergent property rather than a
simple knob setting.
This does not argue that scientists don't believe things. I have discussed
a few in various posts. One is that the world can be understood. Another is
that there are no supernatural processes. Both of these are still testable,
and the continuing success of science is supporting evidence.
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.n2261.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 19:41:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005020133.SAA23374 lists1.best.com)
)
)Joel:
))We could in fact say that Waldorf is based upon pedagogical
)))freedom, in theory.
))
)Debra:
))BS alert. Waldorf curriculum is standard, no matter where you live. The
))teachers may be better or worse, but the curriculum is the same. How many
))Waldorf schools choose Ballet instead of Eurythmy? How many Waldorf schools
))