-------------- 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
))choose stipple or paper-making instead of wet on wet (color meditation)?

[David]
)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?

[Deby]

I agree with you here, but Joel said "pegagogical freedom." That is what I
took issue with. If there is so much pedagogical freedom, why are the
blessings all the same, the paintings the same, the MLB's, the nature
tables, the candles, Ancient History, wet on wet painting, eurythmy, etc.?
If it's Waldorf, it's the same. Only certain things help with soul
development, David, and _that_ is Waldorf's mission.

Have you ever heard of a Waldorf science class that focused its weeks-long
Man and Animal curriculum by studying at the zoo instead of learning about
"head animals?" This isn't pedagogical freedom, it's rigid pedagogy to the
max.. Lisa and (was it you?) recently compared MLB's on Man and Animal.
They were strikingly similar. What is different, and perhaps what you call
pedagogical freedom, is the teacher's personalities. Well, that is
different in any classroom, even Sunday School.

[David]
)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...

[Deby]
I'll just bet they didn't miss their occult ritual wet on wet painting
exercises to learn paper making...

)
)
)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.n2261.6 ---------------

From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re:Science and Belief
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 15:03:58 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005020221.TAA20866 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005020221.TAA20866 lists1.best.com)

)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.


I don't often take issue with Peter Farrell, but I would like to see 
an agreeable refinement of his second statement, that 'scientists 
believe there are no supernatural processes'.

This may be true of individual scientists, but it is not true of 
science or the scientific method.

Science and its method are neutral on the question of 'supernatural 
processes', not disbelieving of their existence.

This is because while there is not now and never has been any 
_evidence_ of them, some could arise in the future.

However, because there has been no evidence or even suggestion of 
such things, scientists generally are uninterested in them -- science 
takes no view, because the issues are also a matter of personal, 
usually religious, belief of non-scientists and scientists alike. 
Science leaves metaphysics to the believers.

(See my question to Chand Desai and all Anthroposophists who demand 
evidence of the critics, where I ask for evidence of the prime source 
of all things Steiner, Waldorf and Anthroposphical: just this 
supernatural realm that Peter Farrell is talking about.)

The fact that individual scientists may believe or disbelieve all 
sorts of things does not make science a believer or non-believer in 
anything.


Cheers from Godzone (not a state of Ozzie, but close, eh, Peter?)

Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.7 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 20:08:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005020111.SAA11067 lists1.best.com)


)
)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.

[Deby]

Farmer's daughter lingo. Sorry. School boards listen to a lawyer, dressed
in their nice ("big") coats, over parents. I watched the vast majority of
parents at Oak Ridge school beg their school board to remove the religious
system of Waldorf from their school. RSC's lawyer stood up, said "Waldorf
is not religious. PLANS has been proved wrong." The board believed him over
all of the evidence the parents brought forth. It took months long fighting
after that to rid the school of Waldorf.


[David]
)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]

I'm not using the term in that way. I agree that Steiner doesn't have a
high powered lawyer. I watched him in action. Still Sac City School Board
listened very carefully, and he was able to single handedly convince the
board that we didn't know anything about Waldorf.

[David]

)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 .

[Deby]

Sac City is different than Twin Ridges, by a long shot. Still the RSC
lawyer was listened to, and his advice taken, by SCUSD over hundreds of
families who came to speak out against their children's new curriculum. The
minutes of that meeting may come in handy one day.


[David]
)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.

[Deby]

Waldorf has found a gold mine in the public sector, but they don't hire
fancy lawyers, they use fellow Anthropop lawyers. My parents called every
lawyer a "big-coat lawyer." My background is telling... (and I won't hold
being a lawyer against you Harve and Steve...)

The problem with alienating voter base, is Waldorf targeted a low income
neighborhood with their "educational" agenda. They magnetized the
neighborhood school, tossed out the computers and brought out the knitting
needles, the nature tables, the wet on wet (you get my point). The affected
families were the 85% english-as-a-second-language crowd who are defensless
at the polls. It takes more than a green card to vote, David.

Still, they were eventually successful. They de-magnetized the school and
unlocked the computers.






--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.8 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Oh come on Dan
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 20:37:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005020111.SAA11003 lists1.best.com)

Dan:
)This kind of personal argument is not allowed on waldorf-critics
)because it ruins the discussion having people fight personal battles.

So let me get this straight.

"This kind of personal argument" is not allowed, but snide insults and
offensive wording, are? As long as nobody actually calls someone an
asshole - a recognized ad hominem - it seems that you don't have a problem
with ad hominem *arguments* at all. (But it is okay for a bunch of folks to
gang up on Debra Harvey for going after Deby's spelling, even though Critics
have *often* chastised Waldorf grads - who are no longer on the list to
defend themselves - for being "linguistically challenged" and "unable to
think"!)

What is this, Dan, your attempt to disprove MK's assertion that you have
allowed this list to become "an Anthroposophical playground"? You seem to
have a great amount of tolerance for those with whom you agree, who are free
to insult people with impunity (as long as they don't use any bad words).

FWIW, I agree that Harve should drop the spelling thing - I know some very
talented and intelligent people who can not spell. But I do understand how
she could find herself becoming cranky. Sometimes the tone of this list
sucks people in, and pretty soon perfectly nice people start treating other
folks as callously as they have witnessed others do...

Of course, it would really help if the list moderator held both "sides" to
the same standards.

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.9 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Oh come on Dan
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 21:53:50 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200005020111.SAA11003 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005020341.UAA29933 lists1.best.com)

)Dan:

[Sarina]
(But it is okay for a bunch of folks to
)gang up on Debra Harvey for going after Deby's spelling, even though Critics
)have *often* chastised Waldorf grads - who are no longer on the list to
)defend themselves - for being "linguistically challenged" and "unable to
)think"!)

For the record, I have complained about Waldorf teacher's lack of ability
in this area, but I have always defended attacks on spelling and grammar,
no matter who atatcks.






--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2261.10 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 22:06:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005011409.HAA21637 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005011409.HAA21637 lists1.best.com)

Chand, you quoted me,

)[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!

And commented,

)But not the one's from which you extract provocative exerpts.

This seems to imply that you believe what Steiner said about Waldorf 
can be separated out from what he said about Anthroposophy. I think 
if you read some of the books recommended for teacher training you 
will see how this is impossible.

-Dan Dugan



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2261 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2262 --------------

    001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
    002 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re:Science and Belief
    003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
    004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: projective geometry
    005 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re: Peter and Joel discuss objective introspection; was: Re:on
    006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
    007 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Anthroposophical evidence (Was Re: Michael Kopp's Absoluti
    008 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: Oh come on Dan
    009 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
    010 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - apology

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.1 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 22:05:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)

Bob, good job contacting Sacks. I agree that he is reputable and 
highly-regarded. You quoted his letter to you:

)[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."

I agree with this, and I believe I acknowledged the value of Goethe's 
observations just recently (4/22):

[Professor at Univerisity of Oregon]
))	"Goethe was a great observer and philosopher.  Science has much to
))gain by looking at his perspective, whether a theory is 'Right' or 'Wrong'.
)
)[Dugan]
)Can't argue with that, Goethe made observations that weren't 
)explained till generations later.

Sacks says there's renewed interest in Goethe's color book because 
Goethe described phenomena that continue to be of interest. He says 
nothing that bears on Goethean Science as promoted by 
Anthroposophists in Waldorf Education beyond the fact that Goethe 
made careful observations and Waldorf science teaching encourages 
careful observation.

What Anthroposophists claim is most important about Goethean Science 
is its methods, which follow a different paradigm, purportedly 
superior and "moral." Your research, Bob, has found the good in 
Goethe's science, but that is irrelevant to our discussion.

It is the misunderstanding of the "(reductive) methods of science" 
Sacks mentions that Anthroposophy is trying to perpetuate in Waldorf. 
In that regard Sacks' statement agrees with the Waldorf critics.

BTW I highly recommend Sacks' book "Seeing Voices," about the world 
of the deaf.

-Dan Dugan
copy to Bob



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.2 ---------------

From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re:Science and Belief
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 16:20:40 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Michael Kopp responds to me

[me]
))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.
)
)
[Michael]
)I don't often take issue with Peter Farrell, but I would like to see 
)an agreeable refinement of his second statement, that 'scientists 
)believe there are no supernatural processes'.
)

I stared at the sentence to which Michael rightly takes exception before I
posted and decided I couldn't do much better in a short time. I am not
happy with Michael's refinement however. The reason is that it interprets
my statement in a way I did not intend. (This is my problem not Michael's).
Let's say we have a God who interferes in human affairs. God might for
example disturb the outcome of lottery draws, or interfere with the
trajectory of vehicles prior to road accidents. Does God have the freedom
to do this in such a way that it is not detectable by standard scientific
testing? With car accidents I suspect the answer is yes because these are
generally such messy events. With lotteries, it will depend on the
frequency of interference. Too frequent and funny things will happen to the
statistics. The point of what I am saying is that if there are a lot of
miracles going on these will disturb the normal progress of physical laws
and lead to the universe being not understandable.

Supernatural processes are fine if they have no measurable consequences. I
think this is slightly different to what Michael was suggesting, but no
doubt he'll let me know. I note that my post was in response to something
Bob Tolz said. He has since indicated his departure. Sorry to see you go Bob.
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.n2262.3 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 23:16:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200004291618.JAA18973 lists1.best.com)
 (200005010757.AAA00397 lists1.best.com)
 (200005012346.QAA20449 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005012346.QAA20449 lists1.best.com)

At 7:49 PM -0400 5/1/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
)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?

Joel, I only quoted the first paragraph to identify the post. Your 
post was directed to the writing style of an individual subscriber. 
This is not acceptable.

-Dan Dugan
Moderator



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.4 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 23:30:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
 (200005011041.DAA00118 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005011041.DAA00118 lists1.best.com)

Sune answered Geo's question about projective geometry thus:

)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.

This is a smoke screen. Projective geometry is intimately tied up 
with occultist pseudo-science, and that's why it's taught in Waldorf 
schools. David Adams wrote:

"The kind of 'space' in which one creates out of the etheric realm is 
quite different than ordinary three-dimensional physical space: 'One 
can...perceive by "imaginations," this space--pregnant with forms, 
everywhere able to produce shapes out of itself, and from such 
perceptions one can create forms in plastic art, architectural or 
sculptural.' Such an artist works not with external objects but only 
with 'forces, effects of forces, lines of force, and 
force-configurations.' Mathematician George Adams once called this 
the 'helioplastic' space of projective geometry, very different from 
the physically-oriented space of Euclidean geometry. In the former, 
you cannot start from one point and relate everything else to it but 
rather must start from the 'counterimage' of the point, that is, the 
blue vault of heaven, the periphery. Etheric planar forces approach 
the earth from all directions, working sculpturally upon it. The 
human etheric body itself is formed plastically from out of the whole 
cosmos by such 'planes of force.' This is the explanation for the 
typical quality of forms in Steiner's architecture and sculpture, 
each shaped by angular surface planes slanting inward from the cosmic 
etheric periphery, as it were. This is the etheric world's method of 
shaping forms.

[Adams, David. "The Goetheanum as White Magic, or Why Is 
Anthroposophical Architecture So Important?" Journal for 
Anthroposophy, No. 64, Spring 1997,  p. 20]

-Dan Dugan



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.5 ---------------

From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re: Peter and Joel discuss objective introspection; was: Re:on
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 17:55:29 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Joel has written what I quote below and I have responded to it but I want
to respond some more.

)    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.

There are real criticisms of the testing method I am supporting here mixed
in with criticisms which are invalid. I accept that homeopathy is included
in a larger interrelated dynamic. This doesn't mean that the testing method
is flawed. At best it only means that the details of the test might need to
ne enlarged. Who should be involved in this process of developing
appropriate tests to make this happen? In my view the answer is
Anthroposophical medical practitioners and theorists. Are they? Certainly
non Anthroposophical homeopaths are involved in the design of such tests. I
believe it is appropriate that this work continues. I also believe that the
tests already carried out answer the question sufficiently to verify that
the standard practice of homeopathy by Anthroposophical medical
practitioners does not work. I am happy to be shown to be wrong.

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.n2262.6 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner College's lawyers?
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 10:40:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005020305.UAA10214 lists1.best.com)

Debra Snell wrote:

) [Deby]
) 
) I'm not using the term in that way. I agree that Steiner doesn't have a
) high powered lawyer. I watched him in action. Still Sac City School Board
) listened very carefully, and he was able to single handedly convince the
) board that we didn't know anything about Waldorf.

Yeeh! You saw _Steiner_ in action, _single handedly_ convince the
board of Sac City School that it did not know anything about Waldorf!
No hallucination? True?? Yeeh! And no smoking and no drinking before
the meeting ...?? Must have been a truely unique experience ... A
clear qualification for becoming a fulltime well paid lecturer on
Steiner. Unless you _were_hallucinating of course ... (?) :-)

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.n2262.7 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical evidence (Was Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist
	 Rhetoric)
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 09:16:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline




[Chand]:
))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.

[Michael]:
)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.

This is your evidence?  Avoiding my question, I assume you have none.

(snip extra words)

[Michael]:
)Here's the question:
)
)Can you show me some *evidence* of the "supersensible higher worlds"
)that Rudolf Steiner said he had clairvoyant access to?

Although I am not an Anthroposophist, it is quite clear from my reading of pg
30-31 of Theosophy (to get context for a quote from Dan's website) that Steiner
considered thinking to be supersensible.

(snip more extra words)

[Michael]:
)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.

If the Anthros were trying to proselytize, then this thread would be apropos.
It seems rather to be the case that you question Anthros about their beliefs and
take issue with the answers.   This is different from your behavior, seeking to
convert list members to your twisted view of Waldorf education using words
without evidence.  Since you are the one making claims, back them up.

[Michael]
)Methinks.....

I read Thor comic books as a kid too.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.8 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Oh come on Dan
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 10:45:02 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Deby]

but I have always defended attacks on spelling and grammar,
)no matter who atatcks.
)
[Harve]

Of course YOU would.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.9 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:50:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005010603.XAA02891 lists1.best.com) (200005012339.QAA16288 lists1.best.com)

Debra Snell wrote:

) 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.

  Dear Deby,

    Pray tell, what is a "big-coat lawyer"?

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2262.10 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: apology
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:04:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear List,

    The last view days I have been depressed (life
crisis issues) and somewhat cranky.  In reading over
some of my posts to this list, I realized I was saying
things I was not really comfortable with on review.

    I'd like to apologize to Michael Kopp for
suggesting he was arrogant, and to the list in general
for seeming to duck the projective geometry question.
I also would like to apologize to deby s. for the
cranky tone in our most recent exchanges.

warm regards,
joel





--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2262 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2263 --------------

    001 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
    002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: projective geometry
    003 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
    004 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
    005 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re:Science and Belief
    006 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Scotoma
    007 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
    008 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
    009 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
    010 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: projective geometry

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.1 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:04:54 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

))Is it wise to even discuss Waldorf Education on this list while a
)law suit
)is pending?

[Harve]

It doesn't matter.  The court will base its decision on the record before 
it, not on any comments made on this list.  The only "judgment" call would 
be whether to engage in the macho posturing regarding the case that I just 
skimmed through.  It's usually best to avoid that, because it can make the 
later egg-on-theface even less palatable.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.2 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 18:18:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
								 (200005011041.DAA00118 lists1.best.com) (200005020657.XAA00999 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:
 
) Sune answered Geo's question about projective geometry thus:
) 
) )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
...

) This is a smoke screen.

No, it is not a smoke screen. It is a short, rather correct answer,
based on what can be read in ordinary lexica and the essay by the
mathematician Kline in "The world of mathematics" (1956 ed: James R.
Newman http://www.win.tue.nl/ioi/imo/books) to Geo's simple specific
indirect question, a few hours earlier: "I do not know what projective
geometry is and would like to learn more." It was also an answer to
the first question that Lisa Ercolano asked at the end of her posting,
that led to Geo's question ("Can anyone tell me what the purpose of
projective geometry is -- OUTSIDE of Waldorf, why would anyone study
it and who would study it?").

You try to answer to _Lisa Ercolano's_ second, slightly more paranoic
indirect earlier question ("And then, perhaps Michael or someone else
(or both!) could explain how projective geometry is used to help
Waldorf advance its spiritual agenda.", Lisa Ercolano suspecting that
it has something to do with the number "3", which she finds suspicious
as a number, as she has found it mentioned in different waldorf
connections).

) Projective geometry is intimately tied up
) with occultist pseudo-science, and that's why it's taught in Waldorf
) schools. David Adams wrote:
...

Using http://www.alltheweb.com or http://www.altavista.com searching
for "projective geometry" leads in both cases to ca 5000 pages on the
net in different ways related to the issue. Most of those I scanned
shortly were purely mathematical-theoretical ones by students or
professionals in mathematics. If you want to call them "occult
pseudo-scientists" with a spiritual agenda, you're of course free to
do it.

Projective geometry leads - among other things - to a rather strange
concept of a plane at infinity of space and shows how it is possible
to build a complete geometry built on the _plane_ as the basic
geometrical element in the same way that Euclidian geometry can be
built on the _point_. 

)From a Euclidian perspective a line can be conceived of as all the
points that make up the line. From a projective geometrical
perspective a line can be conceived of as being "made up" of all the
planes that pass through the line. In a similar way a flat surface -
from an Euclidian perspective - can be conceived of as being made up
of all the lines that lie in the surface. From a projective
perspective its corresponding element; the point, can be conceived of
as being "made up" of all the lines that pass through the point.

While Euclidian geometry is concerned with especially the metric
characteristics of "stiff" bodies, projective geometry is concerned
with the non-metric characteristics that remain constant under certain
circumstances when "stiff" bodies or forms are transformed; changed,
in different ways. Projective geometry thereby makes it possible to
approach, describe and understand the characteristics of non-stiff
forms such as plants and other organic forms, that are transformed and
metamorphose in a regular way, yet remaining the "same" through its
transformations and metamorphosis'.

It is possible to describe characteristics of transforming -
metamorphosing forms of plants out of the perspective of projective
geometry in a way that widens the Euclidian point-"atoms" perspective
and understanding of them. It makes it possible - among other things -
to understand more deeply the characteristics and "forces" that govern
the growth of organic forms if one understands them out of the
perspective of the "plane at infinity" (from a Euclidian perspective).

http://www.anthropress.org/press/shop/Nature2.html PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY
by Olive Whicher gives a general introduction to the subject. "The
Plant between Sun and Earth" by George Adams and Olive Whicher is a
more specific introductory work on the subject, related to the
development of plants from a projective geometrical perspective, see
http://www.rudolfsteiner.co.uk/pages/science.html 

Projective geometry also makes it possible to come to an understanding
of counter space as the polar opposite of Euclidean space
http://www.anth.org.uk/NCT/counter.htm This makes it possible to come
to a completely new perspective of physics, in a way that has been
analysed in parts by Nick Thomas in a recent work "Science Between
Space and Counter Space. Exploring the Significance of Negative Space"
http://www.templelodge.com/pages/recent/recent_book9.html

Projective geometry also gives you keys to understanding the relation
between such basic geometrical bodies as the so called "platonic
bodies". A study of the transformation of the cube, turning it
inside-out along one of its diagonals led Paul Schatz to develop the
mixing machine; Turbula, that was necessary to make the components of
Teflon mix in such way as (as far as i know) was necessary to make it
usable aas a technical product
http://www.paul-schatz.ch./english/index.html

What is the "spiritual agenda" of doing projective geometry at waldorf
schools?

I'd say it is to "un-stiffen" a thinking that thinks of the world only
in "Lego"-terms, developing strict, fully understandable thought-tools
that make it possible also to observe and think of forms in nature and
in general, how they arise and change, also making it possible to come
to terms with the regularities of the ways forms _change_ in nature,
something that is very difficult if you only think in "stiff" terms.

It makes it possible not only to "think" _about_ and analyse stiff
forms, but to _also_ breath (strictly!) changing geometrical forms by
not only "drawing" them but _creating-doing-developing_ them with four
simple tools; paper, pencil, ruler and compasses.

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.n2263.3 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:30:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com) (200005020543.WAA03592 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:

) What Anthroposophists claim is most important about Goethean Science
) is its methods, which follow a different paradigm, purportedly
) superior and "moral." Your research, Bob, has found the good in
) Goethe's science, but that is irrelevant to our discussion.

Dear Dan,

    Would you please provide some evidence for your remarks concerning
"purportedly superior and moral".

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.4 ---------------

From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 09:28:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (200005012346.QAA20465 lists1.best.com)

On 1 May 2000, at 23:43, el redon wrote:

) 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?

Not that I noticed.  There may have been some.

) 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?

Sure, if I think of it at the time.

Briefly, libel is a false statement of fact (not opinion) which injures a 
person's reputation.  It is not libel to say that a person is an oozing, 
malignant growth on the nose of humanity, because that is clearly not a 
statement of fact.  It's an insult, to be sure, but not libel.

On the other hand, if one were to falsely claim that a scientist knowingly 
published a study using falsified data, that would be libel, because it is 
a false statement of fact and would tend to injure the scientist's 
reputation.

More to the point, calling Anthroposophy a cult is not libel because (1) 
it is obviously a statement of opinion rather than fact, and (2) it is not 
about any particular individual.

) Is it wise to even discuss Waldorf Education on this list while a law suit 
) is pending?

I suppose that depends on whether people involved in the suit say things 
that are harmful to their case.  But generally, I don't think that people 
should stop discussing things just because there are lawsuits pending.  

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.n2263.5 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re:Science and Belief
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:42:14 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Peter]

)Let's say we have a God who interferes in human affairs. God might for
)example disturb the outcome of lottery draws, or interfere with the
)trajectory of vehicles prior to road accidents. Does God have the freedom
)to do this in such a way that it is not detectable by standard scientific
)testing? With car accidents I suspect the answer is yes because these are
)generally such messy events. With lotteries, it will depend on the
)frequency of interference. Too frequent and funny things will happen to the
)statistics.


[Harve]

If there is a God, She has much better things to do with her time than worry 
about the lottery--although I'm sure many people get sore knees "praying" 
about this.

In all serious, however, how could the Divine ever be quantifiable?
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.6 ---------------

From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Scotoma
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 10:45:23 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)



----- Original Message -----
From: Tolz, Robert (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2000 12:19 PM
Subject: Scotoma


) 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.
)
) "Goethe's insights have been confirmed."  These are the words of
) well-known neurologist/psychiatrist Oliver Sacks, M.D. )
) Sacks (you may be more familiar with him in his incarnation as Robin
) Williams playing him in the movie "Awakenings" with Robert DeNiro)

I think Sachs is an interesting writer, and I enjoyed the Man Who Mistook
His Wife for a Hat.  However Awakenings was very disturbing to me, as he
seemed to be giving L-Dopa to a group of people with catatonic schizophrenia
whom he misdiagnosed as having Parkinsonism.  Predictably, they got manic
and psychotic.  Now it's true that I see neurologists make this mistake from
time to time, but it certainly doesnt distinguish Sachs as a good clinician
in my mind.  I am also unaware that Sachs is a scientist.  Has he published
any scientific papers? I think you haven't met the challenge until you find
a real scientist, Bob.

Alan Fine



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.7 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 11:52:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Deby]:
)The
)public school districts have been duped by the religious and unaccredited
)Rudolf Steiner College and their big-coat lawyers.

What is the evidence for this statement?  One could say with equal credibility,
prior to the court ruling at least, that the court has been duped by vengeful
and rumor-mongering PLANS and its small-coat lawyer.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.8 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:02:40 -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)
	 (200005012346.QAA20449 lists1.best.com) (200005020657.XAA00916 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:

) Joel, I only quoted the first paragraph to identify the post. Your
) post was directed to the writing style of an individual subscriber.
) This is not acceptable.

Dear Dan,

    I sort of understand this, if I was to criticise the style.  My attempt
was to "characterize" this style of writing, recognizing that "how" one
presents ideas is related to the ability to answer these ideas.  I
exaggerated, somewhat, my "description:", mirroring this individual's similar
"exaggerations".  I borrowed his forms of speech (inventing a term "Koppian"
etc.).  I raised several issues (mirroring the shotgun approach), while at the
end coming to a more narrow criticism of the idea that any group or individual
would accept as a description of who or what they are, the ideas of a critic.
It is an extreme sillyness, and when it is given content, it is insulting.

    For example, Saykalay described the main Beings of Anthroposophy as
Christ, Lucifer and Ahriman.  Only on the critics list, where people routinely
form their ideas of anthropososphy out of critics views (rather than going to
the source), would such an outrageous confabulation of the truth arise.  The
reality, if one was to consider this relevant, is that the main beings are
Christ, Sophia and Michael.  All of Saykalay's "points" suffer the same excess
of confusion.  A "critic", by definition, doesn't "understand", as this list
continually proves.  A "critic" has an agenda, and interprets facts only in
that way that supports this agenda.

    This is not to say that all posters to this list that have issues with
Waldorf are "critics", in the sense I am using that word.  I have a very
narrow idea in mind, when I use it, meaning those writers to this list who
regularly "hear" but do not "listen", already having their minds made up.

    You, of course, have the power to unsubscribe me.  The existence of that
power does not in all cases make your judgement correct.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.9 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 12:06:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[geo]:
)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 myth is this?  I learned that the imposition of compulsory public education
in Massachusetts was met with armed resistance.  After its establishment, the
literacy rate actually dropped.  An inauspicious beginning, to say the least.

The Supreme Court (lawyers, correct my layperson understanding) has ruled that
students do not have the same freedom of speech and expression rights as the
rest of us.  There is very little democracy in schools.  In fact, the public
school system in general is hierarchical, with an appointed superintendent.  The
teachers do not generally get to vote for principal.  In the public schools in
Nashville, there is no recess despite the wishes of PTA.

Is this what you call a "direct reflection of the ideals set forth in our
nations charter?"

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2263.10 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: projective geometry
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:25:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005010025.RAA12263 lists1.best.com)
	 (200005011041.DAA00118 lists1.best.com) (200005020657.XAA00999 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:

) This is a smoke screen. Projective geometry is intimately tied up
) with occultist pseudo-science, and that's why it's taught in Waldorf
) schools. David Adams wrote: (Dan then quotes from an anthroposophically
) oriented journal)

Dear Dan,

    It is clear that projective geometry is much admired in
anthroposophical circles, but as a mathematic discipline, in itself, it has
none of the really weird characteristics you desire to give it above ("
occultist pseudo-science").  These words, of course, have no meaning
whatsoever, and are just "critics" claims, backed up by no references to
anything.

    Projective geometry has quite other significance than that which
anthroposophists have given it.  Of course, for a "critic", if
anthroposophy has anything to do with a subject, then obviously there must
be some flaw.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2263 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2264 --------------

    001 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
    002 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
    003 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - projective geometry
    004 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
    005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
    006 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly  - RE: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
    007 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
    008 - "el redon" (elredon hotma - Arts, Choice, Testing, Insults... Was:Re: Mystery-Mongering (w
    009 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)
    010 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.1 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: If You Can't Take the Surrealism....
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 20:23:18 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011843.LAA19834 lists1.best.com)

Bob wrote:

) 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.

And Michael Kopp appears ...

)         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 think many will miss you!

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.n2264.2 ---------------

From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 11:23:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (200005021709.KAA22896 lists1.best.com)

On 2 May 2000, at 12:06, Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu wrote:

) The Supreme Court (lawyers, correct my layperson understanding) has ruled that
) students do not have the same freedom of speech and expression rights as the
) rest of us. 

It's difficult to correct your understanding because I don't know the 
context of your statement.  The issue comes up in a variety of contexts:

What restrictions may a journalism teacher place on the content of 
articles in the school paper?

What restrictions may a school place on the wearing of gang insignia and 
other potentially disruptive symbols in class (e.g., a swastika)?

What restrictions may a school place on the content of speeches by the 
valedictorian at graduation?

And so on.

The Supreme Court has held that, in the absence of a constitutionally 
valid reason to regulate their speech, public school students have a right 
of free expression of their views.  

So what are constitutionally valid reasons to regulate speech?  One is to 
control the school environment.  Students may be prohibited from holding 
demonstrations which disrupt classes.  On the other hand, they may not be 
prohibited from a peaceful protest which is not disruptive.

Another constitutionally valid reason is to teach students the boundaries 
of socially acceptable behavior.  Thus, students may be prohibited from 
using profanity or sexually explicit language when addressing a school 
assembly.

With respect to school newspapers, even more restrictions are allowable, 
because the paper is published by the school as a learning experience for 
journalism students.  It is not published by the students themselves, and 
it is not a public forum.  As the publisher, the school has the right to 
reasonably restrict the content of the paper.

So it is probably true that students do not have the same freedom of 
expression as the rest of us, in that it may be restricted in ways that 
would be unacceptable in a more public forum, but they do have some 
freedom of expression.

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.n2264.3 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: projective geometry
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 14:39:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear George,

    Sorry for ducking your questions.  Here are a
couple of URLs to University websites on Projective
Geometry, so you can get a sense that it has nothing to
do with the "occult" (whatever that is).

    http://vision.stanford.edu/~birch/projective

http://www.math.toronto.edu/mathnet/questionCorner/projective.html

    Now I will describe my personal relationship to
these ideas.

    When I first met anthroposophy, I was already
having spiritual experiences, and found myself
attracted to Steiner's "Theory of Knowledge Implicit in
Goethe's World Conception", what is called goethean
science (horribly mis-represented on this list), and to
projective geometry.  I especially became interested in
the text: "Projective Geometry: Creative Polarities in
Time and Space", by Olive Whicher.

    This is an approach to the teaching of the ideas of
Projective Geometry through the use of drawing and
visualization (rather than algebraic formulas).  I
studied this text for a number of years, off and on,
and still occassionally take myself back to its
exercises, for they are remarkably pleasurable, as well
as being a wonderful aid to the thinking.

    The basic difference between Euclidian Geometry and
Projective Geometry is the use of infinite elements.
In Euclidian Geometry there is the axiom that parallel
lines never meet.  One of the discoveries of Projective
Geometry is that parallel lines do meet at infinity.

    Many of the drawing exercises involve just drawing
a line horizontally across a page (about two thirds of
the way up from the bottom).  Three points are picked
on this line, following which lines (more vertical than
horizontal) are drawn following a specific ordered
sequence.  When this is done correctly, various
geometric forms will arise (one is called a hexagonal
net).  A hexagonal net is a joined series of
hexagonal-like forms, which are not "regular" in nature
(that is the sides are unequal, as are the angles).

    The lines through the points on the first line
bring it about that the hexagonal net is "projected"
onto the surface of the paper.

    There are certain interesting results of this
"drawing process".   One is that the hexagonal net
arises without the use of "measure".  No protractor is
used to determine angles, no ruler to determine side
lengths.  All that is used is a straight edge and a
pencil.

    A second interesting property is that if you take
one of the elements of this drawing (using the picture
nature of the imagination), and move it out to
infinity, the irregular nature of the hexagonal net
disappears, and all the hexagons become alike and
regular (equal sides and angles). [That is, instead of
the drawing being "projected" from a line and three
points on the page, the line becomes the "line at
infinity" and the lines through the points become
"parallell" (thus regularizing the hexagonal forms).]

    I realize this will be very difficult to imagine,
but I did need to characterize some basic elements of
the exercises in the book.

    Anyway, through this and similar processes, using
drawing and the picture-imagination, various principles
of projective geometry are taught.

    What this does (and what makes it important from my
point of view), is that the picture thinking is trained
to be sensitive to, and practice, precise and exact
mathematical (geometric) acts.  For someone who is not
done this, there is really no way to appreciate the
effect upon the thinking.

    For example, a number of projective geometry
principles involve processes of transformation (such
terms as "involution", "homology", "elation", "circle
curves", "conjugate pairs" etc. become relevant).  The
point here is that the picture-thinking becomes used to
working with plastic transformations in an exact and
disciplined way.  This later becomes important when
considering morophological problems in living organisms
(c.f. "The Plant Between Sun and Earth", by Adams and
Whicher).

    As I have tried (in other posts) to explain,
anthroposophy is based upon certain epistomological
principles that can only be discovered through
objective introspection (I will write more about this
in a post to Peter).  This self examination of the
nature of consciousness (and its dynamic universal
qualities) is greatly enhanced by the study of
Projective Geometry (in the way taught by Whicher),
which allows the "I" to appreciate the need for
precision and exactness in thinking.

    This becomes especially important when one moves
from a quantitative view of reality to a qualitative.
It is mathematics which gives remarkable foundation to
the quantitative view of the universe.  In Projective
Geometry we find the means to bring the same precision
and exactness to the understanding of the qualitative,
which materialism in its abstract reductive habits has
removed from the picture of the universe, and thus
falsified it.

    For example, from the discussions of Goethe's color
ideas on this list, an unprejudiced person will have
learned that Newton and Goethe are complimentary and
not antagonistic.  Newton (in simplistic terms)
examined light from the quantitative view, while Goethe
examined light from the qualitative.  Materialism has
ignored the qualitative, because it could not be
counted (reduced to abstract numbers), but the
qualitative remains an aspect of reality.  So that when
materialism builds up its ideas of the general nature
of the universe, from purely quantitative ideas, it
constructs an illusion (having left outside of its
picture all those inconvienient problems connected to
"qualities" (basically by knowing a lot about "matter",
but almost nothing about "consciousness" - I'll go into
this more when I finish my post to Peter).

    Anyway, George, the above is some of the ideas that
one can think about in connection with Projective
Geometry.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.4 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 14:28:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



Thanks, Steve.  I knew it was more complicated than I understood and anticipated
that you would know the details.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.5 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 13:06:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005021655.JAA14958 lists1.best.com)

)[Deby]:
))The
))public school districts have been duped by the religious and unaccredited
))Rudolf Steiner College and their big-coat lawyers.

[Chand]
)What is the evidence for this statement?  One could say with equal
)credibility,
)prior to the court ruling at least, that the court has been duped by vengeful
)and rumor-mongering PLANS and its small-coat lawyer.
)


[Deby]

The Federal Court bases it's rulings on evidence, not rumors.
Note the judge's statement in the Summary Judgement.

 On September 24, 1999, United States District Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Jr.
upheld our lawsuit, saying "PLANS has raised a genuine issue of material
fact as to whether Anthroposophy is so fundamental to Waldorf education as
to be inseperable from it, thereby making public funding of Waldorf
education methods a direct and substantial (if unintentional) endorsement
of religion, and fostering excessive entanglement between church and
state."

PLANS agrees the school districts are not intentionally endorsing
Anthroposophy, so what else can it be, Chand? They have fallen for a
religious sects' false nonsectarian story.

Get a copy of Schwartz's talk at Sunbridge, if you want to be told by an
Anthroposophist. He may explain it in a way that you can hear.




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.6 ---------------

From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: RE: Ad Hominem: WAS: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers train
Date: 2 May 2000 16:05:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


"Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com) posted:

[Steve]
Briefly, libel is a false statement of fact (not opinion) which injures a 
person's reputation.  It is not libel to say that a person is an oozing, 
malignant growth on the nose of humanity, because that is clearly not a 
statement of fact.  It's an insult, to be sure, but not libel.

On the other hand, if one were to falsely claim that a scientist knowingly 
published a study using falsified data, that would be libel, because it is 
a false statement of fact and would tend to injure the scientist's 
reputation.

More to the point, calling Anthroposophy a cult is not libel because (1) 
it is obviously a statement of opinion rather than fact, and (2) it is not 
about any particular individual.

[Luke]
Steve, hypotetical scenario:
  If someone says that what I teach in school is because I believe in fairies and spiritual mumbo jumbo and that children I teach would therefore be braindamaged because of it and parents should stay away from the school I teach at because if this, would that be libel? (assuming that, at least, I can testify that I do not believe in fairies and spiritual mumbo jumbo)  If not why?
  It seems that they are making false statements about me that harm my reputation.  This seems to be a regular line of critique on this list.  Am I, as an individual, allowed to sue?  If they make this claim about waldorf teachers in general (and hypothetically in this case I am one) do I have any legal recourse?




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.7 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Absolutist Rhetoric
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 15:39:59 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

)
) )[Deby]:
) ))The
) ))public school districts have been duped by the religious and 
)unaccredited
) ))Rudolf Steiner College and their big-coat lawyers.
)
)[Chand]
) )What is the evidence for this statement?  )
)
)[Deby]
)
)The Federal Court bases it's rulings on evidence, not rumors.
)Note the judge's statement in the Summary Judgement.
)
)  On September 24, 1999, United States District Judge, Frank C. Damrell, 
)Jr.
)upheld our lawsuit, saying "PLANS has raised a genuine issue of material
)fact as to whether Anthroposophy is so fundamental to Waldorf education as
)to be inseperable from it, thereby making public funding of Waldorf
)education methods a direct and substantial (if unintentional) endorsement
)of religion, and fostering excessive entanglement between church and
)state."

[Harve quoting United States Supreme Court]:

At the summary judgment stage, the trial judge's function is not himself to 
weigh the evidence [477 U.S. 242, 243] and determine the truth of the matter 
but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial. There is no 
such issue unless there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party 
for a jury to return a verdict for that party.

Deby, the court made no ruling about the truth of the evidence PLANS 
presented.  It simply said that PLANS had presented enough evidence through 
affidavits etc, to survive a summary judgment motion.  That is what usually 
happens with summary judgment motions.  You still have a trial to get 
through.


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.8 ---------------

From: "el redon" (elredon hotmail.com)
Subject: Arts, Choice, Testing, Insults... Was:Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers t
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 21:18:32 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Deby]
"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."

All my fellow classmates had credentials and our work concerned academics 
and presenting them in an artistic way. There was no commitment what so ever 
to Anthroposophy. In fact there was a wide variety of philosophies among my 
comrades.





[Deby]
"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..."


Spoon-fed?
Turned lose?
I take these comments as insults, I am not a baby nor am I an animal.






[Deby]
"...on their own to "spread Anthroposophy to the world", as Schwartz 
instructed a new teacher hired to
teach at a public Waldorf school..."


I do not "spread Anthroposophy"
Further, in all my years I have never heard Eugene Schwartz make such a 
statement, please quote?




[Joel]
)The same is true of public school teachers.  Only their "inspiration"
)is different.

[Deby]
"Yes, thankfully."


There are some good public school teachers and some bad public school 
teachers I have met and worked with many. I hope you are not thankful for 
the bad public school teachers.

BTW I know several other Waldorf teachers working in our Government Public 
Schools, they are excellent teachers, extremely resourceful, very bright and 
caring.



[Joel}
)    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.).

[Deby]
"That may be true, Joel, but Waldorf ius not the answer..."

Your opinion.

I do not think Waldorf is the answer for everyone, but I do not think 
Montessori, Catholic, Lutheran or Government Public Education is for 
everyone either. I think as a free people we need a variety of
educational choices and they need to be made available to all of our 
citizens regardless of personal wealth.  However, like your opinion this is 
mine.

As I have said before I am for parental Choice in Education
I am a believer that we need less Government dictating our lives.



[Joel]
)But in Waldorf, the ideal at least is to place the teacher's freedom in the 
)forefront.

[Deby]
How free is a brainwashed person, Joel?


Again I am insulted as I would think every other person who is inspired by 
Waldorf.

You are insinuating that I and others interested or involved in Waldorf are 
brainwashed.
You do not even know me, nor I gather a large selection of Waldorf teachers 
or teachers inspired by Waldorf Education.

Why do you feel the need to insult a whole group of people who have a common 
interest?

I teach in a Government Public School and this is the type of bigoted hate 
speech we try so hard to remedy in some of our students. It's base. General 
statements that single out one particular group or organization. Guilt by 
association.



[Joel]
)We could in fact say that Waldorf is based upon pedagogical
)freedom, in theory.


[Deby]
"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? ..."


I have seen a variety of marshal arts, ballet, tap and modern dance, yoga 
and a wide variety of movements all in a Waldorf Schools.


[Deby]
"...How many Waldorf schools choose stipple or paper-making instead of wet 
on wet (color meditation)?"



Not only paper making, but stippling, oil painting, 2d, 3d, charcoal, 
pencil, print making, lythograpphy, ceramics etc., etc...

BTW How many Waldorf Schools have you been to?
How many weeks years have you spent daily in a Waldorf classrooms?
Same questions for Public Schools?



I have never heard wet on wet referred to as "color meditation" in a Waldorf 
School.

But, during my state university training the art therapy professor I had 
regarded wet on wet using single primary and later blending them into 
secondary colors as "Quiet Painting." She pointed out that the
qualities of painting in this way had a calming effect on the students we 
were teaching. She also said that it was a very personal and yes, spiritual 
experience.






[Joel]
)Although in practice there is considerable evidence on
)this list of many failures to achieve this ideal.

[Deby]
"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."


I can't speak for AWSNA, but anything bad in any education gives education a 
bad name.

What I have seen here on this list however, is a lot of hear-say and empty 
allegation. I have yet to see any documented substance by you or PLANS.

FYI, in the real world not everything works out perfectly, can Waldorf be 
better, sure anything or anyone can make the efforts to improve, we are all 
human.




[Joel]
)    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?

[Deby]
"Public schools admit there are problems. ..."

Yes and... ????



[Deby]
"Waldorf is not the answer. "

Yes, you are also entitled to your opinion.




[Deby]
"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.)"

I would like to talk to these public school administrators you have spoken 
to about these Waldorf students in your area, may I have their names and 
phone numbers, please? I always like to get first hand information.

I believe I had asked you about a similar situation before regarding 
information about your school district,
I'm still waiting for those names and numbers... Maybe you missed my post?

As a responsible adult I like to verify and educate myself on the issues 
before I commit or support anyones allegations.

As they say from the horses mouth.






[Deby]
"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."


"No regard for the law.. working for the greater good, to teach the test" 
???

I think this is your opinion. Again hearsay, unless you are willing to 
provide names of the people who are doing this?


[Deby]
"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. "

You would have enjoyed the big bust in NYC, where public school teachers had 
the kids fill the test answers out on separate sheets of paper then the 
teachers would fill in a majority of the correct answers on  the official 
test form. They did it this way so eraser marks wouldn't show up and 
suspicion of cheating wouldn't be obvious.

[Deby]
"And then I would have to know the teachers had not viewed the test prior to 
their students taking it.""

Umm... you can go to just about any public high school or private 
educational learning center to learn how to take Standardized Tests. It's a 
booming business right now. In fact the book stores are full of practice 
books using the actual questions given on these tests. Publishers race to 
get the official tests and sell them to centers and then publish them in 
their books.

Official Standardized Test Question:
Fill in the Blank:
How many planets are there in our solar system?
a. 6
b. 7
c. 8
d. 9
e. none of the above

This question was given to students in 1998 and published in a Standardized 
Test Book available 1999.


In the Official Standardized Test given to students in 1999 this same 
question was asked in this way:

True or False
There are 8 planets in our solar system.


The idea behind testing is to see how much the students have learned.

Federal Standardized Testing is a very controversial topic and the Union is 
completely against it. Public School Teachers feel that this test would be 
in judgment of their own skills rather than the students. They also feel 
that they will be blamed if a student does poorly because he/she doesn't 
want to learn or study the material they
teach. The Union has taken a pretty strong stand on this issue and thousands 
of teachers have pledged to teach the test verbatim or quit if it is 
federally mandated.

Every time a school district or a state wants Standardizes Testing teachers 
routinely take the tests and make sure they cover the content area. The 
reasoning being, 'how are the students supposed to know this stuff unless 
they are taught what is required?'

Then there is the whole issue of how bias are these tests in regards to  
black children, compared to white children, compared to
asian children, compared to involve parents, compared to income, compared to 
suburban students, and on  and on...

You really need to do more research on this topic before you make such 
general statements concerning Waldorf and testing.





[Deby]
"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.)"

Hmmmm... If this did happen I would say it was wrong. However, when this 
happens in the public school and it does from time to time, the teacher is 
put on review and sometimes moved to another district. As in the case of NYC 
several schools participated and were charged with cheating and tampering 
with the tests. The principals were fired for
encouraging the teachers. The students had to repeat the test.

I hope you are not accusing Waldorf teachers of doing the same with these 
tests, are you?

This would be a very serious allegation.











wawoa

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2264.9 ---------------

From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 19:35:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Deby:
)Have you ever heard of a Waldorf science class that focused its weeks-long
)Man and Animal curriculum by studying at the zoo instead of learning about
)"head animals?" This isn't pedagogical freedom, it's rigid pedagogy to the
)max.. Lisa and (was it you?) recently compared MLB's on Man and Animal.
)They were strikingly similar. What is different, and perhaps what you call
)pedagogical freedom, is the teacher's personalities. Well, that is
)different in any classroom, even Sunday School.


As I'm sure our attentive listmates remember, I said that my daughter's
class went to the zoo, and to a butterfly farm, and on nature walks, all
during their animal study blocks.  They also built dioramas and wrote poems
in tribute to the bird of their choice.  The word "head animal" does not
appear in her book (the term "head foot", a crude translation of
"cephalopod" does on the cuttlefish page).

Maybe we just have different definitions of "rigid".  Teachers in most
schools have a set of lesson plans that map out what gets covered when.  A
Waldorf teacher has no such structure.  They are free to cover the material
in the way they wish.  I would even assert that there is a danger inherent
in Waldorf because teachers ARE so free; a teacher might well be tempted to
"skim over" material.  Rigid?  Hardly.

I may be wrong (or forgetful), but I don't remember hearing much about
Lisa's child's book.  I DO remember Lisa saying they were very similar.
Since my experiences here tell me that Lisa and I make different
conclustions regarding many topics, I do not know that I would share her
opinion.

)[David]
))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...
)
)[Deby]
)I'll just bet they didn't miss their occult ritual wet on wet painting
)exercises to learn paper making...


Repeating it over and over doesn't make it so.  Nice try, though.

Actually, that class rarely painted; the teacher didn't like it all that
much.  My younger child's class paints much more often, and my oldest now
paints more this year.

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.n2264.10 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)?
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 20:10:11 -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) (200005020103.SAA06055 lists1.best.com)

Dear Deby,

    I have made some remarks within your comments below in my usual fashion [in
brackets].

warm regards,
joel

Debra Snell wrote:

) )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.

[You are making an assumption here of what you think should be done.  In
addition, the idea "academics" is really quite vague.  This list has discussed
the Waldorf idea of not awakening the intellect too early.  Critics like to say
bad things about this idea, but their views are not much more than opinions.
Many parents are quite satisfied with the "academics" at Waldorf.  Many
assertions of the critics have been answered (although critics will claim this
is not so).  Your remarks about teacher training not containing "academic"
emphasis, given the fact that much public school teacher training is similar (in
fact in the recent past, schools of education ignored completely specialized
training in a particular area), seems odd.  At Sacramento, all the 9-12 grade
teachers were "academically" skilled.  One of the matters you seem to have
missed is that many teachers, who take the training, are already degreed and
mature.  When I was a RSC most of those taking the training were in the
mid-twenties and older.  The problem, as I see it, is the old one often referred
to on this list - namely the tendency of critics to take single examples of
facts and generalize to the whole Waldorf movement.]

) 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...,

[This is not funny, it is insulting.  You don't know for a fact he was or was
not a clairvoyant.  But since it helps your agenda, you like to use the idea
(which many people don't believe possible) to beat up Waldorf with.  I am sure
there are a lot of teachers who would find your characterization of them as
being "spoon feed" very objectionable and untrue.  Clearly the teacher training
in America is flawed, for many reasons the critics ignore, and often not for the
reasons the critics assert.  People who should not teach get through, and
Schools hire teachers who are not trained and who aren't suitable to be teachers
for other reasons.  Schools, being very independent, often make choices in order
to get started, being impatient.  This is a flaw of parents and others who found
the  Schools and not of Waldorf.  Many people are leaving public education.
Some go to home schooling and others look for alternatives.  This "demand" makes
a preasure on the Waldorf system which it really can't meet (this issue was
being discussed in the early '80's at RSC, and it was really a situation they
can't control.  That some RSC waldorfians got the wrong-headed idea to push
Waldorf into the public school system, has been addressed before on this list.
It was controversial within anthroposophy at the time it was inaugurated, and
many did not want it to happen.  Because of the freedom of initiative within
anthroposophy, this nevertheless did occur.  The flaw then is with those
individuals, not with either Steiner, or anthroposophy itself

) 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...

[This is again the act of an individual.  I realize this reality is
inconvienient for many critics, who want to see Waldorf and Anthroposophy as
centrally organized and heirarchically ordered, but it basically is not.  Also,
as I have pointed out to this list many times, when the term "anthroposophy" is
used, even among anthroposophists, it most often has a very individualized
meaning.  I do recall Virginia Sease saying in about 1985, soon after she became
the first American to become a member of the Vorstand in Dornach (the highest
institutional office in the anthroposophical movement), that she thought that
Waldorf would be the means through which many people came to knowledge of
anthroposophy, but this was not said in terms of an agenda, but rather as an
observation of the "demand" aspect being made on Waldorf by people concerned
with their public school institutions.  (I did not then, and do not now agree
with her views on this)]

)
)
) )
) )    The same is true of public school teachers.  Only their "inspiration"
) )is different.
)
) Yes, thankfully.

[You might not be so thankful if your really understood what lies behind these
views.  Although, in saying this, I need to remind the readers of this post that
over time (decades and centuries), educational matters undergo various
transformations, and in the temper of modern times, the situation is really more
chaotic and unpredictable then folks, who think superficially about these
matters, might expect.  For example, corporations are moving into education (and
the delivery of other "social" services) in a big way, seeing possible profits.
The corporate invasion of medicine has not enhanced medical care, so there is
little evidence that the corporate invasion of education will enhance our
children's schools.]

) )
) )    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...

[So you say.  But there are others who are quite satisfied with it.  I do think
the issue of disclosure is very interesting, and the recent posting of answers
to questions by a new parent at a young school did not make the teacher core
look very good.  My own view is that the problem is not with Waldorf
intrinsically, but with a failure to train the teachers to really appreciate the
"social problem" when they are communicating with parents.  The defensiveness
and failure to be honest about anthroposophy is due to poor training at the
teacher training level, and is not fundamental to anthroposophy.  The
anthroposophical movement is itself quite young, it has made many mis-steps, and
some of these mis-steps are evidenced in this problem of "disclosure".]

)
)
)  But in
) )Waldorf, the ideal at least is to place the teacher's freedom in the
) )forefront.
)
) How free is a brainwashed person, Joel?

[Again this is your assumption about the nature of consciousness of the
teachers.  It represents not a real knowledge of what lives in the teachers
world-wide, but rather your antipathetically driven prejudice.  You really don't
make points by calling people names, Deby.]

)
)
) 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)?

[You mistake effect for cause, Deby.  Clearly the schools exhibit common
attributes.  You seem to assume that this is because teachers become brainwashed
and don't think for themselves.  Yet, entering teacher training, a big life step
for most people, comes about because of an already existing interest and trust
in Steiner and anthroposophy.  People come to Waldorf because they want to use
the methods, not because they are looking to teach school and fall in with a
cult.  They then absorb the methods, while at the same time making a multitude
of choices in the classroom.  Critics see sameness because sameness is in their
agenda.  But that is just poor observation.  An objective observation of the
class rooms would see much teacher individuality embeded in a cohesively similar
structure.  It is like the forest and the trees.  The critics see a forest and
miss the trees.]

)
)
)  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.

[Bad apples in public education give it a bad name.  But only a fool fails to
see through the bad name to the truth underneath the false public perception.
Your desire for studies is interesting, but it is only your desire.  I will deal
with "studies" in a post to Peter, so I won't go into it here (it is lengthy).
A big part of the problem is one I refered to in my Koppian post about mixing
truth things with untrue things.  A great deal of the dialogue on this list
fails at this level, because issues are confused and too many themes covered for
an adequate discussion. Converstation wanders all over the place and often lacks
focus.  As someone trying to help people understand something they really know
very little about, this lack of focus makes for many difficulties.  Then there
is the critics tendency to make comments from the side-lines, using not a
critical language but rather euphemistic potshots (SWA apologists, mumbo-jumbo
etc).  Critics frequently demand studies, etc. yet seldom hold themselves to the
same standards.]

)
)
) )    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.)

[Talk is cheap.  You want studies from Waldorf, refuse anecdotal evidence, but
here you are offering hearsay anecdotal evidence, as if it gold.]

)
)
) 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.

[Where did this come from?  A more salient question is who is to make the
judgments?  The parent is the most concerned, so no need for them to have your
prejudices.  Are you setting PLANS critics up as the morally superior judges of
all educational issues?  Should all parents come to PLANS for the truth about
Waldorf?  I know some on this list seem to advocating just that.  Seems a bit
arrogant to me.]

)
)
) 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.)
)

[Oh, I get it.  This is just something anecdotal you added to your post to
bolster your views and your expertise on things Waldorf.  Cleary this must be
true of all Waldorf Schools, and there probably is a secret sacred Steiner text
somewhere defining how standardized tests are to be related to.  Yoicks!]

) Deby





--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2264 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2265 --------------

    001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Libel, was RE: Ad Hominem:
    002 - "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik  - Re: Open House was: which school?
    003 - "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2ga - Man and Animal, again
    004 - "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2ga - teacher credentials
    005 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Re:Science and Belief
    006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: apology
    007 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
    008 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection (so
    009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: apology

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.1 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Libel, was RE: Ad Hominem:
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 18:12:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005022007.NAA14599 lists1.best.com)

)"Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com) posted:)

)More to the point, calling Anthroposophy a cult is not libel because (1)
)it is obviously a statement of opinion rather than fact, and (2) it is not
)about any particular individual.
)
)[Luke]
)Steve, hypotetical scenario:
)  If someone says that what I teach in school is because I believe in
)fairies and spiritual mumbo jumbo and that children I teach would
)therefore be braindamaged because of it and parents should stay away from
)the school I teach at because if this, would that be libel? (assuming
)that, at least, I can testify that I do not believe in fairies and
)spiritual mumbo jumbo)  If not why?


[Deby]

Who said that Waldorf causes brain damage? (Did I miss that post?) I have
never said parents should stay away from Waldorf. Waldorf is a religious
school system, and people need to know that. Further, they need to
understand what will be taught to their children because of it's religious
beliefs. If parents agree with the Anthroposophical tenets that will creep
into their minds, as Schwartz thinks they will, then Waldorf is the perfect
school for their children.

[Luke]

)  It seems that they are making false statements about me that harm my
)reputation.  This seems to be a regular line of critique on this list.  Am
)I, as an individual, allowed to sue?  If they make this claim about
)waldorf teachers in general (and hypothetically in this case I am one) do
)I have any legal recourse?

[Deby]

I can't remember anyone who said Waldorf causes brain damage, nor do I
remember anyone saying that [all] parents should stay away from Waldorf.
Parents whose belief system is not in alignment with Anthroposophy should
be told so they can make an _informed_ decision. It is called "truth in
advertising." What looks like truth to Anthroposophists, looks like
religion to many.




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.2 ---------------

From: "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik cybertrails.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 19:52:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



----------
) From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
) Date: Monday, May 01, 2000 11:50 AM
) 
) 
) 
) [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.

I think I can learn a lot from these people.
) 
) 

) 
) 
) [Deby]
) 
) Cheap tape recorders are worth their weight in gold...

Been there done that

) 

) 
) [Deby]
) Catholic nuns are very dedicated too. This is more than just a job...

the teachers really looked tired, especially after the presentations.  I
was tired and found myself trying to hang in to ask questions later.  I
wanted to take a nap partly because it took so much energy to sift through
what they were saying.  I though about this a bit when I was driving back
(four hours is a long time to think in the desert).  When people feel tired
it is usually because of some sort of exertion. Active listening is
exertion. I put out a lot of effort listening to those presentations and
came away will just as much information (except the book titles) as I had
when I went in.  I'll bet people when they leave those things and are tired
sometimes draw erroneous conclusions such as "I am tired so I must have
learned a lot." 
) 
) [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.

I was clueless.  I thought it was for all parents and I expected to meet
more people.  I gave out two cards and talked to one prospective parent
today.  I asked her if she had ever heard of anthroposophy or if she knew
about out.  She said no she had never heard of it and asked if it is
something she should know about.  I said in my opinion she ought to know
about it so she could make an informed decision.  We talked a bit and she
wrote down the PLANS web address.  She commented that during the 3rd grade
presentation she asked the teacher if they were addressing the spiritual
aspects of kids (or something to that effect) because of the content of the
lesson books she was looking at.  The teacher responded that no they stay
away from that and that they respect the parent's belief system or
something like that.  She commented to me that the response of the teacher
did not correspond with the content of the lesson book she was looking at.
) 
) [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...

Yeah I know.  I wanted a format that was not threatening.  I did not want
to cause a scene or have them say that I was threatening and intimidating
like they did before.  This time though my behavior was the same as it was
the first time.  I simply sat quietly and took notes.  The teachers would
walk by like they wanted to see what I was writing but they did not say
anything.

) 
) [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.

I figured as much.  Judith seems to have an attitude that she knows what is
best for me to read.  It would be like someone asking me if they could read
about cognitive therapies and me saying that they need a watered down
version of it assuming that they could not understand what was contained in
the original source.  That might be true for chemistry or something but I
have read enough material in the social sciences and philosophy to be able
to sift through.
) 
) [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...

yep you were right.  after the first grade presentation a parent (not me)
tried to ask a question or two.  Judith Quarrington said I think three
times that there were no questions until the end.  The teacher however had
the courtesy to answer the question before moving the group to the second
grade.
) 
) [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.

Yes interviewing is an art.  There is a book at my office titled
Researching Sensitive Topics that I used in my dissertation.  I need to
read it again.  At this point though I did not want to get into a pissing
match with a skunk and I figured if I was more direct I might not get past
question one.  I'm really surprised that I got four questions in and I
wonder why I did.  I did not think that I would get called on at all.  Each
encounter is an education for me as well as for them.  
) 
) [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."

Yeah I guess.  There are some books or pamphlets from Rudolf Steiner
College Bookstore that talk about the man/animal lesson.  She could have
mentioned those but did not.
) 
) 
) [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...

Judith and Debra May both  could have said something to that effect but did
not.

) 
) [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?

I got the sense that she was supportive of the teacher following the
children.  I also got the sense though that she knew little if anything
about anthroposophy.  The man she was seated with was next to me.  I asked
him if the had read any Steiner and he said he had but it had been about 30
years, apparently suggesting that he did not remember much of what he read.
) 
) 
) [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.

Judith did not mention academic catch up.  She only talked about the things
the kids would have missed from Waldorf by being in a regular public
school.  It was interesting because  it was almost as if they would have to
"remediate deficits" in things like recorder and other things that are not
considered deficits in the mainstream.

) 
) [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.

Both the head teacher and the 1st grade teacher came from New Hampshire.  I
think they both worked at the Pine Hill school along with the remedial
teacher.  The remedial teacher worked with the head teacher and Waldorf
trained with her in Chicago. 
) 
) [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...

yeah I am sure you are correct.  People were tired.
) 
) [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...

This is true.  The people who left their seats first were the teachers and
everyone else followed.  They were modeling "appropriate behavior."  I
wondered more than once if they have training on how to do that or if it is
just all part of the waldorf training.
) 
) )

) 
) [Deby]
) 
) Can't recommend a book that doesn't shield Anthroposophy! Europeans are
) more honest. Schwartz is pretty open as well...

I have skimmed parts of the Koepke book and it draws direct parallels
between Steiner and the content of the lesson books.  It talks about the
three fold nature of man etc.  It is actually a pretty easy read and it
makes no sense to me to not let parents know about it.  I want to get the
Schwartz book but I do not have my catalog.  It is on loan sort of.
) 
) 
) )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.

I thought this was on the list.  Is it not?  It is OK with me if it gets on
there.  Take care and I will keep you posted.  Anything you think needs to
be posted from my notes?  Like every room had a nature table.  It was
interesting that the kindergarten teacher was not there.  I think some
people had kindergarteners.  The parents were in the presentations and the
kids were out on the playground.  I always wonder why Terra Rosa treats
kids like objects.  I like to have my kids with me.
) 
) 


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.3 ---------------

From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Man and Animal, again
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 21:32:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

  In a recent post, David Cann mentions that I never reported back about the
contents of my daughter's "Man and Animal" mainlesson book.
    As my daughter is in bed asleep right now, and as her pile of old
mainlesson books is under her dresser, I cannot sneak in right now and get
the book for purposes of posting the contents to this list.
    I will do so, however, tomorrow and by tomorrow night, post for David
and any others who are curious what is in the book. I will warn you,
however, that the book is probably not complete as we withdrew Olivia in
early January, which means that they had just done one "Man and Animal"
block before she left the class.
    I do recall that the book opened to the poem, "Unstooping," by Walter de
la Mare, and that it contained drawings (copied from the board) of an
octopus, a lion, a mouse and a cow. That's all I can remember by heart.


Lisa

PS -- we have a wonderful zoo in Baltimore, and to my knowledge, our school
does not have children in grade 4 visit this zoo during the "man and animal"
block. David's child sounds lucky, indeed, to have been able to visit a zoo,
and a butterfly farm, etc. as part of the animal study. His child's
experience sounds much more "scientific" than does mine.


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.4 ---------------

From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: teacher credentials
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 21:48:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    For those who have been on this list a long time and have discussed this
before, I beg patience.
    But this recent thread about teacher training for Waldorf has compelled
me to bring the subject up again: why don't the Waldorf teacher training
colleges insist or require that teacher trainees have bachelor's degrees --
ideally in education (early childhood, elementary or secondary) -- before
they are allowed to enroll in the programs?
    I realize that not all private schools demand that their teachers have
bachelor's degrees,  though I would be hard pressed to choose any teacher at
any of the more than half dozen high-quality, college preparatory private
schools here in the Baltimore area who does NOT have a bachelor's degree or
higher. A glance at the faculty list of the school my younger girl will
attend next year shows me that every faculty member has a bachelor's degree
or higher (most have masters and above).
    Yet Waldorf teachers are not required to have this background; they need
only a certificate from an AWSNA-approved teacher training course. When a
friend of mine called Rudolf Steiner College awhile back to inquire about
requirements for their program, she was told that she needn't have a
bachelor's degree -- indeed, she needed no college degree at all -- but that
she would have to take the full training course (either full time or over
four summers, I think it was) to become a Waldorf teacher.
    I don't think any of us -- whatever our position in regard to WE --
would argue that Waldorf is NOT a specialized approach to education. It
seems to me that because the Waldorf teacher trainees spend most if not all
of their time studying this educational approach through the works of WE
founder Steiner and Anthroposophy, having a solid foundation provided by a
college degree in education would make for the best teachers, as well as
make the most sense. (Taking a class through 8 years of knowledge and growth
must be the most demanding task imaginable.)

    * Those of you out there who send your children to Waldorf schools --
can you please answer the following questions:

    1.) Does your school provide parents with a list of faculty and their
educational backgrounds BEFORE Waldorf teacher training?
    2.) If so, what percentage of your teachers earned a bachelor's degree
or higher in education before taking Waldorf teacher training? What
percentage have a bachelor's degree in anything before teacher training?
    3.) What at the backgrounds of those who have no bachelor's degrees?
    4.) Is this information readily available to you, or do you have to ask
for it?
    I am interested to hear the results, if any choose to take me up on it.
I also will, at that time, provide the answers to those questions in regard
to my local WS, where one of my children still attends kindergarten.

Lisa


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.5 ---------------

From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Re:Science and Belief
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 12:28:29 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Harve responds 
)
)If there is a God, She has much better things to do with her time than worry 
)about the lottery--although I'm sure many people get sore knees "praying" 
)about this.
)
)In all serious, however, how could the Divine ever be quantifiable?

I was making the point that if God acts in an unquantifiable way in a
quantifiable arena (lottery) then that interference may become
quantifiable. Does God act in this way? Our understanding of the world
continues to improve. Either God does not interfere or the interference is
very subtle. I did not mean to restrict this interference to God. I would
include things like the Findhorn fairies (is that the right terminology?)
as well.

Of course it all depends on what you mean by divine. There are people who
seem to believe that no event occurs without God's direct influence. In
this case the cause of an individual nucleus spontaneously fissioning
(radioactive decay) is directly God's handiwork. God appears to do this in
such a way that the large scale happenings of nuclear fission are
consistent with individual random events. This seems to me to be consistent
with God allowing nuclear fission to occur according to some rules without
God's direct influence thereafter. If this is the way God runs it, and then
God occasionally interferes in nuclear fission to produce whatever desired
effect, might this lead to the observation of events which are inconsistent
with the possibility of understanding the universe? Maybe. It would
certainly make the process of science tricky. One would never know whether
the experimental result was due to "physics" or to "God".

A theologian friend of mine who also happens to have a Bachelor's degree in
physics has a book in press with a chapter on whether God's freedom to act
in the world is restricted by modern physics and other science. I read some
of it for him to check for gross blunders in physics. According to Amazon,
the book will be available in June 2000.

A God for This World : A Theologian Conducts a Fresh, Energetic Discussion
of God's Relevance to the Physical World 
Scott Cowdell 
ISBN: 0264675096

I enjoyed the bits I read. Maybe some of you might enjoy it too. 

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.n2265.6 ---------------

From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: apology
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 06:33:06 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005021601.JAA21228 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005021601.JAA21228 lists1.best.com)

)Dear List,
)
)     The last view days I have been depressed (life
)crisis issues) and somewhat cranky.  In reading over
)some of my posts to this list, I realized I was saying
)things I was not really comfortable with on review.
)
)     I'd like to apologize to Michael Kopp for
)suggesting he was arrogant, and to the list in general
)for seeming to duck the projective geometry question.
)I also would like to apologize to deby s. for the
)cranky tone in our most recent exchanges.
)
)warm regards,
)joel

Accepted.

Best personal wishes,

Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.7 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 01:21:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200004272110.OAA26200 lists1.best.com) (200005010757.AAA00380 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:

) 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.

Dear Dan,

    About three years ago Wm Buckley's show did a two hour debate on
public television on this issue.   There are a number of websites
dedicated to the issue, many of which cite scientists.  If they have a
flaw, it is that "creationists" run many of the websites, but the
articles and books cited are not all by "creationists".  Cladism seems to
be an indirect retreat from macroevolution, but I would defer to Chand
for his impression on that issue.  There are a number of
anti-macroevolution books, and many people have entered the debate.

    The most interesting thing to me, which appeared when I reviewed the
net before posting this, was the frequency of a new argument (actually it
is old, just dressed up in a new form), which was not much in evidence
that last time I took a serious look at this issue about 10 years ago.
This new argument is made by the proponents of macroevolution, and goes
basically like this:

    The fossil record is very incomplete.  Most species are not recorded
(this is an assumption by the way, since it depends upon the attempted
logical presumption of the absence of somethng).   These supposed facts
are then inserted in pro-macroevolution essays in the often implied
argument that the missing inbetween species could be found there if only
nature had cooperated in constructing the fossil record.  This is, of
course, an ad hoc hypothesis writ large (see Ron Brady's article).

    When I do Peter's reply, I will try to cover certain aspects of this
issue from the point of view of an examination of "thinking" and its
relationship to natural science.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.8 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection (sort of)
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 01:20:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Peter,

    I am going to begin by going somewhere not directly
on the theme, but which lives in the background, from
the point of view of Spiritual Science, and therefore
I, at least, have to take account of it.

    An essential characteristic of this age is the
development of the consciousness soul, or what is
sometimes called "spiritual freedom".  This is the
basis (in part) for Steiner's book: "The Philosophy of
Freedom".  This means several things.

    On the level of the individual, it means that we
are meant to experience the spiritual out of our own
activity, and not as a given.  The rise of natural
science played a role in the final separating of the
individual from the divine source, so that if (not
when) one returned to the divine (like the prodigal
son), that would be an act of individual freedom, and
not because the individual was compelled to acknowledge
the divine, due to an experience of the divine as a
given.

    Spiritual Science is to be presented to the world
in such a way, that individual spiritual freedom (inner
freedom of thought, belief and knowledge, as opposed to
outer political freedom) is not compromised.  The
"brainwashing" alleged by some critics would be a gross
violation of this freedom.  One is to come to knowledge
of the spiritual out of one's own activity, and not
because someone has claimed to have proven it.
Reference to the "Authority" of a divine being, or an
initiate, has no place in Spiritual Science.  People on
this list are well aware of how frequently in Waldorf,
and in the teacher training, that these fundamental
views are ignored.

    This is why I have emphasized objective
introspection, and not been much inclined to "proofs"
of spiritual facts (as Michael K. seems to want).
Michael says "prove" the divine, yet someone who
actually knows something of these matters in the
present, knows that such a kind of activity is
"impossible".  The divine has withdrawn in a very real
way, and left humanity to discover its own realities
and potentials.

    Of course, given the above, as I said, some of the
practices in teacher training are clearly in violation
of these fundamental principles and facts, and are
therefore quite regretable.  This also makes for a
considerable dilemma on the part of a spiritual
scientist on this list, because those individuals fully
living in the paradigm of materialism (the condition
that is supposed to exist so that humanity could be
completely free to self determine its knowledge of, and
relatiionship to, the divine) have a right to their
views.

    They are not to be dissuaded from them.

    In the light of this, I have (imperfectly, no
doubt) endeavored to work more at explaining what is
the basis of the new paradigm, and the meaning of some
of its content, rather than at "arguing" that someone
ought to believe in these themes.  I have also been
critical of certain aspects of materialism, finding
them dangerous both for communities and individuals.
It requires on odd kind of dance and I am sure makes
for some strange reading on the part of those who
bother with my posts.

    It is out of this context of understanding of my
own views, that I will now attempt to reply to your
latest responses in our ongoing dialogue.

    You wrote: "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."

    I am not surprised that you see no evidence that we
are at a dead end or that there are any serious
contradictions.  I suspect that might depend upon where
you look.

    You admit that natural science is late to the
investigation of consciousness.  What I have read of
the current work, shows a tendency to ignore older and
more developed investigations of the phenomena of
"experience".  All the serious mystical and depth
spiritual systems in the world are attempts at this,
whose major differences are related to cultural
realities, and not to disagreements about the results
of such investigations.  I have gotten the impression
from my reading that these older disciplines are
"inconvenient" precisely because they are anomalous.

    The result is that the natural scientist wants to
ignore the personally experiential investigation of
consciousness, and substitute the same processes by
which matter has been investigated.  It is a very real
question whether this is justified.

    Carl Sagan wrote a book called "The Demon Haunted
World" in which he expressed concern that the light of
reason might go out, if the tendencies to new age
beliefs etc. continued to grow at the present rate.  I
agree that this would be regretable.  If the human
being is to discover the spiritual, this ought not to
be done by sacrificing the intellectual achievements
present in modern civilization.

    In a sense then I think the issue is joined, albeit
a bit off center from the main streams of natural
science.  This is to say, that the issue has emerged in
wide areas of cultural development, and only very
marginally within the halls of academia.

    What is not appreciated, and certainly Waldorf
education is a very poor example (in practice,
especially in its social relations), is that Spiritual
Science offers just that approach to the investigation
of the spiritual needed in order for the light of
reason not to go out.

    It is because of this that I keep trying to get the
dialogue to approach "objective introspection", because
it is there that the individual can, in freedom, and on
the basis of objective (reproducable) knowledge, verify
for themselves the existence of the divine.

    Yet, in our dialogues on this list, we have not
been able to engage at this point of intersection, and
have wandered off into other realms (homeopathy,
testing etc).  So before seeing if there is someplace
where the "supernatural" can be made subject to "test",
I will try to respond to your remarks about these other
matters which you deem so important.

    I said: "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."

Then you said: "If this is so it must be easy for you
to cite various arguments."

    I have already refered to my two critical essays
that were published in the journal "jahrbuch fur
anthroposophische kritik, 1988", and are on my website
at:
http://www.tiac.net/users/hermit/oajnr.html

    Here are some remarks by Valentin Tomberg,
published in his anonymously written: "Meditations on
the Tarot: a journey into Christian Hermeticism"

    In a discussion on the Maitreya Buddha, in Arcanum
XXI The Fool, Tomberg writes that Steiner hoped  that
the bodhisattva incarnation of this individuality
would take place within the anthroposophical socieity,
and that "This time the disappointment was due not to
an error with regard to the awaited individuality,...,
but rather to an overestimation of the Anthroposophical
Society on the part of its founder."

    And in the discussion of the problem of evil, in
Arcanum XV The Devil, Tomberg writes: "Another example
of the excessive accentuation of the knowledge of evil
- and therefore an occupation of consciousness with
evil - is the preoccupation with the problem of the
twofold (even threefold) evil amongst German
Anthroposophists.' [next follows a discussion of
Lucifer and Ahriman etc] "Anthroposophists are led to
classify thousands of facts from the point of view of
the category of evil which is revealed through them -
which suffices to occupy them for the whole day.  And
to so occupy oneself amounts to contact with evil and a
corresponding reduction of living and inspiring contact
with the good.  The result is a lame wisdom without
wings, derpived of creative elan, which only repeats
and comments to satiety what the master, Dr. Rudolf
Steiner, said."

    Needless to say, Tomberg is not liked by many
anthroposophists.  A book long criticism of Tomberg is
published as: "The Case of Valentin Tomberg:
Anthroposophy or Jesuitism?" by Sergei O. Prokofieff
(the composers son).

    I recall the book, The Living Earth, by Walther
Cloos (an attempt at a goethean geology) being highly
criticised in the Journal of Anthroposophy, in
particular for failing to deal with plate tectonics.

    There has been a massive argument, for decades,
about decisions made just after Steiner's death
regarding the legal constitution of the Society, which
is just now reaching a head.  The Vorstand, the
institutional head of the Society, fell into complete
disarray after Steiner's death, and recriminations were
heaped on all sides.

    The anthroposophical movement is pretty human, and
all  you have to do is pick a theme and you can find an
argument.  Recall the recollections of the speech by
Eugene Schwartz at Sun Bridge which critics found much
in line with their own thinking.

       Is this the kind of thing you were looking for?

    You said: "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."

    In order to try to answer your questions above, I
have to go off into other areas.  You asked: "In what
sense is it better".  I take that to mean
anthroposophical medicine in general and not just high
dilution remedies.  Why would a doctor, a graduate of a
medical school, with the potential to make a great deal
of money, become a GP apparently using a controversial
system of ideas?

    Of course, you have asked your question, hoping to
come up with something that can be "tested".  This
expectation adds another quality, namely why should the
doctor use "testing", in the natural science sense, as
an adjunct to his practice.  I can understand why you
seem to want it, but I am adding the question, why
should he want it?

    I see these ideas/questions as interrelated: Why is
anthroposophical medicine better, and why should its
practitioners use the testing methods of natural
science in their work. I know this is not exactly your
question, but I am also trying to see the matter from
the point of view of the doctor.

    Of course, "better" in the above is not to be
understood in a absolute sense, but in a relative
sense, for it is the doctor that is choosing to
practice what Dan, in his overzealousness, wants to
call "quackery".  As you know, there are many
safeguards in place, for the protection of patients,
and if anthroposophical medicine really was "quackery",
it would certainly have that reputation by now.

    Anthroposophical Medicine begins with understanding
human nature and the processes of health and disease.
To the recognized physical processes are added the
observation of non-physical processes, in order to have
a complete picture.  Once these elements are
understood, then it becomes possible to learn
diagnosis, or the art of "perceiving" the root of the
disease, after which a course of action is to be taken,
which may or may not include homeopathic remedies (some
of which will be high dilutions, while some will not).

    Now someone with little understanding of
anthroposophy might assume that what is involved is the
learning of a system of ideas which are then used as a
kind of template for observing the organism.  This is a
failure to appreciate the epistomological element, or
what is the relationship of thinking, to observation of
the organism, the diagnosis of disease, and the
understanding of what is an appropriate remedy.

    It is here of course that a great divergence with
natural science occurs, for the given epistomological
foundation places greatest emphasis, not on experiment
and proof, but on intuition.  The doctor stands before
his patient as a thinking human being, and it is that
faculty (in harmonious relationship with the rest of
the soul) that becomes the vehicle for understanding
the human organism, for making a diagnosis, and for
selecting a remedy.

    The doctor is not to subject his judgment to tests
and proofs, but to inner work and struggle.  He is to
find out how to "know" directly what he needs to
"know".  Now from the outside, from someone whose whole
habits of thought are otherwise, this reliance on
intuition would seem not to be "knowlege" at all.

    At the same time it is the crux of the issue
between you and I, Peter.  And it is at this crux that
the whole issue of "spiritual freedom" becomes
relevant.

    The natural scientist exists within a cultural
paradigm that believes that if a special elite group of
workers has established among themselves the proof of
something, then these proven facts are to be taught to
children.  Thus materialism is perpetuated in our
schools as a belief system, although as people mature
in their educations, they usually discover that the
real situation is somewhat different.

    My elder brother is a microbiologist.  We have had
many conversations along these same lines.  He has
remarked to me (he is now retired) that the biggest
disappointments of his university teaching career (he
also did research) were the far too frequent encounters
with students who expected science to be absolute and
defined - to be a system of ideas fixed in nature, that
only needed to be learned, and certainly did not
contain any ambiguities or problems requiring difficult
thinking judgments.  It was, of course, nearly
impossible to teach such a mind anything about
microbiology, or the scientific research protocols upon
which its understandings were based.

    So where does this leave us?

    Hopefully not at in impasse, but at a greater level
of understanding.  In support of this let me go deeper
into the epistomological problem.

    Everything that any human being knows comes about
through the act of thinking.  All of experimental
science (and certainly theoretical sciences) are
permiated with acts of thought.  Granted, what is
thought to be known is filtered through highly
developed processes of observation, hypothesis and
experimentation, but it remains a fact that every
observation, every hypothesis, every experiement, and
every conclusion about what any of it all means, is
rooted in thinking.

    Anything we know about the world is first and last
"thought".

    Natural Science "knows" almost nothing about
"thought".  There are a lot of assumptions, a lot of
beliefs, a lot of ideas about what "thought" is, but
almost no "knowledge".  Basically we use a "tool" whose
nature we do not know, and about which we have a great
deal that we imagine.

    Without thought we do not perceive (unless we are
very young children).  But certainly during the
acquisition of language, and the identification to
thought of the "names" of things, perception becomes
"determined".  A baby does not "see" a face as an adult
sees it.  But after we have acculturated the child,
told it all the names of the parts, and given it
numerous experiences of the facial "expressions", out
of this will emerge "knowledge" which is rooted in
thought.

    In our materialistic culture this process
continues, so that "thought" acquires pictures of the
world in accord with the theories of natural science.
At the same time, the activity of thought, in itself,
goes on unnoticed in the background.

    If the assumptions about the nature of thought
inherent in the natural science paradigm are false,
then the pictures created by this falsly understood
"thought process" might also be false.  Notice I did
not say "must necessarily", but might.  It would be
most egregious to suggest that merely because we do not
yet, as a culture, understand thought itself, that what
we have learned is false.  A much better expression
would be: incomplete.

    It is here, of course, where the bridge from
natural science to spiritual science is to be built.
Natural science understands it has limitations.  It is
constantly in great effort attempting to go beyond
those limitations.  What happens when thought itself is
understood is really only going to be a refinement, a
subtle redirection of the nature of the exploration.

    This is where the anthroposophical doctor stands -
on this bridge.  He is setting aside reliance on test
and experiment, and having come to terms with the true
nature of thinking, now proceeds to "know" on the basis
of intuition instead.

    This "knowing" is not perfect, for the knower is
not perfect.  At the same time, a kind of circle is now
complete, for with the practice of intuition comes the
confirming experience that thought is not separated
from the world of matter, but that consciousness is
continuous with the world of matter.   The true nature
of the thing in itself appears intuitionally in
thought.

    It is this last statement that can be "tested".
And this "test" is the only test appropriate in the age
of spiritual freedom.  No group should be able to prove
and then insist that the above is true.  Each
individual is to confirm for themselves the true nature
of thought.  In fact, given the true nature of thought,
it only is the individual that can test and confirm its
truth.

    Michael wants proof of the divine.  That proof is
entirely within his grasp and his own judgement.  But
the divine does not want his thoughtless acceptance.
The divine has created a situation where only if
Michael acts, will he know.  He may choose to believe,
but that is something quite different from "knowledge".

    Or as Steiner put it in the First Leading Thought:
"Anthroposophy is a path of knowledge (cognition) from
the spiritual in man to the Spiritual in the Universe."

    Now Peter, if I understand your other remarks
(besides the ones quoted above), and which are in a
similar vein, you feel that Spiritual Science, if it
says something about the natural world, ought to
produce a testable factual observation.

    We have here two problems.  First of all, as
regards the material world - the world of appearences,
it is goetheanism which speaks, not Spiritual Science.
The relationship of these two to each other is a
kinship concerning the act of thinking.  Secondly,
concerning the immaterial world, it is Spiritual
Science which speaks, but where these two intersect,
such as in Anthroposopohical Medicine, great care must
be taken not to confuse things.

    Let us begin with goetheanism, and that wonderful
subject Dan likes to abuse, the threefold human
organism (nerve-sense system, rhythmic system, and
metabolic limb system).  Now there is no way that I can
even begin to duplicate the wealth of detail possible
to descriptive observation of the human form.  I can
only refer to a text: "Man and Mammals: Toward a
Biology of Form", by Wolfgang Schad.  It is about 350
pages, with text, index, bibliography, notes and
pictures.

    I would recommend that Chand see if he can find a
copy through his Waldorf School, and maybe he will have
the time over the summer to read it and make a report
as to whether he "learned" anything of value to him as
a biologist.  If he can't find a copy, and is willing
to read one, I can send him mine.  The English text is
different from the orignal German text, in that a lot
of material on embryology has been left out.

    As to our dialogue Peter, I am not sure how to
proceed.  I am not willing to reduce the threefold
organism idea to some cheap and incomplete expression,
when its self evident proof (as an excellent emperical
set of observations) is quite available in the above
text.

    Nevertheless, it is this kind of detail in
observation, without theorizing, that begins the
Anthroposophical doctors exploration of the human
organism.  Once this form principle is observed it then
becomes possible to think about "processes" in the
organism and their interrelationships.  Now the
beginnings of these processes are drawn from what is
already know to the doctor through their studies at
medical school.  It is just that the facts are
organized in a different way, in accord with the form
picture obvious once the eye has been trained to
perceive it.

    The totality becomes known, not as a chemical
factory, but as a set of balances among polaricially
related processes.  It is here where Steiner's lectures
to doctors (such as "Spiritual Science and Medicine")
become relevant, for it is in the polarical balances
that disharmony arises which eventually appears in the
form of some kind of disease of the total organism.

    I next will give an example, which should not in
any case be seen as what a real anthroposophical doctor
would do, but rather to give some pictures of the
typical organism of ideas involved as regards the
presentment of a patient for treatment.

    Let's say a patient presents with the following
symptoms: frequent incapcitating back spasms, and
eruptions on the skin of the lower limbs of painfully
itching small redish bumps.  A long history is taken at
the initial evaluation, because without the history,
the individuality of the course of the diease can't be
seen.

    The doctor is encouraged to use their senses.  For
example, if possible the doctor is to smell the breath
(an old diagnostic tool, lost to modern medicine which
has become over-reliant on technology).  The exulations
of the lungs and stomach contain a great deal of
information.

    Since the organism is seen as a field of
interacting processes on multiple levels, the skin
eruptions on the lower limbs are not treated directly
with medication (what an allopathic doctor might do),
but are seen as evidence of incomplete metabolic
processes in the body.  The large muscles of the limbs
carry out metabolic functions, as does a certain level
of the skin organization.  If the liver is not
functioning in a normal way, as well as the pancreas,
this incomplete metabolization will result in efforts
of the organism to extrude the unmetabolized proteins
through the skin - thus the eruptions.

    This is treated in two ways.  First by diet, only
boiled apples and brown rice for at least a couple of
weeks.  This allows the liver and pancreas to recover -
they are not overworked by this change in diet.
Secondly, hot baths are called for, as hot as the
patient can stand.  Metabolization is a "heat" process,
and the incompletely metabolized proteins in the skin
eruptions are helped to be metabolized by the addition
of heat from the outside.  This will also relieve the
itching.

    The back spasms indicate a dysfunction in the
kidneys.  Movement in the organism begins with the
astral body taking hold of the muscle organization
through the kidneys (anybody who does a lot of lifting,
and is conscious of their body, knows this.  Heavy
weight lifters also wear wide belts covering the
kidneys).  If the kidneys are weak (usually due to
excesses in the diet - same with the liver and
pancreas), when the astral body tries to take hold of
the muscle organization through weak kidneys, it will
"rebound", and it is this "rebound" which causes the
muscles near the kidneys to spasm.

    This is also treated with diet, and rest.  A
topical ointment containing "copper" is applied at
night to the kidneys, accompanied by a warm wrap, so
that during sleep the kidneys do not become abnormally
cold, when the body cools down as is normal at night.

    Now the point of this is to ask, where does what is
going on here come to the point of being "tested" in
the ways habitual within materialistic medicine.
Clearly the patient recovers from the symptoms (the
doctor and the patient make this judgment), but except
to prove things to skeptics, what tool does a "test"
give the doctor of anthroposophical medicine.  He has
his "test" completely in whether he is able to give
relief to the patient.  Why should he satisfy your
need, driven by your process of doubt?

    This has been long, and I am exhausted (it is past
one a.m.).  Hopefully we will have made some progress
in mutual understanding.

warm regards,
joel





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2265.9 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: apology
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 23:16:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200005021601.JAA21228 lists1.best.com)
 (200005021601.JAA21228 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005030449.VAA17599 lists1.best.com)

))Dear List,
))
))     The last view days I have been depressed (life
))crisis issues) and somewhat cranky.  In reading over
))some of my posts to this list, I realized I was saying
))things I was not really comfortable with on review.
))
))     I'd like to apologize to Michael Kopp for
))suggesting he was arrogant, and to the list in general
))for seeming to duck the projective geometry question.
))I also would like to apologize to deby s. for the
))cranky tone in our most recent exchanges.


Joel,

I, too, accept your apology. I admit to taking out my own ill-placed
aggressions on you. You don't need to own it all. I value your posts and
your usual open and even-toned manner.
I don't have any personal issues with you, regardless of how I sounded.

Bob would be so proud of us,
Deby









--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2265 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2266 --------------

    001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Oh come on Dan
    002 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
    003 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Scotoma
    004 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Re: Open House was: which school?
    005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Open House was: which school?
    006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Scotoma
    007 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
    008 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Open House was: which school?
    009 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
    010 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Scotoma (answer from Bob)

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.1 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Oh come on Dan
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 04:34:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005021547.IAA15305 lists1.best.com)

)[Deby]
)
)but I have always defended attacks on spelling and grammar,
))no matter who atatcks.
))
)[Harve]
)
)Of course YOU would.

[Deby]

Poorly worded. I'll try again:

I have always defended people who are attacked for their spelling and
grammar deficiencies.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.2 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 09:02:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



Dan Dugan wrote:
)) 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.

[Joel]:
)Dear Dan,
)
)    About three years ago Wm Buckley's show did a two hour debate on
)public television on this issue.   There are a number of websites
)dedicated to the issue, many of which cite scientists.  If they have a
)flaw, it is that "creationists" run many of the websites, but the
)articles and books cited are not all by "creationists".  Cladism seems to
)be an indirect retreat from macroevolution, but I would defer to Chand
)for his impression on that issue.  There are a number of
)anti-macroevolution books, and many people have entered the debate.
)
)    The most interesting thing to me, which appeared when I reviewed the
)net before posting this, was the frequency of a new argument (actually it
)is old, just dressed up in a new form), which was not much in evidence
)that last time I took a serious look at this issue about 10 years ago.
)This new argument is made by the proponents of macroevolution, and goes
)basically like this:
)
)    The fossil record is very incomplete.  Most species are not recorded
)(this is an assumption by the way, since it depends upon the attempted
)logical presumption of the absence of somethng).   These supposed facts
)are then inserted in pro-macroevolution essays in the often implied
)argument that the missing inbetween species could be found there if only
)nature had cooperated in constructing the fossil record.  This is, of
)course, an ad hoc hypothesis writ large (see Ron Brady's article).

As I have written here before, science cannot prove anything, only disprove
something.  The theory of evolution is an example of this - its predictions have
most often been born out.  The trouble is it is difficult to test this theory
directly because of the long time required to form new species (according to
this theory).

The mechanisms of evolution are still hotly debated - there is a small voice for
directed evolution in certain cases and there are debates as to how good
"molecular clocks" are - I think this is where the cladism comes in (I didn't
check out the websites yet).  Most biologist assume evolution to be a good model
of how life attained its present form on our planet.  There are many "born
again" biologists, however, that take a literalist view of the bible (6 24 hr
days, etc.)

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.3 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Scotoma
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 16:19:09 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com) (200005021647.JAA10861 lists1.best.com)

Alan S. Fine MD wrote:

) I think Sachs is an interesting writer, and I enjoyed the Man Who Mistook
) His Wife for a Hat.  However Awakenings was very disturbing to me, as he
) seemed to be giving L-Dopa to a group of people with catatonic schizophrenia
) whom he misdiagnosed as having Parkinsonism.  Predictably, they got manic
) and psychotic.  Now it's true that I see neurologists make this mistake from
) time to time, but it certainly doesnt distinguish Sachs as a good clinician
) in my mind.

As can be seen from http://www.oliversacks.com/awakenings.html L-Dopa
was a new drug (invented 1967,info not on page) when Sacks in 1969
(then 36 years old) used it in treating a number of patients "who
contracted sleeping-sickness during the great epidemic just after
World War I". I haven't read the book. Has Sacks anywhere said that he
used it in the treatment because he thought the patients had
specifically _Parkinsonism_, and has it not been and is not used today
on the basis of also other diagnosis'?

) I am also unaware that Sachs is a scientist.

Im not fully aware of the basis for appointing Professors in the US,
but to the degree it is based on scientific merits one easily finds
them using a simple search engine and search for "Oliver Sacks", see
http://www.oliversacks.com/ (first found page of 5226 pages by
http://www.alltheweb.com) 

Curriculum Vitae:
1975-1978 Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Assistant Professor of
Neurology
1978-1985 Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Associate Professor of
Neurology
1985-pres. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Clinical Professor of
Neurology
1992-pres. New York University Medical Center, Adjunct Professor of
Psychiatry

) Has he published
) any scientific papers? I think you haven't met the challenge until you find
) a real scientist, Bob.

If you are interested in his scientific papers, it takes at most three
minutes in finding them using the simple search engine mentioned
above. They can be found too at his page under "Publications". But is
seems you have no real interest in the question you ask, instead
arguing that Bob has not found a "real scientist" on the basis of the
unfounded and uninvestigated assumption that Sacks has not published
any scientific papers, something that - as can be seen if one really
wants to know - takes at most a few minutes to check out for yourself?

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.n2266.4 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 07:27:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005031137.EAA10855 lists1.best.com)

) )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.

[Sarina]

Um, excuse me, Deby? This is an archetype that many cultures throughout
history have acknowledged. I would hardly call this a specifically
Anthroposophic tenet - in fact the obvious fallacy of this statement makes
it almost unneccessary for me to be more specific, since I'm sure everyone
here could think of many examples themselves.

) [Deby]
)
) Sounds like Judith is the professional deceiver.

[Sarina]

I agree with Deby - it does sound like this school is not being very
up-front about the influence of Steiner and Anthroposophy. I have a question
for Jim Staffink:
I assume the Terra Rosa school provided you with some written materials.
What do these materials say about Waldorf school's link with Anthroposophy
and Steiner? This is one of the things that upsets me about some of the
schools, that there is no mention of any of it (I think Bob Tolz' school,
Green Meadow, does a great job of this with their 'religion statement'). So,
Jim, did this school provide you with any written information regarding
Steiner/Anth? I don't think a verbal answer is good enough, a statement of
religion - as Green Meadow has - should be in writing.

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.5 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 07:53:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005030115.SAA19800 lists1.best.com)


[Jim]

)the teachers really looked tired, especially after the presentations.  I
)was tired and found myself trying to hang in to ask questions later.  I
)wanted to take a nap partly because it took so much energy to sift through
)what they were saying.  I though about this a bit when I was driving back
)(four hours is a long time to think in the desert).

[Deby]

Waldorf teachers work very hard.

Waldorf is sold primarily using one-way communication. It is common for
teachers to use words that are only common to Waldorf. They use words like
"hold the school", "hold the enrollment", refer to _the_ school as a
"community". Over time, parents get trained in all the jargon, but it can
be exhausting to sift through the jargon and smoke screens at first.


[Jim]

)I wanted a format that was not threatening.  I did not want
)to cause a scene or have them say that I was threatening and intimidating
)like they did before.  This time though my behavior was the same as it was
)the first time.  I simply sat quietly and took notes.  The teachers would
)walk by like they wanted to see what I was writing but they did not say
)anything.

[Deby]

Got it.


[Jim]

)yep you were right.  after the first grade presentation a parent (not me)
)tried to ask a question or two.  Judith Quarrington said I think three
)times that there were no questions until the end.  The teacher however had
)the courtesy to answer the question before moving the group to the second
)grade.

[Deby]

You should buy the book, 'Cults in our Midst', by Margaret Singer and Janja
Lalick. She describes the specific techniques of exploitative persuasion
used by cults. If you read that book, you'll never see a Waldorf meeting
the same again. The mind control techniques become very evident.

She describes the continuum of influence and persuasion. Under her
"direction and degree of exchange", there is first the "Two way
pupil-teacher exchange", which generally occurs one on one. The meeting you
describe would fit in the second continuum where "exchange can occur, but
communication is generally one-sided". This is the "advertising" aspect of
a cult, where they are selling their wares. It's wares can be anything, in
this case Waldorf education serves as the front to Anthroposophy. It is a
good example of how anyone can be pursuaded to join a cult, thinking you
are only choosing an education. The whole transformation is a slow process,
but thought reform techniques begin immediately. (Accepted snacks,
clothing, new educational terms, media control, us verses them, etc.)

Later, if you buy in, you get to learn the more esoteric nature of
Anthroposophy. When that occurs, your life gets even more limited, until
you are talking the party line. Then you hear words like _the_ concept,
_the_ truth, _the_ community, etc.

)) [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

[Deby]

Control, and allow only limited exchange...


[Jim]
)
)) )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]

Look at how she worded her sentence, here. She said " embrace _the_
concept", as if it were the only concept to embrace.

[snip]

)) [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]
)Yeah I guess.  There are some books or pamphlets from Rudolf Steiner
)College Bookstore that talk about the man/animal lesson.  She could have
)mentioned those but did not.

[Deby]

You aren't ready. You don't know how to interpret it properly. I've been
told that I don't understand Steiner because I studied him alone. I needed
to study Steiner within a group study context. (Mind control alert!)

)) [Deby]
))
)) ...but clearly they'll need no academic catch-up.

[Jim]

)Judith did not mention academic catch up.  She only talked about the things
)the kids would have missed from Waldorf by being in a regular public
)school.  It was interesting because  it was almost as if they would have to
)"remediate deficits" in things like recorder and other things that are not
)considered deficits in the mainstream.


[Deby]
Yep. This is Waldorf's remedial program - recorder, knitting,violin. If
they don't get it, there's always curative Eurythmy.


[Jim, on teacher control]

 The people who left their seats first were the teachers and
)everyone else followed.  They were modeling "appropriate behavior."  I
)wondered more than once if they have training on how to do that or if it is
)just all part of the waldorf training.
))
)) )

[Deby]

Its just words and group pressures, put together in packaged form.

[Jim]

)I have skimmed parts of the Koepke book and it draws direct parallels
)between Steiner and the content of the lesson books.  It talks about the
)three fold nature of man etc.  It is actually a pretty easy read and it
)makes no sense to me to not let parents know about it.

[Deby]

Sounds like a good book. Post some quotes if you get a chance...

[Jim]

)I thought this was on the list.  Is it not?

[Deby]

Yes, it is on list.

[Jim]

Take care and I will keep you posted.  Anything you think needs to
)be posted from my notes?  Like every room had a nature table.

[Deby]

Sounds like a pure Waldorf school to me. Collect evidence, please.

[Jim]

It was
)interesting that the kindergarten teacher was not there.  I think some
)people had kindergarteners.  The parents were in the presentations and the
)kids were out on the playground.  I always wonder why Terra Rosa treats
)kids like objects.  I like to have my kids with me.

[Deby]

Yes, it is interesting, but parents make the decisions, not the children.
Their individuality is not considered. To involve them in these kind of
presentations would be "pre-awakening." (Another Anthro jargon term.)

My son, Max, had the hardest time sitting through the main lesson period.
He used to complain that by the time recess came, he felt almost
hypnotized. In a dramatic plea to get out of the school, he said, "Do you
want me to get hypnotized and fall out of my desk and hit my head on the
desk next to me?"

He was not a Waldorf kid.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.6 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Scotoma
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 16:54:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com) (200005021647.JAA10861 lists1.best.com) (200005031421.HAA10110 lists1.best.com)

As to the "I am also unaware that Sachs is a scientist" (Alan Fine)

) Curriculum Vitae:
) 1975-1978 Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Assistant Professor of
) Neurology
) 1978-1985 Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Associate Professor of
) Neurology
) 1985-pres. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Clinical Professor of
) Neurology
) 1992-pres. New York University Medical Center, Adjunct Professor of
) Psychiatry

Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University
(http://www.aecom.yu.edu/home/)

Yeshiva University (http://www.yu.edu/) is "the oldest and most
comprehensive educational institution under Jewish auspices in America
and one of the nation's top 50 research universities according to U.S.
News and World Report".

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.n2266.7 ---------------

From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 09:32:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (200005030517.WAA03954 lists1.best.com)

On 3 May 2000, at 1:21, Joel A. Wendt wrote:

)     The most interesting thing to me, which appeared when I reviewed the
) net before posting this, was the frequency of a new argument (actually it
) is old, just dressed up in a new form), which was not much in evidence
) that last time I took a serious look at this issue about 10 years ago.
) This new argument is made by the proponents of macroevolution, and goes
) basically like this:
) 
)     The fossil record is very incomplete.  Most species are not recorded
) (this is an assumption by the way, since it depends upon the attempted
) logical presumption of the absence of somethng).   These supposed facts
) are then inserted in pro-macroevolution essays in the often implied
) argument that the missing inbetween species could be found there if only
) nature had cooperated in constructing the fossil record.  This is, of
) course, an ad hoc hypothesis writ large (see Ron Brady's article).

It's not that new.  I heard the argument in college 25 years ago.

It seems like a reasonable assumption to me.  The fossil record covers 
specific times and places, but for most places there is no known fossil 
record, and in the places in which there are known fossils, the fossil 
record does not include all time periods.

It seems likely that the development of new species tends to take place in 
relatively small populations.  This is what we see today, for example, in 
isolated environments where a particular species will diverge into various 
forms to take advantage of different available ecological niches.  A 
famous example is the finches of the Galapagos.  There are other examples 
as well.

Also, my impression is that natural selection will tend to operate more 
quickly on a small population than a large one, although I don't 
understand the theory and genetics well enough to explain why.

Eventually, the new form may become so well adapted to its niche that it 
is able to displace the species that are occupying that niche in other 
locations.  So if the isolated population becomes no longer isolated 
(e.g., because a land bridge opens connecting the island to the mainland, 
or a glacier retreats, or a desert becomes a grassland), and the new 
species spreads out, the fossil record will see the new form replace the 
old with nothing in between.

So the lack of "in between" species in the fossil record is not evidence 
that new species do not develop through evolution.  Rather, it is evidence 
supporting the view that new species tend to develop in small, isolated 
populations, and then spread out.

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.n2266.8 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 13:48:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005031451.HAA22800 lists1.best.com)

Dear Deby,

    Your riffs below on mind control etc. in Waldorf and Anthroposophy are not
supported by any facts.  You are mistaking a problem of communication between
individuals (a very natural human condition), for something intentional and
diabolical.

    I don't know the book you refered to, but on the basis of your remarks in
regard to it, its general principles would apply to going to work for any large
corporation.  When one enters any new micro-culture, there are always special
language usages unique to that social environment.  Jim should try to understand
what the speaker means, rather than have your agenda and assumptions (you
weren't there and aren't the speaker) determine the interpretation of that
meaning.

amazed regards,
joel

Debra Snell wrote:

) [Jim]
)
) )the teachers really looked tired, especially after the presentations.  I
) )was tired and found myself trying to hang in to ask questions later.  I
) )wanted to take a nap partly because it took so much energy to sift through
) )what they were saying.  I though about this a bit when I was driving back
) )(four hours is a long time to think in the desert).
)
) [Deby]
)
) Waldorf teachers work very hard.
)
) Waldorf is sold primarily using one-way communication. It is common for
) teachers to use words that are only common to Waldorf. They use words like
) "hold the school", "hold the enrollment", refer to _the_ school as a
) "community". Over time, parents get trained in all the jargon, but it can
) be exhausting to sift through the jargon and smoke screens at first.
)
) [Jim]
)
) )I wanted a format that was not threatening.  I did not want
) )to cause a scene or have them say that I was threatening and intimidating
) )like they did before.  This time though my behavior was the same as it was
) )the first time.  I simply sat quietly and took notes.  The teachers would
) )walk by like they wanted to see what I was writing but they did not say
) )anything.
)
) [Deby]
)
) Got it.
)
) [Jim]
)
) )yep you were right.  after the first grade presentation a parent (not me)
) )tried to ask a question or two.  Judith Quarrington said I think three
) )times that there were no questions until the end.  The teacher however had
) )the courtesy to answer the question before moving the group to the second
) )grade.
)
) [Deby]
)
) You should buy the book, 'Cults in our Midst', by Margaret Singer and Janja
) Lalick. She describes the specific techniques of exploitative persuasion
) used by cults. If you read that book, you'll never see a Waldorf meeting
) the same again. The mind control techniques become very evident.
)
) She describes the continuum of influence and persuasion. Under her
) "direction and degree of exchange", there is first the "Two way
) pupil-teacher exchange", which generally occurs one on one. The meeting you
) describe would fit in the second continuum where "exchange can occur, but
) communication is generally one-sided". This is the "advertising" aspect of
) a cult, where they are selling their wares. It's wares can be anything, in
) this case Waldorf education serves as the front to Anthroposophy. It is a
) good example of how anyone can be pursuaded to join a cult, thinking you
) are only choosing an education. The whole transformation is a slow process,
) but thought reform techniques begin immediately. (Accepted snacks,
) clothing, new educational terms, media control, us verses them, etc.)
)
) Later, if you buy in, you get to learn the more esoteric nature of
) Anthroposophy. When that occurs, your life gets even more limited, until
) you are talking the party line. Then you hear words like _the_ concept,
) _the_ truth, _the_ community, etc.
)
) )) [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
)
) [Deby]
)
) Control, and allow only limited exchange...
)
) [Jim]
) )
) )) )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]
)
) Look at how she worded her sentence, here. She said " embrace _the_
) concept", as if it were the only concept to embrace.
)
) [snip]
)
) )) [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]
) )Yeah I guess.  There are some books or pamphlets from Rudolf Steiner
) )College Bookstore that talk about the man/animal lesson.  She could have
) )mentioned those but did not.
)
) [Deby]
)
) You aren't ready. You don't know how to interpret it properly. I've been
) told that I don't understand Steiner because I studied him alone. I needed
) to study Steiner within a group study context. (Mind control alert!)
)
) )) [Deby]
) ))
) )) ...but clearly they'll need no academic catch-up.
)
) [Jim]
)
) )Judith did not mention academic catch up.  She only talked about the things
) )the kids would have missed from Waldorf by being in a regular public
) )school.  It was interesting because  it was almost as if they would have to
) )"remediate deficits" in things like recorder and other things that are not
) )considered deficits in the mainstream.
)
) [Deby]
) Yep. This is Waldorf's remedial program - recorder, knitting,violin. If
) they don't get it, there's always curative Eurythmy.
)
) [Jim, on teacher control]
)
)  The people who left their seats first were the teachers and
) )everyone else followed.  They were modeling "appropriate behavior."  I
) )wondered more than once if they have training on how to do that or if it is
) )just all part of the waldorf training.
) ))
) )) )
)
) [Deby]
)
) Its just words and group pressures, put together in packaged form.
)
) [Jim]
)
) )I have skimmed parts of the Koepke book and it draws direct parallels
) )between Steiner and the content of the lesson books.  It talks about the
) )three fold nature of man etc.  It is actually a pretty easy read and it
) )makes no sense to me to not let parents know about it.
)
) [Deby]
)
) Sounds like a good book. Post some quotes if you get a chance...
)
) [Jim]
)
) )I thought this was on the list.  Is it not?
)
) [Deby]
)
) Yes, it is on list.
)
) [Jim]
)
) Take care and I will keep you posted.  Anything you think needs to
) )be posted from my notes?  Like every room had a nature table.
)
) [Deby]
)
) Sounds like a pure Waldorf school to me. Collect evidence, please.
)
) [Jim]
)
) It was
) )interesting that the kindergarten teacher was not there.  I think some
) )people had kindergarteners.  The parents were in the presentations and the
) )kids were out on the playground.  I always wonder why Terra Rosa treats
) )kids like objects.  I like to have my kids with me.
)
) [Deby]
)
) Yes, it is interesting, but parents make the decisions, not the children.
) Their individuality is not considered. To involve them in these kind of
) presentations would be "pre-awakening." (Another Anthro jargon term.)
)
) My son, Max, had the hardest time sitting through the main lesson period.
) He used to complain that by the time recess came, he felt almost
) hypnotized. In a dramatic plea to get out of the school, he said, "Do you
) want me to get hypnotized and fall out of my desk and hit my head on the
) desk next to me?"
)
) He was not a Waldorf kid.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.9 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 14:10:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005031635.JAA12320 lists1.best.com)

Steve Premo wrote:

) It seems like a reasonable assumption to me.  The fossil record covers
) specific times and places, but for most places there is no known fossil
) record, and in the places in which there are known fossils, the fossil
) record does not include all time periods.
)
) It seems likely that the development of new species tends to take place in
) relatively small populations.  This is what we see today, for example, in
) isolated environments where a particular species will diverge into various
) forms to take advantage of different available ecological niches.  A
) famous example is the finches of the Galapagos.  There are other examples
) as well.
)
) Also, my impression is that natural selection will tend to operate more
) quickly on a small population than a large one, although I don't
) understand the theory and genetics well enough to explain why.
)
) Eventually, the new form may become so well adapted to its niche that it
) is able to displace the species that are occupying that niche in other
) locations.  So if the isolated population becomes no longer isolated
) (e.g., because a land bridge opens connecting the island to the mainland,
) or a glacier retreats, or a desert becomes a grassland), and the new
) species spreads out, the fossil record will see the new form replace the
) old with nothing in between.
)
) So the lack of "in between" species in the fossil record is not evidence
) that new species do not develop through evolution.  Rather, it is evidence
) supporting the view that new species tend to develop in small, isolated
) populations, and then spread out.

Dear Steve,

    If you will look at what you just did, you will see that there is no
"evidence", but rather an "emptyness".  It is your thinking which then fills in
this space in the facts, with assumptions as to what the "emptyness" means.
You may think the inferences you make are logical (which they might well be),
but these same inferences are also "invention".

    This is basically an "ad hoc hypothesis", a form of reasoning which fills
in empty spaces with invented pictures consistent with the given hypothesis in
order to "save" it from the inconvenience of the anomalous condition.  No one
can test your ad hoc hypothesis, since by definition the inter species
developments are alleged to take place (something you do not factually know)
off the stage of the fossil record.

    This is fantasy, not science.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2266.10 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Scotoma (answer from Bob)
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 20:33:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com) (200005021647.JAA10861 lists1.best.com)

[Bob:]
The following comment from Alan Fine was forwarded to me by Sune:

[Alan Fine]
)I think Sachs is an interesting writer, and I enjoyed the Man Who Mistook
)His Wife for a Hat. However Awakenings was very disturbing to me, as he
)seemed to be giving L-Dopa to a group of people with catatonic
schizophrenia
)whom he misdiagnosed as having Parkinsonism. Predictably, they got manic
)and psychotic. Now it's true that I see neurologists make this mistake from
)time to time, but it certainly doesnt distinguish Sachs as a good clinician
)in my mind. I am also unaware that Sachs is a scientist.  Has he published
)any scientific papers? I think you haven't met the challenge until you find
)a real scientist, Bob.

[Bob Tolz]
        Methinks Alan has not been following the conversations about
Goethe very carefully. I've recited quite a litany of evidence. In
response to Peter Farrell's comment that he didn't think that I'd show
him a "real" scientist working from a Goethean base, I offered him
Brian Goodwin. In offlist conversations, Peter reported to me that the
man was publishing regularly in peer-reviewed journals (including very
recently), and although Peter didn't necessarily agree with Goodwin's
ideas, it was clear enough to Peter that I had met his challenge that
he has contacted one of his old students who has migrated to NYC so
that the wager (a chocolate ice cream) can be delivered to me.
                Bob Tolz



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2266 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2267 --------------

    001 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
    002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - [Tolz] RE: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today
    003 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
    004 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly  - RE: Open House was: which school?
    005 - "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet. - RE: Open House was: which school?
    006 - "el redon" (elredon hotma - Re: Open House was: which school?
    007 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - RE: more about myth (Luke)
    008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
    009 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
    010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Open House was: which school?

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.1 ---------------

From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Michael Kopp's Scientism
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 11:46:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (200005031805.LAA08160 lists1.best.com)

On 3 May 2000, at 14:10, Joel A. Wendt wrote:

) Steve Premo wrote:
) 
) ) It seems like a reasonable assumption to me.  The fossil record covers
) ) specific times and places, but for most places there is no known fossil
) ) record, and in the places in which there are known fossils, the fossil
) ) record does not include all time periods.
) )
) ) It seems likely that the development of new species tends to take place in
) ) relatively small populations.  This is what we see today, for example, in
) ) isolated environments where a particular species will diverge into various
) ) forms to take advantage of different available ecological niches.  A
) ) famous example is the finches of the Galapagos.  There are other examples
) ) as well.
) )
) ) Also, my impression is that natural selection will tend to operate more
) ) quickly on a small population than a large one, although I don't
) ) understand the theory and genetics well enough to explain why.
) )
) ) Eventually, the new form may become so well adapted to its niche that it
) ) is able to displace the species that are occupying that niche in other
) ) locations.  So if the isolated population becomes no longer isolated
) ) (e.g., because a land bridge opens connecting the island to the mainland,
) ) or a glacier retreats, or a desert becomes a grassland), and the new
) ) species spreads out, the fossil record will see the new form replace the
) ) old with nothing in between.
) )
) ) So the lack of "in between" species in the fossil record is not evidence
) ) that new species do not develop through evolution.  Rather, it is evidence
) ) supporting the view that new species tend to develop in small, isolated
) ) populations, and then spread out.
) 
) Dear Steve,
) 
)     If you will look at what you just did, you will see that there is no
) "evidence", but rather an "emptyness".  It is your thinking which then fills in
) this space in the facts, with assumptions as to what the "emptyness" means.

Right.  There is evidence of certain species existing at different times 
in the past, but no direct evidence of how they came about, except that 
some appear in a type of progression.

In the case of human evolution, for example, you find the development of 
bipedalism precedes the development of a larger brain, and you find brain 
size developing in stages.  Not a smooth progression, but rather what is 
sometimes referred to as "punctuated equilibrium."

So it behooves scientists to use their thinking to come up with theories 
to explain these facts, including the rapid replacement of one species 
with another.  (We're talking geologic time here, so "rapid" may be on the 
order of a few millennia.)

One theory might be that "God did it," but that doesn't explain anything.  
If God did it, how did God do it?  By killing off one species and creating 
a new one from scratch, or by an evolutionary process? 

We may assume (1) that God does not exist, and the "rules" by which the 
universe operates are inherent properties of the universe; or (2) that God 
exists, and enacted those "rules, and that those "rules" are discoverable. 
The consequences of each assumption are identical.   

Science generally operates under the assumption that the material world 
may be understood.  As Michael Kopp pointed out, this has been a very 
valuable assumption.

Conversely, we may assume that God or other supernatural beings intervene 
in physical processes without following certain rules.  Creationism might 
be based on this concept.  The fossil record is the way it is because 
that's the way God made it.  Why did God make it that way?  Because he 
felt like it, I guess.  That is not a productive assumption from a 
scientific viewpoint, for reasons Peter has pointed out.

)     This is basically an "ad hoc hypothesis", a form of reasoning which fills
) in empty spaces with invented pictures consistent with the given hypothesis in
) order to "save" it from the inconvenience of the anomalous condition. 

What is the anomalous condition?  That the fossil record tends to show a 
particular form existing for a long period, and then rather abruptly (in 
geologic terms) replaced by a new form?  That is not an anomaly.  It's 
perfectly consistent with the hypothesis I outlined regarding the workings 
of evolution.

In fact, we see this in the world today.  In many areas of the world, new, 
imported species are rapidly replacing indigenous species.  I would expect 
that to occur whenever an previously isolated area comes into contact with 
another area.

You seem to be saying that it is unscientific to refine a theory to keep 
it consistent with the state of the evidence, even (as in the case of 
evolution) when there is no viable competing theory.  (I consider neither 
the Bible nor Steiner's reading of the Akashic record to constitute a 
viable competing scientific theory.)  I don't agree.  Science develops 
both through the modification of existing theories to keep them consistent 
with newly discovered facts, and through the development of new theories 
which might explain the facts even better.

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.n2267.2 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [Tolz] RE: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 01:02:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

Dan,

	Please copy this response to the list.

	I think your own post is significant not only because of its
relatively level-headed tone, but also because I detect you're coming to
realize that wholesale broadsides against Waldorf education's approach to
science are not sustainable.  You need to refine what it is that you think
is objectionable, and I think you're beginning to do so, though I still
disagree with your conclusions.

[Dan Dugan]
)
)  Sacks says there's renewed interest in Goethe's color book because
)  Goethe described phenomena that continue to be of interest. He says
)  nothing that bears on Goethean Science as promoted by
)  Anthroposophists in Waldorf Education beyond the fact that Goethe
)  made careful observations and Waldorf science teaching encourages
)  careful observation.
)
)  What Anthroposophists claim is most important about Goethean Science
)  is its methods, which follow a different paradigm, purportedly
)  superior and "moral." Your research, Bob, has found the good in
)  Goethe's science, but that is irrelevant to our discussion.
)
)  It is the misunderstanding of the "(reductive) methods of science"
)  Sacks mentions that Anthroposophy is trying to perpetuate in Waldorf.
)  In that regard Sacks' statement agrees with the Waldorf critics.

[Bob Tolz]

	Well, that would be true only if you equate Waldorf's approach to
science with being reductionistic.  We part ways here.

	If your difficulty is with anyone who suggests that science needs to
be completely sense-based and must stop there, without passing onward into
the investigation of what cannot be sensed, then I would agree with your
criticisms.  However, that is not what I've observed in the way science is
taught.  Instead, what I have seen is the use of sense-based observation and
experimentation which is designed to instill awe for science in the
children.  It's not supposed to be a dead-end; it's supposed to be a
beginning.

	As a real-life example of how science is presented, I'll relate to
you what I've learned about a recently taught unit on electromagnetism (8th
grade).  The subject was hit from many angles.

	The kids were able to observe lines of magnetic force by looking at
how iron filings rearranged themselves on a sheet of glass under which
magnets were placed; they saw how the lines of force varied depending on the
strength, shape and orientation of the magnet.  They learned about the
relationship of amps, ohms, volts, etc. They learned how coils of wire are
related to magnetism and the electricity, with each child producing their
own morse-code terminal.

	Then they visited a coal-burning electricity plant, observing how
coal was converted into usable energy, starting with observing the delivery
of the raw material, then the efforts of the employees feeding the coal into
the furnace, watching the turbines turning to generate the energy, then
observing the miles of wiring necessary to produce and deliver the
end-product.

	In class, they did further experiments in electromagnetism,
observing how the differing conductivity of cylinders composed of diferent
metals exerts an influence on a magnet dropped through the hollow core (I
myself was in awe when the teacher demonstrated by dropping a magnet through
one cylinder and then following it by a drop through a different cylinder,
with the trip taking appreciably longer because of the difference in
conductivity).

	And here's the capper:  Liquid nitrogen was poured into a
transparent container.  Then a piece of ceramic material was placed in the
liquid nitrogen.  Immediately the ceramic begins to levitate and to revolve
on its axis.  The children were told that superconductivity like this is not
completely understood, but could they imagine, based on their experiences
with the generation of electricity at the coal plant, how some day someone,
maybe one of them, would figure out a way to devise a way of generating
environmentally safe electricity by bringing super-conducting material to
the earth's poles, perpetually revolving in the cold, producing a
potentially endless supply of energy.

	Give me this type of science any day of the week.  I wish I had had
it when I was a kid.  Where's the anthroposophy, Dan?

		Bob Tolz

P.S.  Don't anticipate a continued back and forth from me on this.  I
suspect the likelihood of this conversation going back to an unfruitful
back-and-forth argument.  I'm already enjoying my retirement from the list.


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.3 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 13:02:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi, Deby. I have a question for you that I hope you won't mind me asking.

You wrote that "Accepted snacks, clothing, new educational terms, media
control, us verses them, etc." points to Waldorf schools being part of a
cult.

I am curious if you REALLY believe this, or if you are stating a PLANS
position for the sake of the current discussion with Jim on the list? I am
really curious about this, because I chose Waldorf for my son BECAUSE of
the:

- acceptable snacks (healthy, organic)

- clothing (non-commercial, non-polluting)

- educational terms (seem focused on nurturing the young child)

- media control (supportive of non-commercial, non-violent values)

and

- the us verses them (some mainstream families would find me weird, and I
find many of their choices shocking and offensive - such as the example I
heard from Mary Pipher herself (author of "Reviving Ophelia" and "The
Shelter of Each Other") of the family who took their 4 year old with them to
see the movie Saving Private Ryan.)

Do you really believe this makes me a member of a cult, because I reject the
mainstream value of consumerism (which leads to the consumption of
non-nutritive junk food, and commercial-logo junk clothes, and violent
merchandising-ready junk media)?

I don't think so... and I resent the implication.

)From our conversations I have always thought of you as being a very
reasonable person who was hurt by a Waldorf school, and whose child had been
hurt, and had good reason to be pissed off. But I wish you would show some
balance in your posts about this.

Some people who agree with Waldorf on those practices you listed as
"cult-like" like to think of it as simply living our VALUES.

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.4 ---------------

From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: 3 May 2000 16:19:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) posted:

[Deby]
You should buy the book, 'Cults in our Midst', by Margaret Singer and Janja
Lalick. She describes the specific techniques of exploitative persuasion
used by cults. If you read that book, you'll never see a Waldorf meeting
the same again. The mind control techniques become very evident.

She describes the continuum of influence and persuasion. Under her
"direction and degree of exchange", there is first the "Two way
pupil-teacher exchange", which generally occurs one on one. The meeting you
describe would fit in the second continuum where "exchange can occur, but
communication is generally one-sided". This is the "advertising" aspect of
a cult, where they are selling their wares. It's wares can be anything, in
this case Waldorf education serves as the front to Anthroposophy. It is a
good example of how anyone can be pursuaded to join a cult, thinking you
are only choosing an education. The whole transformation is a slow process,
but thought reform techniques begin immediately. (Accepted snacks,
clothing, new educational terms, media control, us verses them, etc.)

[Luke]
Hey Deby,
  What portion of this book describes the mind control technique of reinterpreting some event for soemone else (one that they were at and you weren't) to reinforce your cults point of view?  Sounds like you have really picked up some pointers from this mind control book.  What part of the mind control book told you to call this practice *helping others understand what's _really_ going on*?  As in -the truth-.  Take alook in the mirror you.

BTW Jim,

  Were you going to answer my question to you, or was your whole line of questioning in a previous post some rhetorical musings?





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.5 ---------------

From: "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet.att.net)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 16:22:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005031431.HAA14187 lists1.best.com)

)I don't think a verbal answer is
) good enough, a statement of
) religion - as Green Meadow has - should be in writing.
)
) Sarina McDonald


This is the exact point which would help alleviate the
problems that some people have with Waldorf.
Dose anyone on the list have a data-base or a central
collection of all the literature from all the Waldorf
schools concerning religion? Is there supposed to be a
certain statement for all the schools?




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.6 ---------------

From: "el redon" (elredon hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 21:59:44 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Deby]
  Its just words and group pressures, put together in packaged form.


hehe.. I couldn't help, but laugh at this comment. Sounds like the loyal 
followers of PLANS ;p

You guys bully and bash Waldorf Education to the point that leaves me with 
this impression of; "If I use misleading statement, isolate comments and 
pull them out of context, while exaggerating situations, coupled with a few 
real short fallings now and again long enough someone's bound to believe 
me!"

That's what you guys sounds like, it's really weird.

In one of my University Psychology classes we students were told that 
bitterness over long periods of time often leads to cynicism and paranoia.

***
The real issues.
I hope you all had a chance to see Nightline last night...
http://abcnews.go.com/onair/nightline/transcripts/nl000502_trans.html
Amen sister!
That's what it is like out there friends only 10 fold!

Part Two is on tonight this should help explain further why so many parents 
want CHOICE in education.

Most of last nights program, including video, is on the ABC web site, take a 
look before it's gone.
http://abcnews.go.com/onair/nightline/NightlineIndex.html

There are many similarities in this program that cross all lines of 
education, even the life of a Waldorf teacher.

Note how the faculty and administration at the public school conducted their 
business.

***
Also... I picked up most of  the PBS Frontline "Jefferson's Blood."
Very interesting.
I have to say for a man who wrote that all men were created equal it is 
astounding to hear that Thomas Jefferson kept, sold, traded, whipped, 
fathered illegitimate children by an African slave women and thought peoples 
of Africans decent were animals.

By today's standards Thomas Jefferson would be considered a raving racial 
bigot.

Perhaps, we should disregard his body of work because of his actions and 
what he said off the paper as oppose to on the paper. Namely, the Bill of 
Rights and the Constitution of the United States.

Although it did appear that he wasn't speaking for the equality of all human 
beings.

It's astonishing that we are living in a country ruled by laws that were 
conceived by a man who had African American slaves and thought them beneath 
his dignity.

The founding father of all things government in the US.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.7 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: more about myth (Luke)
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 00:56:55 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



Luke,
Thanks for answering.

[Luke, on the gnomes:]
)I think talk of gnomes in K is a mole hill.

My basic point was the gnomes make great PR, because everybody's in love 
with them instantly, and then it becomes hard to think about what they're 
actually about in the curriculum.

They're no more important than any other single aspect of the curriculum, 
but they do represent quite a bit of what the critics raise as problems in 
Waldorf -- encouragement of magical thinking at the expense of intellectual 
development, and a hint of the problems to come with the science curriculum, 
where things must be accepted for which there is no empirical evidence or 
rational explanation. (Not to mention bad psychology: discouraging 
self-awareness; projecting your emotions or motivations or blaming your 
problems on little creatures "out there.")

[Luke:]
)I underestimated your time of being an assistant because I thought if )I 
)was wrong you would certainly point it out but if I over estimated )you 
)might not correct that.

Ok, thanks for clarifying you're working on the assumption I've got no 
integrity. Now that we've got that straight . . . Forget it. :)

Myth versus history:
)Am I incorrect in how I explained the Waldorf emphasis on teaching 7- )to 
)14-year-olds through imagination, and through reference to )authority, and 
)that this explains why Waldorf teachers would
)be reluctant to explain the difference between myth versus history?

[Luke]
)I think you are correct about the 7 and 14 year ideas as a general 
) )principle.  As Lisa pointed out (I think in response to Chand's post) )we 
)could start to discuss the meaning and implication of every word.  )Would 
)it explain why a teacher does something?  Neither you or I are )teachers so 
)it wouldn't necessarily explain the *why* of that.

What Steiner recommended probably often explains what teachers in Steiner 
schools do, I would think.

Two points: the teacher as source of knowledge is central, the children 
learn best and in the proper way by looking up to this teacher, and they 
accept what the teacher puts forth because of their great love (hopefully) 
for the teacher. This is the correct *mode* of learning for this age range, 
according to Steiner.

Anything that would undermine the children's awe and reverence for the 
teacher and his or her overflowing knowledge, or cause the children to start 
questioning whether what the teacher says is always true -- or even what 
makes certain things "true" and others not, or how you would determine this 
-- would undermine this relationship and interfere with this kind of 
learning. Explaining "intellectual" distinctions like myth-versus-history 
would destroy the mood of reverence.

Second point, at this age they are supposed to learn by taking in pictures 
(or creating pictures in their minds, perhaps more accurate). Facts, 
reasons, explanations, are not a healthy way to learn at this age, per 
Steiner. Stories lead the children to make pictures.

You want a story with vivid images, like Adam and Eve in the garden, to 
"live in" the children, and you kill this thing that is supposed to be 
living if you then ask the children to step out of the story and consider 
whether it is "true."  (Personally, I think this doesn't follow -- while 
pictorial, imaginative learning is certainly healthy, I don't think you kill 
it this easily by encouraging other modes of thought also.) But this is the 
second reason you don't talk about distinctions like myth-versus-history.

[Luke:]
)Within this context I think it useful to not have to be specific 
) )(particularly about the Bible stories) so that teachers are not forced 
) )to be in confrontation with their different families.

I have not heard this argument before, but basically I don't believe this is 
why they don't discuss myth versus history.

It is not difficult to explain to children of almost any age that some 
people tell a particular story, and other people in other times and places 
have told other stories. There is certainly no reason a teacher would "force 
a confrontation." If a child says, "But is it true," no well-meaning teacher 
is going to say, "No, it isn't true, what your family believes is wrong." 
She can just say, "That is what the Christians/Jews/ancient Greeks/whoever 
believed" or "You can ask your mom and dad what they believe."

[Diana]
)Am I incorrect that Steiner recommended this approach? [telling stories 
)without commenting on their factualness]

[Luke]
)I have no idea if you are correct or not.

That's okay, because the question was rhetorical. Steiner did recommend this 
approach.

[Diana]
)I had a discussion like this with my 7-year-old son this evening.

[Luke]
)This is *your* son.

Yes, but I don't know any children of approximately this age who I couldn't 
have a similar conversation with. When you have a seven year old, you 
develop a fair sense of where seven year olds are at -- or whatever age 
group -- notwithstanding individual differences.

[Diana]
)  Someone gave him "Dinotopia" (snip)

[Luke]
)Dinotopia is not some family's serious religion.

No, but the point was the level of cognitive development required to grasp 
the distinction between literal truth and other types of stories (myth, 
belief, or fantasy). Most seven year olds are there, and much younger kids 
too (maybe four or five years and up), because this development is innate 
and because most families recognize and encourage their children's 
intellectual progress as enthusiastically as any other aspect of their 
child's development.

[Diana]

)Waldorf is thus trying to do something very far outside the cultural )norm 
)in delaying children's understanding of a simple distinction such )as myth 
)versus history.

[Luke]
)Thus I will leave the hyperbloles to you.

I honestly don't think this is hyperbole. I can't claim to have researched 
many other types of education, but I greatly doubt you could find another 
form of education, alternative, progressive, religious, etc., today that 
would advocate that children remain unclear until some time approaching 
puberty about what is history and what is religion or myth (creation 
stories) or what is fantasy (the gnomes). I think Waldorf is unique in this. 
The only exception, though I hate to say so, would be cults or groups that 
are attempting deliberate indoctrination.

The only reason it can be construed as hyperbole is that I don't think it 
works very well -- most families don't even get that this is what the 
teachers really think best, and they go on working against what the teacher 
are trying to do, to the teachers' enormous frustration. Probably the 
family's influence is more decisive in the long run.

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.8 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:59:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005032005.NAA28749 lists1.best.com)


Sarina,
I hope you aren't sorry you asked me this question because I've done some
thinking on it and do have some opinions.

[Sarina]
)Hi, Deby. I have a question for you that I hope you won't mind me asking.
)I am curious if you REALLY believe this, or if you are stating a PLANS
)position for the sake of the current discussion with Jim on the list? I am
)really curious about this, because I chose Waldorf for my son BECAUSE of
)the:
)
)- acceptable snacks (healthy, organic)


[Deby]
I have seen and heard many stories of children's lunches gone through and
food taken away. This is rediculous, controlling and gives children bad
messages about their family. Children's diets should be worked out between
parents and child - not teacher and child.  If a parents wants to send
gummy worms in their lunch box, they should be allowed to, without fear of
their children being shamed and humiliated. I watched a Waldorf teacher
actually rip a plastic tube of play lip-stick from a  shy child's hand and
_sternly_ tell her _never_ to bring things like that to school _again_. The
mother, new to Waldorf, felt horrible because she hadn't noticed her
daughter slipped out of the car with it in her hand...

Speaking of food, I have few questions and comments.

How does prefering organic food become a "value"? Why is it not a political
statement and a preference?

If we don't not grow everything we eat, how is it obtained? If it is
purchased, is that an act of consumerism?

Organic food is big business, as is vegetarian food, vegetarian clothing,
cosmetics, toiletries, et al. Organics are advertised as healthy, yet no
studies so far have shown conclusively that organic food is any healthier
than the same food item grown conventionally.

Some studies have shown a shocking amount of coliform bacteria in organic
food. Is it elitest to eat foods that cost up to twice the usual price for
the organic certification? I stopped buying the organic spring lettuce
because of ecoli bacteria showing up much too frequently. It takes too long
to wash properly, insuring the safety of my kids from fecal contamination,
which can be deadly. I do buy organic carrots for carrot juice...

[Sarina]
)- clothing (non-commercial, non-polluting)


[Deby]
Yes, and I didn't have to change my children's wardrobes when they started
Waldorf either, but if a child showed up in a shirt with commercial writing
or pictures, they were made to wear it inside out. Some children were too
poor to purchase new clothing. These kids wore their shirts inside out
almost daily. What message does that kid take in?

But this is the surface stuff, Anthroposophy's front. I call it the wares
because it is what initially attracts parents (like me) to Waldorf.

What is "non-commercial" clothing, anyway? Is it the absence of logos? Is it
clothing that one makes yourself from home-spun yarns woven into cloth? Is
it clothing purchased from a craftsperson and avoiding the middleman? Is
Blue Fish (tm) brand clothing "non-commercial"? How about Hanna Anderson?

As a farmer's daughter and friend of a felter and weaver, I ask, just what
is "non-polluting" clothing?

Is it wool? Wool needs to be washed (animal feces and urine get into the
water processing plant), scoured (harsh alkali is used to strip out the
lanolin). The sheep eat hay (which may or may not be grown organically) and
may need to be treated by a vet who may use pharmaceutical products. Much
of the wool in America is treated in acid before being carded and spun into
yarn for clothing. Washable wool and quilt batts that do not "beard"  are
treated with a synthetic resin.

Wool is not cruelty-free - try a search at Ask Jeeves...

Is cotton clothing "non-polluting"? Cotton is sprayed with pesticides.
Cotton requires a lot of water. Check out the Aral Sea problem in Russia.
Russia grows a lot of cotton because it is very profitable. Cotton
is not Earth friendly.  Cotton is intensively farmed using heavy machinery
that runs on gasoline. Workers in cotton mills must be protected against
the clouds of cotton dust in the air. This dust contains micro organisms
that are natural to the plant. This micro-organism-laden dust, and if it is
breathed, can lead to a condition known as "brown lung".

Is linen "non-polluting"?  How many parents prefer linen clothing for their
children? Non-wrinkling, washable linen is treated with resins.

Is clothing made with natural dyes "non-polluting"? The mordants for these
dyes are heavy metals. These heavy metals are dangerous to the workers and
must be controlled in the disposal so as not to enter the ground water. (I
have art experience using natural dyes and work with metals every day.)

Sarina, there is no free lunch, no matter what your "values" are.



[Sarina]
)- educational terms (seem focused on nurturing the young child)


[Deby]
Nurturing? Not always. There are too many ill-trained and unstable teachers
in the business. (woeful teacher training alert) Debra's accounting of her
Waldorf classroom did not seem like a nurturing place to be on some days,
and forgive me for mentioning the scarf wrapping incident, or the "mean
kids" who "stole lunches" from my timid son. Waldorf can be hell for timid
and cautious children while the bullies wearing certain kind of clothes
bully their way up the pecking order while the teacher sings her certain
songs in her certain voice, in her certain colored dress while preparing
her certain grain for snack, in the certain colored room with the certain
kind of toys in the certain kind of room... And that is freedom? Sheesh.

If educational terms *seem* "focused on nurturing the young child", how
does this differ from actually *being* nurturing? What filters are the
educational terms run through in order to arrive at the seeming of
nurturing? Are educational terms not related to Waldorf _non_-nurturing of
young children? This is the "us verses them" mentality I talk about.


[Sarina]
)- media control (supportive of non-commercial, non-violent values)

[Deby]

I guess I believe everything in moderation. My son had Nintendo. All of his
friends practically lived at our house. (Yes, the parents knew we had
electronics here, even though they didn't...) Derek got to the point where
he'd ask me to unplug the game _before_ they came over because they were so
obsessed with it that they wouldn't do anything but play the games when
they were here and Derek wanted to play with _them_. Many a Waldorf friend
would drop $20.00 a pop on video games at the local pizza parlor. My son
saved his money for Jerry Rice rookie cards, etc.

If you keep your children isolated from modern society, how do they learn
moderation? I'll confess that my 30 yr old daughter was raised without TV
(as I was). Recently I had a talk with her because every time I dropped by,
her TV was on, even if no one is watching it. She thought about our talk
and now her family has days where the TV is off limits. We talked about the
value of moderation, and that I'd learned a thing or two since raising her
in such a strict and opinionated way.

How does media control support non-commercial, non-violent values? Is
control of any sort free of coercion? Is National Public Television
non-commercial? Is National Public Radio non-commercial? Both of these are
supported by corporations. Is a grant morally superior to many sources of
income from the sale of advertisement?


[Sarina]

)and - the us verses them (some mainstream families would find me weird, and I
)find many of their choices shocking and offensive - such as the example I
)heard from Mary Pipher herself (author of "Reviving Ophelia" and "The
)Shelter of Each Other") of the family who took their 4 year old with them to
)see the movie Saving Private Ryan.)


[Deby]

I'm with you there, Sarina. I wouldn't let my 12 yr old see it, but I
allowed my 15 year old. Heck, it was all I could do to watch it..

[Sarina]
)Do you really believe this makes me a member of a cult, because I reject the
)mainstream value of consumerism (which leads to the consumption of
)non-nutritive junk food, and commercial-logo junk clothes, and violent
)merchandising-ready junk media)?


[Deby]
I believe we are all susceptable to group think, or mind control. Many
cults attract people like us because of the seemingly common "values."

[Sarina]
)Some people who agree with Waldorf on those practices you listed as
)"cult-like" like to think of it as simply living our VALUES.


[Deby]
I think I already addressed this in my long rant of a post.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.9 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: DEBY - Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 02:29:29 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


Deby, I enjoyed your rant and am eager to rant as well. Issues dear to my 
heart. :)

[Deby]
)I have seen and heard many stories of children's lunches gone through )and 
)food taken away. This is rediculous, controlling and gives )children )bad 
)messages about their family

Though I did not see any child's food actually taken away, the teachers in 
each of the classes I worked in were *very* controlling and judgmental about 
food. One teacher carefully instructed each child which food to eat in which 
order (You must eat two carrot sticks. Then you may have five of your potato 
chips; leave the rest. Only then may you have your cookie). (I admit, she 
was extreme, the others only huffed and sighed and grimaced at the 
children's food.)

The children were dependent on this and would ask me what to eat next too, 
and I was very uncomfortable with this.

I was usually "with the program" in terms of my son's lunch (in fact I kind 
of miss the peer pressure to avoid junk, quite absent at my son's present 
school), but once, right after Halloween, and I swear to God I think it was 
the *only* time in three years I let candy slip in, but I put a tiny packet 
of sweet tarts in his lunch, and was *immediately* told not to let it happen 
again.

Even lunch containers are open to criticism. Of course no cartoons or logos 
or Pokemon, goes without saying, but once I brought my own lunch in a 
plastic bag, I forget why I wasn't using my usual tasteful straw bag, and as 
soon as I put it on the table the teacher grabbed it away from me -- 
literally -- and whisked it out of sight because it was so damaging for the 
children to see a plastic bag. She threw away the bag and brought my lunch 
back to me on a plate. What does this kind of rude behavior teach children? 
(Actually, they laughed, because I laughed, once I got over the surprise of 
seeing my lunch suddenly confiscated. Then the teacher was mad at the 
children for laughing.)

[Sarina]
) )- educational terms (seem focused on nurturing the young child)

They believe you "nurture" the young child by wearing the right clothing, 
singing the right songs, telling the right stories, speaking in a special 
voice, eating millet on Wednesday. It doesn't necessarily have anything to 
do with being kind to children.

That doesn't mean there aren't Waldorf teachers who are kind to children. My 
son had a couple of wonderful, kind Waldorf teachers. But they were the ones 
who weren't too interested in getting everything "correct" per Waldorf -- a 
coincidence?

[Sarina]
) )- media control (supportive of non-commercial, non-violent values)

[Deby]
)If you keep your children isolated from modern society, how do they )learn 
)moderation? I'll confess that my 30 yr old daughter was raised )without TV 
)(as I was).

We didn't have TV till I was 12 (which made me *very* much of an oddball in 
the neighborhood; I did watch at friends' houses often because everyone felt 
so sorry for me, they thought my parents were kooks, which, actually, pretty 
much explains it).

Once we got TV, it spiraled immediately out of control, and I spent hours a 
day in front of the TV for 2 or 3 years, trying to catch up and figure out 
what my peers had been talking about all that time. I watched TV before 
school, after school, I followed about 10 different soap operas, and I 
watched TV in my room (yes after years of making it forbidden fruit, they 
actually got me one for my own room) till 3 a.m. with the sound off. 
(Remember Love American Style?) But I will say the early conditioning is 
what stuck. I hardly ever watch TV now, none of us do except my husband 
watches baseball.

I agree with Deby, moderation is best, not extremism in either direction.

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2267.10 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 21:16:47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005032201.PAA20203 lists1.best.com)



[el redon]

)In one of my University Psychology classes we students were told that
)bitterness over long periods of time often leads to cynicism and paranoia.

[Deby]

Nah, this isn't bitterness, this is fun. Ask your teacher what _that_
means. :+)







--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2267 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2268 --------------

    001 - "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik  - Re: Open House was: which school?
    002 - "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik  - Re: Open House was: which school?
    003 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
  (
    004 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Re: DEBY
    005 - "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet. - Cults (surreal  cereal for all)
    006 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
    007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
    008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
    009 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Serious Virus threat!
    010 - momof2gals mindspring.com - food rules, etc.

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.1 ---------------

From: "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik cybertrails.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:22:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



----------
) From: Luke Schelly (lschelly JackRouse.com)
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
) Date: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 1:19 PM
) 
) 
) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) posted:
) 
) [
) BTW Jim,
) 
)   Were you going to answer my question to you, or was your whole line of
questioning in a previous post some rhetorical musings?

No I really am interested in Waldorf diagnostics and I thought you were
using them in an educational context.  My interest is in knowing what is
going on because I have a chronic problem getting information.  I would
appreciate your views.  Thanks Jim


) 
) 
) 


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.2 ---------------

From: "Jim Staffnik" (staffnik cybertrails.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:35:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



----------
) From: Sarina McDonald (pandora aa.net)
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
) Date: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 7:27 AM
) 
) ) 
) I agree with Deby - it does sound like this school is not being very
) up-front about the influence of Steiner and Anthroposophy. I have a
question
) for Jim Staffink:
) I assume the Terra Rosa school provided you with some written materials.

I never received any written materials from the school about Steiner's
anthroposophy and its influence in the school.  I found out about
anthroposophy when I got a notice about a michaelmas celebration and looked
it up on the net.  In the charter proposal the school they say the school
is based on the teachings of Austrian "scientist" Rudolf Steiner.  I did
not find any reference to anthroposophy in the charter documents I read. In
their charter school file with the state department, Terra Rosa board
meeting notes from sometime in 1998 state that the school needs to inform
parents of their "core values" in light of the California situation.  I
never received anything regarding core values.  

) What do these materials say about Waldorf school's link with
Anthroposophy
) and Steiner?

 
There are book reviews in the newsletters from the school and that is about
it.  I have not received a newsletter from the school since I started
asking questions.

This is one of the things that upsets me about some of the
) schools, that there is no mention of any of it (I think Bob Tolz' school,
) Green Meadow, does a great job of this with their 'religion statement').
So,
) Jim, did this school provide you with any written information regarding
) Steiner/Anth? 

No.  I have not received anything in writing.  The closest thing to getting
anything verbal was when my son's kindergarten teacher smiled and said we
had a difference in philosophy, because of my occupation.  I did not know
what she meant.  In fact I said to her that my job doesnot necessarily mean
that we have a difference in philosophy.  She smiled and that was the end
of the discussion.  That happened about two years ago.  I found out about
anthroposophy in early October 1999.

I don't think a verbal answer is good enough, a statement of
) religion - as Green Meadow has - should be in writing.
) 
) Sarina McDonald
) Bainbridge Island, WA
) pandora aa.net
) 
)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
) "It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
) Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
)                     -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist
) 


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.3 ---------------

From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
  (sort of)
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 15:52:18 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Joel has taken the trouble to respond to my posts again. I thank him for
his perseverance and patience.

I'm going to respond a little differently. I am going to respond for now
only to his first claim. Further responses are coming.

Joel says
)
)    I am going to begin by going somewhere not directly
)on the theme, but which lives in the background, from
)the point of view of Spiritual Science, and therefore
)I, at least, have to take account of it.
)
)    An essential characteristic of this age is the
)development of the consciousness soul, or what is
)sometimes called "spiritual freedom".  This is the
)basis (in part) for Steiner's book: "The Philosophy of
)Freedom".  This means several things.
)

Joel claims "An essential characteristic of this age is the development of
the consciousness soul." This claim is made as though it were an agreed
fact. I don't accept it at all. I don't see any evidence for this claim. I
might claim alternatively that a characteristic (perhaps not essential) of
the age is the existence and use of lasers. There seems to me to be no
doubt of this. In western countries most people have them in their homes.
They use them for all sorts of things from communication to shopping to
entertainment to medical treatment. One can trace the development of lasers
from physics in the 1950s and earlier to the present day in public
documents. In some cases early lasers are still extant and may be viewed.
For example, I believe we have the oldest operating CO2 laser in the world
in a laboratory just down the hall. It was constructed in 1968. I would
like to hear of older ones if anyone knows. I can't start with Joel's claim
because I just don't believe it and Joel does not support it with
independent evidence. Might it be true? Could be. How might one tell? By
considering evidence of the consequences. In the absence of this why should
I or anyone else pay any attention to such a claim. We might equally pay
attention to a scientologist who claims to have a machine which clears your
whatever it is that they claim that they clear.

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.n2268.4 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: DEBY
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 01:36:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005040413.VAA28968 lists1.best.com)

Ah, Deby, shame on you. You are trying to discredit me with a "what's the
use, it's all bad" argument. I could waste plenty of time explaining to you
in excruciating detail why I buy organic food, or answer any of your other
irrelevant arguments - at least one of which I would retract (hasty send
button excuse).

But that would simply provide you with what you wanted:

A smokescreen.

I would be happy to debate the merits of organic food or anything else with
you, *off-list.* But for the purposes of the list, you have not addressed
how your list of practices such as eating organic food relates to cult
membership. If eating the same foods makes one a member of a cult, then
every family who buys Froot Loops because a brightly colored toucan told
them to, is a member of a cult? Surely there is more to your argument than
that.

BTW and for the record, I never said humiliating children over the contents
of their lunches was a good idea - you brought that old story up again
because it suited your purpose: to deflect criticism away from your "cult"
remarks and my calling you on them.

Whether or not you agree with their reasoning, there are an awful lot of
hippie-granola types who follow those practices you listed who are not
members of any cult. Just about any of the patrons of your local food co-op
would fit the bill, even if they do wear leather.

You know that I am trying to head off the unhealthy message in our culture
which teaches kids to "consume! consume!" with my choices as a parent, on
which you have said in the past that you agree. I do wonder why you
trivialize my concerns.

Could it be that you can't support your "cult" argument any other way?

I will ask you clearly:

Please explain to me how whole foods/organic snacks, natural fiber clothing,
limiting TV/media, and feeling a need to defend my child from a toxic media
culture makes me a member of the Steiner cult (or any cult), or somehow
proves I am the victim of mind control - when I held these views *before* I
encountered Waldorf, Anthroposophy (through WE), or even the UUA for that
matter!

All ears,

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.5 ---------------

From: "geo" (aspbury1 worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Cults (surreal  cereal for all)
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 06:37:22 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005040839.BAA23932 lists1.best.com)

) If eating the same foods makes one a
) member of a cult, then
) every family who buys Froot Loops because a
) brightly colored toucan told
) them to, is a member of a cult?

oh no.... we have been found out. Now that the secret is
out, would you like a bowl of froot loops?


'The Disciples Of The Brightly Feathered Large Beaked One'






--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.6 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 11:58:45 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


[Sarina to Deby:]
)you have not addressed how your list of practices such as eating )organic 
)food relates to cult membership. If eating the same foods )makes one a 
)member of a cult, then every family who buys Froot Loops )because a 
)brightly colored toucan told them to, is a member of a cult? )Surely there 
)is more to your argument than that.

Is it better to eat what the Waldorf teacher says to eat than what the 
brightly colored toucan says to eat? :)

)Please explain to me how whole foods/organic snacks, natural fiber 
) )clothing, limiting TV/media, and feeling a need to defend my child )from 
)a toxic media culture makes me a member of the Steiner cult (or )any cult), 
)or somehow proves I am the victim of mind control - when I )held these 
)views *before* I encountered Waldorf, Anthroposophy )(through WE), or even 
)the UUA for that matter!

My two cents, Sarina:

None of these things makes you a member of a cult. But I think there are two 
relevant points: cults do make a point of enforcing conformity through such 
things as clothing, food, lifestyle. They make a closed world, where you 
distinguish yourself from the rest of society, which is considered corrupt, 
by having your own little culture, your own way of life which you become 
convinced nobody outside the group can understand, and even believing 
they're trying to hurt you or your children. (I don't mean *you* Sarina, I'm 
speaking generically.) No single aspect of this, the clothing, the food, the 
lighting of candles or speaking of verses, is "bad" in itself or labels you 
a cult member. But the mentality is similar, and is something to watch out 
for, in my opinion. We all do it (identify with our friends or social scene 
by the way we dress, for example, or if we have a party we try to serve food 
we know everyone will eat). It's a question of how far you carry it, and 
what kind of attitude goes with it. There is no question in my mind some 
people relate to the Waldorf culture in a cult-like way. --As Joel would 
say, I know this objectively, I've seen the "reality" of this. :)

Second, Waldorf takes advantage of these superficial similarities in values 
to attract potential customers. This shows you exactly the problem with 
relying on these superficial things. A parent assumes, as you apparently 
did, Sarina, that a "nurturing" attitude goes along with granola and millet 
and cotton clothing and an aversion to media, because other people you know 
who dress and eat like you share your parenting practices, probably. It can 
be a long while before they become aware that the teacher may *not* relate 
to the children in the way they assumed. The breastfeeding/family bed thing 
is a good example. Or how violence in the classroom is handled (or not 
handled).

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.7 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 08:04:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005041159.EAA20620 lists1.best.com)

)[Sarina to Deby:]
))you have not addressed how your list of practices such as eating )organic
))food relates to cult membership. If eating the same foods )makes one a
))member of a cult, then every family who buys Froot Loops )because a
))brightly colored toucan told them to, is a member of a cult? )Surely there
))is more to your argument than that.

[Diana]

)Is it better to eat what the Waldorf teacher says to eat than what the
)brightly colored toucan says to eat? :)

[Deby]

Bingo! Diana, you said what I tried to say in 10K worth of ramble.

[Sarina]

))Please explain to me how whole foods/organic snacks, natural fiber
)) )clothing, limiting TV/media, and feeling a need to defend my child )from
))a toxic media culture makes me a member of the Steiner cult (or )any cult),
))or somehow proves I am the victim of mind control - when I )held these
))views *before* I encountered Waldorf, Anthroposophy )(through WE), or even
))the UUA for that matter!


[Diana]

)
)My two cents, Sarina:
)
)None of these things makes you a member of a cult. But I think there are two
)relevant points: cults do make a point of enforcing conformity through such
)things as clothing, food, lifestyle. They make a closed world, where you
)distinguish yourself from the rest of society, which is considered corrupt,
)by having your own little culture, your own way of life which you become
)convinced nobody outside the group can understand, and even believing
)they're trying to hurt you or your children. (I don't mean *you* Sarina, I'm
)speaking generically.) No single aspect of this, the clothing, the food, the
)lighting of candles or speaking of verses, is "bad" in itself or labels you
)a cult member. But the mentality is similar, and is something to watch out
)for, in my opinion. We all do it (identify with our friends or social scene
)by the way we dress, for example, or if we have a party we try to serve food
)we know everyone will eat). It's a question of how far you carry it, and
)what kind of attitude goes with it. There is no question in my mind some
)people relate to the Waldorf culture in a cult-like way. --As Joel would
)say, I know this objectively, I've seen the "reality" of this. :)

[Deby]

Yes, no one is immune. That is my point.

[Diana]

)Second, Waldorf takes advantage of these superficial similarities in values
)to attract potential customers. This shows you exactly the problem with
)relying on these superficial things. A parent assumes, as you apparently
)did, Sarina, that a "nurturing" attitude goes along with granola and millet
)and cotton clothing and an aversion to media, because other people you know
)who dress and eat like you share your parenting practices, probably. It can
)be a long while before they become aware that the teacher may *not* relate
)to the children in the way they assumed.

[Deby]

Been there, done that. For Max, Waldorf was like living Hansel and Grettle.
I thought I was choosing a school that would be perfect for his timid and
cautious personality. It certainly promoted itself in a way that I
identified with. They said all of the right things. I wanted my child
"protected".

But it was false advertising, in his case. He needed a teacher solidly in
charge, someone who didn't see scarf wrapping as a way to heal him after
the "mean kids" abused him. He needed a firm and loving teacher who
instilled classroom rules that worked for everyone, not just the bullies.
Max became very insecure and lost some of his trust in adults during his
Waldorf experience. In Max's case, Waldorf was pre-awakening.


[Diana]

)The breastfeeding/family bed thing
)is a good example. Or how violence in the classroom is handled (or not
)handled).

[Deby]

We've all seen Waldorf mothers anquish and struggle over what Steiner had
to say about breast-feeding on the SJU list. This is a good example of
people actively seeking approval from the cult-like environment of  S/W/A.
They _want_ to do the right thing.

How many other elementary schools would you ask for advice on
breastfeeding? Cults cross the line with a total plan for life. That plan
is available in Waldorf. It is called Anthroposophy, and Anthroposophy has
all the answers. If you just read Steiner correctly, without judgement, you
too can see the light. By the time you see that light, your world will be
very small, and very controlled. You will have a Steiner indication for
every thing you do. It is a total plan for your life. Waldorf - the
one-stop-shop, and the gateway for the cult-like world view of
Anthroposophy.

Do what you want, and to heck with what Steiner or anyone else has to say
about it. Think about your own families values. Don't toss them all out.
Stay true to who _you_ are, not who S/W/A says you should be.







--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.8 ---------------

From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 08:15:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)
 (200005020543.WAA03592 lists1.best.com)
 (200005021627.JAA01304 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005021627.JAA01304 lists1.best.com)

At 12:30 PM -0400 5/2/00, Joel A. Wendt wrote:
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
)  ) What Anthroposophists claim is most important about Goethean Science
)  ) is its methods, which follow a different paradigm, purportedly
)  ) superior and "moral." Your research, Bob, has found the good in
)  ) Goethe's science, but that is irrelevant to our discussion.
)
)Dear Dan,
)
)     Would you please provide some evidence for your remarks concerning
)"purportedly superior and moral".

Both of these claims are made often in Waldorf and Anthroposophical 
writing. Surely they are familiar to you. I don't understand why you 
challenge me about them, except to waste my time.

-Dan



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2268.9 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Serious Virus threat!
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 17:41:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

VIRUS ALERT, especially for those using MS Explorer 5 and MS Outlook

See http://www.drsolomon.com/home/vbslove.htm

Date Discovered: Thursday May 4th 2000

*****************************************
Virus Name:      VBS/LoveLetter.worm
Aliases:            none known
 
Characteristics:
This worm is a VBS program that is sent attached to an email with the
subject ILOVEYOU. 
The mail contains the message "kindly check the attached LOVELETTER
coming from me."
The attachment is called LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.vbs
If the user runs the attachment the worm runs using the Windows
Scripting Host program. This is not normally present on Windows 95 or
Windows NT unless Internet Explorer 5 is installed.
...
*****************************************

It spreads very rapidly and has caused serious problems to many big
companies in Sweden this afternoon.

For those with Dr Solomon Antivirus Toolkit, a tool for handling it is
available at http://www.drsolomon.com/home/home.cfm

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.n2268.10 ---------------

From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 13:26:46 -0400


     There is little question in my mind that most members of a 
Waldorf school community are pressured to conform in the areas of food 
and diet, clothing and medical care. That does not mean that families 
are required to dress their children a certain way or to feed them 
only organic food, but the pressure to do so is there, and people can 
get very superior about it.
      Deby mentioned teachers forcing children who wore tee-shirts or 
other shirts with logos or pictures on them to turn their shirts 
inside out and to wear them that way for the rest of the day as an 
example. I recognize that private schools have the authority to 
require a certain dress code: I support that, in fact. However, when a 
first or second grader wears the "wrong" thing one day, it's hardly 
the fault of a child that young! Doesn't it make more sense to see if 
the "infraction" occurs again, and if it does, to take the issue up 
with the parent? I put the "turn your shirt inside out and wear it 
that way" in the category of "shaming" -- a technique  not unusual at 
some Waldorf schools. (Other private schools have what seem to me far 
better and humane ways of dealing with dress code infractions. If a 
child is out of uniform, etc. consistenly, and if that child is young, 
parents are approached. If an older child is involved, the child is 
given demerits or detention. There is no public "shaming" involved!)
     The food issue works the same way. Though at our school the only 
written rule relating to food was that candy not come to school, it 
was not unusual for teachers (I have heard this from several parents 
with children in several classes) to compare -- out loud -- whose 
lunch is healthy, etc. (This was easy to do, as children eat at their 
desks in the classrooms.) In my daughter's class, various items 
considered "unsuitable" were confiscated, including a small can of 
unflavored seltzer water that no one I know would consider to be "soda 
pop." 
      Being on board in terms of how healthcare was approached is also 
important in a Waldorf school. At our school, teachers often urged 
that parents see the Anthro physician associated with the school, 
which makes sense when one considers the role of Anthroposophy in the 
school. However, the culture of the school is so strong that parents 
who choose to have their children vaccinated can often feel as if they 
are doing something wrong. I have been told, defensively, by parents 
whose children have had to be on antibioticis that "we are only using 
them because the echinacea/herbs/eurythmy didn't work!" These parents 
actually feel ashamed that they are using science-based, Western 
medicine instead of homeopathy or something else "alternative"!
     Certainly, every school has its culture. But let me tell you: 
Waldorf schools lose a fair number of prospective families because 
from the outside, that culture looks as if it requires what some call 
a "crunchy granola" lifestyle! I've heard moms say that they were 
given pressure because they wore makeup and did not dress in the 
standard "mama" dresses of natural fibers (flax is really big here!) A 
lot of people who might consider Waldorf come to open houses and see 
the piercings, the Birkenstocks, babies strapped into slings, etc. and 
they just feel they won't fit in. 
     One last thing about shaming (and I warn you that this is just an 
anecdote, but I have never been able to forget it.) I'd like to hear 
what people feel about the following: a child who -- and this was in a 
lower grade, 1st or 2nd, I think -- consistently squirmed so much that 
he toppled out of his chair. As a punishment, the child was required 
to kneel in front of his desk for about a half hour, doing his work 
that way (on his knees, in other words.) Does that seem unduly harsh 
to anyone but me?
      For the record, I am not OK with having a teacher's hand in my 
child's lunchbox, or even having a teacher comment on what is in my 
child's lunchbox. I am not OK with having a child turn his or her tee 
shirt on inside out. I am not ok with little children standing on 
their knees on a hard floor, even if they fell out of the chair.
      I truly believe that this kind of blurring of the boundaries 
between the purview of parents and teachers happens more in Waldorf 
schools because of the long-term relationship that a class teacher has 
with a child. A teacher who is with a child for 8 years has simply got 
to become more than just a teacher to the students -- and I am sure 
that Waldorf supporters believe that is exactly the point! (I used to 
think that was a great benefit, too. I have come to think that the 



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2268 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2269 --------------

    001 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: food rules, etc.
    002 - "John and Heather at Prof - organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
    003 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: food rules, etc.
    004 - momof2gals mindspring.com - Heather's reaction/another question
    005 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: food rules, etc.
    006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: food rules, etc.
    007 - momof2gals mindspring.com - firsthand knowledge
    008 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Re: organic food, cotton clothing
    009 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: food rules, etc.
    010 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Open House was: which school?

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.1 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 12:56:32 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

{Lisa]

I have been told, defensively, by parents
)whose children have had to be on antibioticis that "we are only using
)them because the echinacea/herbs/eurythmy didn't work!"

[Harve]

I see nothing wrong with using antibiotics for serious infections.  On the 
other hand, they are so overused that bacteria are becoming resistent and 
the should be used as a last resort for less serious infections.   I have 
seen people use a combination of diet and alternative medicine very 
effectively.


Also, t-shirts with media images are inconsistent with the environment.  I  
don't think that it is particularly shaming to ask a child to turn his/her 
shirt inside out or to wear one from the lost and found if it is done 
discreetly.  Maybe children should have a place for a change of clothes 
anyway.

Harve
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.2 ---------------

From: "John and Heather at Profoundia" (profoundia olywa.net)
Subject: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 11:30:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200005041727.KAA23626 lists1.best.com)

Ahh lunches..
Let's see if I can keep my "two cents" under a page.


Momof3
)      There is little question in my mind that most members of a 
) Waldorf school community are pressured to conform in the areas of food 
) and diet, clothing and medical care. That does not mean that families 
) are required to dress their children a certain way or to feed them 
) only organic food, but the pressure to do so is there, and people can 
) get very superior about it.

Heather
I chose to enforce only the no candy rule in my class, privately telling children to "save it until after school" rather than shaming them about having a "bad lunch".
Parents would approach me about not being strict enough on this issue and not banning lunchables.  The parent in question a single dad who seemed overwhelmed by the propect of parenting and didn't seems know what to buy for lunch . I wasn't going to condemn him for it.
I made suggestions- but I wasn't going to force him to do it or make his child feel like Dad's lunch wasn't good enough. I am sure some Waldorf colleagues are dealing with the lunch issue in a harsh way - but many parents also seize upon the lunch dilemma to single out other families lifestyles. Teaching tolerance includes being tolerant that not everyone shops at the co-op.


Momof3
)       Deby mentioned teachers forcing children who wore tee-shirts or 
) other shirts with logos or pictures on them to turn their shirts 
) inside out and to wear them that way for the rest of the day as an 
) example. I recognize that private schools have the authority to 
) require a certain dress code: I support that, in fact. However, when a 
) first or second grader wears the "wrong" thing one day, it's hardly 
) the fault of a child that young! Doesn't it make more sense to see if 
) the "infraction" occurs again, and if it does, to take the issue up 
) with the parent? I put the "turn your shirt inside out and wear it 
) that way" in the category of "shaming" -- a technique  not unusual at 
) some Waldorf schools. (Other private schools have what seem to me far 
) better and humane ways of dealing with dress code infractions. If a 
) child is out of uniform, etc. consistenly, and if that child is young, 
) parents are approached. If an older child is involved, the child is 
) given demerits or detention. There is no public "shaming" involved!)

Heather
Turning shirts inside out is ridiculous- not only that, the child in question is getting attention from teacher and peers and learns that being disruptive is a way to get noticed.

Momof 3
)      The food issue works the same way. Though at our school the only 
) written rule relating to food was that candy not come to school, it 
) was not unusual for teachers (I have heard this from several parents 
) with children in several classes) to compare -- out loud -- whose 
) lunch is healthy, etc. (This was easy to do, as children eat at their 
) desks in the classrooms.) In my daughter's class, various items 
) considered "unsuitable" were confiscated, including a small can of 
) unflavored seltzer water that no one I know would consider to be "soda 
) pop." 
)       Being on board in terms of how healthcare was approached is also 
) important in a Waldorf school. At our school, teachers often urged 
) that parents see the Anthro physician associated with the school, 
) which makes sense when one considers the role of Anthroposophy in the 
) school. However, the culture of the school is so strong that parents 
) who choose to have their children vaccinated can often feel as if they 
) are doing something wrong. I have been told, defensively, by parents 
) whose children have had to be on antibioticis that "we are only using 
) them because the echinacea/herbs/eurythmy didn't work!" These parents 
) actually feel ashamed that they are using science-based, Western 
) medicine instead of homeopathy or something else "alternative"!
)      Certainly, every school has its culture. But let me tell you: 
) Waldorf schools lose a fair number of prospective families because 
) from the outside, that culture looks as if it requires what some call 
) a "crunchy granola" lifestyle! I've heard moms say that they were 
) given pressure because they wore makeup and did not dress in the 
) standard "mama" dresses of natural fibers (flax is really big here!) A 
) lot of people who might consider Waldorf come to open houses and see 
) the piercings, the Birkenstocks, babies strapped into slings, etc. and 
) they just feel they won't fit in. 
)      One last thing about shaming (and I warn you that this is just an 
) anecdote, but I have never been able to forget it.) I'd like to hear 
) what people feel about the following: a child who -- and this was in a 
) lower grade, 1st or 2nd, I think -- consistently squirmed so much that 
) he toppled out of his chair. As a punishment, the child was required 
) to kneel in front of his desk for about a half hour, doing his work 
) that way (on his knees, in other words.) Does that seem unduly harsh 
) to anyone but me?

Heather
Not only harsh, but counterproductive developmentally. Chair squirming is often the sign of a spinal gallant reflex. Children who squirm need movement targeted to their needs and a desk to themselves so that they do not elbow their neighbor. Working on the knees enforces unhealthy postural habits . I would imagine also, that a child with this difficulty who was forced to kneel in this way would fall forward or write with both arms bent .
Remediation needs to happen in a private relaxed setting. It should not be seen as a consquence.



I've got to go eat my organic fruity puffs,
Heather




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.3 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 14:04:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Lisa]:
)      Deby mentioned teachers forcing children who wore tee-shirts or
)other shirts with logos or pictures on them to turn their shirts
)inside out and to wear them that way for the rest of the day as an
)example. I recognize that private schools have the authority to
)require a certain dress code: I support that, in fact. However, when a
)first or second grader wears the "wrong" thing one day, it's hardly
)the fault of a child that young! Doesn't it make more sense to see if
)the "infraction" occurs again, and if it does, to take the issue up
)with the parent? I put the "turn your shirt inside out and wear it
)that way" in the category of "shaming" -- a technique  not unusual at
)some Waldorf schools. (Other private schools have what seem to me far
)better and humane ways of dealing with dress code infractions. If a
)child is out of uniform, etc. consistenly, and if that child is young,
)parents are approached. If an older child is involved, the child is
)given demerits or detention. There is no public "shaming" involved!)

You know nothing of this event.  Neither do I.  At the time it was first posted,
I asked the questions you, with your antagonism to Waldorf, assume the answers
to.  Specifically, I asked if:

     this was a repeated behavior
     the teacher talked to the parent about it

It is also not clear to me that the teacher was not simply correcting the
situation - removing the logo from view.  You assume shaming, but to really know
this, you must ask the teacher his or her intent, or talk to someone who put
this question to the teacher.

You also assert that "shaming" is " a technique  not unusual at some Waldorf
schools", using your imagination of the event described above as an example.  If
this is how you think, your opinions are on shaky ground indeed.  Lets have some
evidence.

You speak elsewhere of pressure to conform in Waldorf, citing diet and clothing
as examples.  My family's diet and clothing did not change upon entry to
Waldorf.  Perhaps the pressure you felt to conform comes from within.  The
alignment of your opinions with those of certain other critics on this list is
consistent with an especial need to fit in.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.4 ---------------

From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: Heather's reaction/another question
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 15:40:55 -0400

Thank you, Heather, for your thoughtful response to my post. Your 
answers made so much sense and reflected your obvious respect for 
children and their parents. How I wish all teachers (Waldorf or not!) 
considered matters as thoughtfully as you apparently do.

I agree with you completely that "shaming" has no value in education 
or in promoting the healthy development of children. Our personal 
experience with Waldorf, however, abounded with these types of 
incidents that seemed aimed more at enforcing the authority of the 
teacher than in responding to the needs of the individual child and/or 
the rest of the class as a group.

I found it interesting that you, as a teacher, receive pressure from 
parents to be *more* strict about what is allowed, food-wise, in the 
classroom. I witnessed this kind of thing myself -- parents who had 
banned or severaly limited TV and eliminated sugar, for instance, 
would get upset when another parent chose to have his child's birthday 
celebration at Chuckie Cheese or something! These other parents would 
go to the teacher to try to get her to intervene. I really liked what 
you said about not making that father, who was obviously trying hard, 
feel bad about what he packed for lunch. 

BTW: I hope you don't know something I don't know, Heather! Because I 
am only the Mom Of 2, not the Mom Of 3!!! (grin)!!!!

Thanks for your post. (Oh yes, particularly on the child who squirmed. 
Another method of punishment/correction I saw involved having a child 
who called out in class without raising of hands stand facing the 
front of the class with his arms  -- teacher called them "silver 
swords" -- crossed over his chest. He had to stand there for about 15 
minutes.) Heather, is that a particularly Waldorf thing to do? I ask 
because of the reference to the "silver swords


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.5 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 14:41:45 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Chand]

Perhaps the pressure you felt to conform comes from within.  The
)alignment of your opinions with those of certain other critics on this list 
)is
)consistent with an especial need to fit in.
)
[Harve]

That makes sense.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.6 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 13:03:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005041727.KAA23624 lists1.best.com)

[Lisa]
)     There is little question in my mind that most members of a
)Waldorf school community are pressured to conform in the areas of food
)and diet, clothing and medical care. That does not mean that families
)are required to dress their children a certain way or to feed them
)only organic food, but the pressure to do so is there, and people can
)get very superior about it.


[Deby]

It goes even deeper than that, Lisa. At the risk of offending Harve, I'm
going to come back (AGAIN) to the scarf wrapping. I may even bring a "new"
side of this story because I'm looking at it from a different prospective.

In most schools, there is a standard procedure used for kids who are having
problems at school (like Max was). Parents are either contacted by the
school for a conference, or the parents contact the school (I contacted the
school when Max was complaining about "mean kids" taking his lunch, etc.).

In all the other schools I have been part of, I have felt my views and
suggestions on issues regarding my children have been highly regarded. I
have a definite feeling that current school officials think I am a
dedicated and experienced mother. Over the course of 30 years of hands-on
parenting, I have worked with school psychologists, teachers, principals,
etc. on various kid issues . Waldorf was the one exception.

When I went to Max's Waldorf teacher with my concern about Max's attitude
toward school (including the fact that he didn't want to go because the
kids were mean), our conversation was pretty one-sided. The teacher said
that she would think about it. Since I had approached right after school, I
wrongly assumed that she was rushing off somewhere and we would finish the
conversation later. She had no intention.

She took my concern to the college of teachers, who did a "child study" on
Max, who was two months into his kindergarten year. In other words, this
was a student that they really didn't know very well at all. That didn't
stop them. _They_ came up with *the* plan on how to treat Max's problem,
and it was executed without my knowledge or consent. Now, who knows a child
better than their primary care parent? I think the parent does. But if you
are not an Anthroposphical family, your opinion mean nothing.
Anthroposophical teachers, not the un-enlightened parents, hold the _true_
picture of your child.

I would _never_  have allowed my son to be wrapped in scarfs by a teacher
he didn't even trust to protect him from the "mean kids," what's more,
allow the "mean kids" participate!

Most Waldorf parents don't have a clue what the pyschological/spiritual
plan is for their child.  If the teachers believe the parents of a
particular student are clueless as to Anthroposophy's path, they don't
think the parents input is of any value.  If you are an Anthro family, your
opinions may hold more weight, and you may even be included in your own
child's plan. Waldorf crosses too many lines, and unsuspecting parents
don't realize it.

End rant.




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.7 ---------------

From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: firsthand knowledge
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 16:15:30 -0400

     Gotta correct you, Chand! I do have firsthand knowledge of the 
way children who wear the "wrong" tee-shirt or shirt are handled by 
some Waldorf teachers. In fact, quite some time ago I brought this 
method of dealing with dress code infractions up on both this list and 
the SJU list, and got several responses offlist from parents whose 
children had been made to turn their tee-shirts (or shirts) inside out 
and wear them that way all day.
     My firsthand knowledge comes from the fact that it happened in my 
daughter's (former) class. I also heard offlist from a former parent 
at our school who became alerted to the fact that this had happened to 
his child when she came running out to the carpool line wearing an 
inside-out tee-shirt! The parent was livid, and felt that sending the 
child back the next day wearing the same shirt -- still inside out -- 
might be a suitable response. (Of course, he did not. He just withdrew 
his daughter and found other education alternatives. No, the teeshirt 
was not the single thing that caused the family to leave -- as is 
usual, it was a combination of those kinds of things mixed with fears 
about quality of education.)
     Chand, you can deny this all you want. But it happens -- and not 
just in one classroom at one school. Perhaps the reason these thing 
happen has something to do with the fact that Waldorf depends heavily 
on the "authority" of the teacher; read any Steiner lectures about how 
young children learn and develop, and you will see that word -- 
"authority" -- repeated. The child is supposed to learn to respect the 
authority of the teacher in all things until age 14 -- even to the 
point where the child should not be thinking for herself (at least in 
an abstract way) until age 14. Until then, the student must depend on 
the "authority" of the teacher.
   So, if the teacher says your clothes and lunch are wrong, they must 
be wrong. Naturally, the child whose tee shirt is wrong (or who eats 
sugar or watches TV) becomes a joke to the other children, who by her 
actions has sanctioned shame as a way of keep


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.8 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 13:22:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005041727.KAA23626 lists1.best.com)

)Is it better to eat what the Waldorf teacher says to eat than what the
)brightly colored toucan says to eat? :)

In a word, YES. Not because "the Waldorf teacher said so," but because the
toucan is trying to sell you candy disguised as cereal and the Waldorf
teacher is suggesting you eat whole foods - which is a really good idea
(duh). I think we should just drop this discussion, because I have actually
been called a "nutrition nazi" before - look out, cult alert! - so we will
obviously never agree.

As to the rest of your and (Deby's) post, you still haven't linked those
practices which I consider healthful to cultism. I still fail to see how
buying GAP clothes and Disney merchandise and General Mills cereal like the
TV commercials tell you (and as many good American consumers do) is any
different from what you describe as the "cult-like" practices inherent in
Waldorf Education... they are both lifestyle choices, not evidence of cult
adherence.

I give up. What's missing in all these debates and conversations -- painting
methods, organic foods, media control/avoidance -- is an appreciation of the
nuances, and respect for the possibility that the opposition may actually
have arrived at their position through a recognizably reasonable
intellectual process.


Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2269.9 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 22:29:18 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005041943.MAA14837 lists1.best.com)

Harve wrote:
 
) [Chand]
) Perhaps the pressure you felt to conform comes from within. The
) )alignment of your opinions with those of certain other critics 
) )on this list is consistent with an especial need to fit in.

) [Harve]
) That makes sense.

... isn't some degree of conforming to the group you are or want/try
to become part of human, typical and basic in all social contexts?

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.n2269.10 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 17:39:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005032123.OAA24095 lists1.best.com)

geo wrote:

) This is the exact point which would help alleviate the
) problems that some people have with Waldorf.
) Dose anyone on the list have a data-base or a central
) collection of all the literature from all the Waldorf
) schools concerning religion? Is there supposed to be a
) certain statement for all the schools?

Dear George,

    I would like to remind you, George, that this list is a
very poor place to get real information about Waldorf.
PLANS has a quite definite agenda, and much that comes from
the critics is "adjusted" to conform to that agenda.

    Waldorf Schools don't have a central organizational
base.  Usually a Waldorf school is born and grown in a
specific place out of the initiative of individuals living
in that place.  Frequently schools will start with just a
kindergarden, or perhaps also a first grade, depending upon
the needs of the children of those individuals founding the
school.

    There is no centrally organized body that goes around
founding Waldorf Schools.

    As each year passes in the life of a new school, a new
grade will be added, given that each year the children who
were enrolled in the founding years are growing older.

    Since these tend to be private schools, most States have
no requirement regarding certification of the teachers.
This allows those who founded the school to either use
experienced teachers, newly trained teachers from one of the
training centers, or individuals who the founders otherwise
find qualified.

    This results in each school being very individual.
Their common element is the desire of the founders to have a
"Waldorf" school, which means something generally true to
all these individuals, but also probably very different for
each individual.

    Many individual teachers see Waldorf "technique" as
something of a system that one adopts, while others will see
it as a basis for inspiring them to draw on inner forces of
soul that they find newly awakening in themselves.  Some
teachers are quite rigid, and oppose any "violation" of what
they see as a "system".

    I was at a conference a couple of years ago in San
Francisco, of a kind of counter-rigid pedagogical impulse.
These were all West Coast teachers, who found themselves
working in areas where there were many minority children.
The conference was on the work that they were doing
attempting to adapt Waldorf "technique" to the cultural
realities of these children.  I was at this confernce with a
friend, whose wife was a "purist" teacher, and who was angry
at us for going and supporting this work.

    My point is to suggest to you, George, that Waldorf
schools and teachers are very individual, come from a number
of "religious" backgrounds, and are not as uniform in nature
and practice as the critics like to suggest.

warm regards,
joel




--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2269 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2270 --------------

    001 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Steve and Joel discuss evolution
    002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
    003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Open House was: which school?
    004 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
    005 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Re: Lisa, Diane, Deby
    006 - "John and Heather at Prof - Re: food rules, etc.
    007 - "Christian" (christian ga - RE: food rules, etc.
    008 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
    009 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: organic food, cotton clothing
    010 - "David Cann" (canndw netz - Re: Open House was: which school?

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.1 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Steve and Joel discuss evolution
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 18:44:16 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Steve,

    I hope you don't mind my giving a new subject line
to our discussion, but I would like to continue it
without mis-identifying it.  I am also going to leave
out your remarks about God and Steiner's akashic record
stuff, as I did not introduce those and I am not
concerned about them in reference to this discussion.

    The fossil record very likey does not include all
species that have every lived, for the very reasons
observed (the species has to die under conditions that
preserve it, and the preserved bone or imprint has to
survive all manner of climatological and geological
forces that might otherwise destroy it.

    The fossil record also shows a structure that
paleontologists have called "stasis".  Basically what
this means is that those species that appear at the
beginning of a geological age do not significantly
change over the course of that age (although some may
dissappear).  In addition, each geological age tends to
have species unique to that age.  Moreover, each age is
separated from the others by geological layer(s) which
have no species present at all.

    This last point has changed somewhat, in that
recently trans age microbiological organisms have been
discovered in shale.  It remains true, however, the
complicated organisms continue to exhibit the phenomena
of "stasis".

    The problem is with the idea of macroevolution.
Few people doubt microevolution (small changes within
species), but macroevolution theorizes that one species
can become another species through small changes over
long periods of time.

    A lot of people have trouble with this idea, and it
doesn't really have anything to do with their
religion.  Consider the eye, for example.

    The eye is a very complicated organ.  Neo-darwinian
macroevolution supposes that the eye appears through
billions of small changes, each change representing
some form of advancement that increases the chances of
survival (so that the organism becomes more fit to
reproduce).   This is known, among critics of
macroevolution, as the tornado in the junkyard
producing a 747 theory.

    There used to be a "monster" theory.   The
"monster" theory was that nature would produce a big
change, through some mechanism of mutation, and then
this would explain the appearence of complicated organs
in new species.  The problem with this "ad hoc
hypothesis", is that mutations in nature are always
sterile - that is they don't reproduce, can't have
decedents and thus can't pass on their imagined new
mutated traits.

    The history of the arguments in support of
macroevolution continue to be "ad hoc hypotheses".
There is no new data, just more clever arguments in
support of the idea of macroevolution, which Nature,
through "stasis" (and the absence of inbetween
complicated organisms), seems very much to deny.

    Something is clearly going on, but suggesting that
macroevolution is true, by arguing that the missing
inbetween species happened in those imagined instances
where no fossil record was preserved, is silly.  The
argument is not based on facts, it is entirely
conjecture.

    What makes the whole thing really and seriously
flawed, is that all the mental effort is spent on
refining the array of "ad hoc hypothesis" rather than
trying to find a testable and adequate theory in accord
with the actual facts.  It is as if macroevolution was
a religion of scientists, and had to be preserved at
all costs because it is a key element of materialism.
If the fossil record is allowed to speak, it clearly
says, sorry, but there are no inbetween species, so
guess again folks.

warm regards,
joel



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.2 ---------------

From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:19:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)
		 (200005020543.WAA03592 lists1.best.com)
		 (200005021627.JAA01304 lists1.best.com) (200005041517.IAA05632 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote:

[Joel]
) )     Would you please provide some evidence for your remarks concerning
) )"purportedly superior and moral".
) 
) Both of these claims are made often in Waldorf and Anthroposophical
) writing. Surely they are familiar to you. I don't understand why you
) challenge me about them, except to waste my time.

You have collected much litterature on anthroposophy and WE and seem
to find your way easily around it. If both claims often are made in
the litterature, could you not take a few minutes to find one quote or
two that show that Anthroposophists claim that the paradigm, which
Goethean methodology follows, by which I assume you mean
"anthroposophy", is "superior" and "moral", as you write? 

I can understand that those are feelings different writings maybe
generally may evoke. But it would be interesting to see to what degree
they corresponds to what is actually written as "claims" or at what
level they arise.

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.n2270.3 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 16:27:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200005032123.OAA24095 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005042136.OAA26131 lists1.best.com)

)geo wrote:
)
)) This is the exact point which would help alleviate the
)) problems that some people have with Waldorf.
)) Dose anyone on the list have a data-base or a central
)) collection of all the literature from all the Waldorf
)) schools concerning religion? Is there supposed to be a
)) certain statement for all the schools?
)
[Joel]
)
)    I would like to remind you, George, that this list is a
)very poor place to get real information about Waldorf.
)PLANS has a quite definite agenda, and much that comes from
)the critics is "adjusted" to conform to that agenda.
)
)    Waldorf Schools don't have a central organizational
)base.  Usually a Waldorf school is born and grown in a
)specific place out of the initiative of individuals living
)in that place.  Frequently schools will start with just a
)kindergarden, or perhaps also a first grade, depending upon
)the needs of the children of those individuals founding the
)school.
)
)    There is no centrally organized body that goes around
)founding Waldorf Schools.

[Deby]

Waldorf is a trademarked name, Joel. AWSNA determines the criteria of who
gets to use their name. If I remember correctly, 80% of the teachers must
be Waldorf -trained in order to use the word "Waldorf" in your name.

In order to be an AWSNA reacognized school, it has to be an
Anthroposophical school.

George, if you don't want to listen to the "critics", contact AWSNA for the
criteria. Joel is spoon-feeding you the party line, pretending that any one
can start any kind of school and call it Waldorf. I vote for truth in
advertising (AGAIN).

AWSNA = Association of Waldorf Schools in North America.




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.4 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
	  (sort of)
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 19:41:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005040549.WAA15957 lists1.best.com)

Dear Peter,

    You have completely misunderstood me.  I am sure it was unintentional, but
I do believe I expressed myself in a way that would have enabled you not to
make this error.
My very first paragraph I said I was going to speak of something from Spiritual
Science, which I had to take account of.  I did not say you had to believe it,
only that it was a reality to me, stood in the background of all kinds of
matters and was crucial to many judgements I made, and to much that I
understood about  the world.

    It was not a claim.  You don't have to believe it.  It is real to me.

    Please reread my post in this light, it may change how you understand what
I have written.

warm regards,
joel

Peter Farrell wrote:

) Joel has taken the trouble to respond to my posts again. I thank him for
) his perseverance and patience.
)
) I'm going to respond a little differently. I am going to respond for now
) only to his first claim. Further responses are coming.
)
) Joel says
) )
) )    I am going to begin by going somewhere not directly
) )on the theme, but which lives in the background, from
) )the point of view of Spiritual Science, and therefore
) )I, at least, have to take account of it.
) )
) )    An essential characteristic of this age is the
) )development of the consciousness soul, or what is
) )sometimes called "spiritual freedom".  This is the
) )basis (in part) for Steiner's book: "The Philosophy of
) )Freedom".  This means several things.
) )
)
) Joel claims "An essential characteristic of this age is the development of
) the consciousness soul." This claim is made as though it were an agreed
) fact. I don't accept it at all. I don't see any evidence for this claim. I
) might claim alternatively that a characteristic (perhaps not essential) of
) the age is the existence and use of lasers. There seems to me to be no
) doubt of this. In western countries most people have them in their homes.
) They use them for all sorts of things from communication to shopping to
) entertainment to medical treatment. One can trace the development of lasers
) from physics in the 1950s and earlier to the present day in public
) documents. In some cases early lasers are still extant and may be viewed.
) For example, I believe we have the oldest operating CO2 laser in the world
) in a laboratory just down the hall. It was constructed in 1968. I would
) like to hear of older ones if anyone knows. I can't start with Joel's claim
) because I just don't believe it and Joel does not support it with
) independent evidence. Might it be true? Could be. How might one tell? By
) considering evidence of the consequences. In the absence of this why should
) I or anyone else pay any attention to such a claim. We might equally pay
) attention to a scientologist who claims to have a machine which clears your
) whatever it is that they claim that they clear.
)
) 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.n2270.5 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Lisa, Diane, Deby
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 16:36:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005042136.OAA26133 lists1.best.com)

[Lisa wrote this to Heather, a Waldorf teacher:]
"Your answers made so much sense and reflected your obvious respect for
children and their parents. How I wish all teachers (Waldorf or not!)
considered matters as thoughtfully as you apparently do."

[Sarina]
Huh? I thought Waldorf teachers were all cult members or dupes, blindly
following religious dogma? Could it be that NOT ALL Waldorf teachers shame
their students and steal their lunches and wrap them in silks?

How balanced of you to finally admit that... or have you?

For the record, the folks at my son's school NEVER

-changed anyone's clothes
-confiscated lunch items
-stuck to useless dogma
-acted like they knew better than parents
-preached "no TV!"

In fact, the people at my local school make it a point to be respectful of
parents choices, and their dilemmas. Can you believe that!?

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.6 ---------------

From: "John and Heather at Profoundia" (profoundia olywa.net)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 16:48:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (200005042136.OAA26133 lists1.best.com)

Mom of 2
) Thanks for your post. (Oh yes, particularly on the child who squirmed. 
) Another method of punishment/correction I saw involved having a child 
) who called out in class without raising of hands stand facing the 
) front of the class with his arms  -- teacher called them "silver 
) swords" -- crossed over his chest. He had to stand there for about 15 
) minutes.) Heather, is that a particularly Waldorf thing to do? I ask 
) because of the reference to the "silver swords

Heather
Sounds to me like a rather poor use of the "E' position in Eurythmy.
"E" is supposed to have  focusing  and grounding qualities ( this could be backed up by developmental psychology- since it is a midline activity- but I am not going to give the full research).
In a class, having the children stand up with arms crossed to get ready for the next activity is a good way to keep them from poking each other. You don't however, single them out or make them stand for extended periods of time with tensely drawn shoulders.

Heather
As far as my lifestyle views...
I choose a TV free, whole foods lifestyle for myself. I criticize and actively protest destructive advertising campaigns that target children.  I think the food and clothing discussion here is centering on another kind of environmental pollution that comes from intolerance and lack of consideration for others' feelings. We can live our lives in way that are kind to our earth and our children- but what about getting along with our neighbors?
You have to meet people where they are.  I may be a vegetarian, but when Grandma serves up her pot roast, I'll eat the meal that she made with love!

I like Waldorf methodology a lot.. but I will point out that it can really backfire when people don't back it up with their minds AND hearts.  My disappointment with the interpersonal realities within the school led me to leave the community. For families that depend on like parents for support- leaving an unhealthy situation is a lot harder.

Heather




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.7 ---------------

From: "Christian" (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 17:01:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (200005041943.MAA14837 lists1.best.com)


)[Chand]
)
)Perhaps the pressure you felt to conform comes from within.  The
))alignment of your opinions with those of certain other 
)critics on this list 
))is
))consistent with an especial need to fit in.
))
)[Harve]
)
)That makes sense.

[Christian]
Wow! This IS backwards compatible!




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.8 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Scotoma [is Goethe's work relevant to science today]
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 20:15:00 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005011813.LAA05952 lists1.best.com)
	 (200005020543.WAA03592 lists1.best.com)
	 (200005021627.JAA01304 lists1.best.com) (200005041517.IAA05632 lists1.best.com)

Dan Dugan wrote: "Both of these claims are made often in Waldorf and
Anthroposophical writing. Surely they are familiar to you. I don't understand
why you challenge me about them, except to waste my time."

Dear Dan,

    Nice try Dan, but you wouldn't let me duck this kind of unsupported
claim, and I won't let you.  Lets have some quotes and the sources, by page
and title, if it is all that easy.

warm regards,
joel




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.9 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:28:21 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


[I wrote:]
) )Is it better to eat what the Waldorf teacher says to eat than what the 
)brightly colored toucan says to eat? :)

[and Sarina said:]
)In a word, YES. Not because "the Waldorf teacher said so," but because the 
)toucan is trying to sell you candy disguised as cereal and the Waldorf 
)teacher is suggesting you eat whole foods - which is a really good idea 
)(duh). I think we should just drop this discussion, because I have actually 
)been called a "nutrition nazi" before - look out, cult alert! - so we will 
)obviously never agree.

I agree we're not going to agree on the "what makes it a cult" question, 
though I'm not afraid to talk nutrition with you, Sarina, I follow a fairly, 
well, non-mainstream diet myself, and the food served in Waldorf schools is 
one of the few areas in Waldorf I can't think of any complaints about! (The 
control is a different matter; the food is fine.)

What I don't get talking to you, Sarina, is how you seem to always start out 
thinking we're miles apart when in fact I usually agree with about 98% of 
what you say. I also agree it is better to eat what the Waldorf teacher says 
than what the toucan says, because, as you put it, duh, the food is better.

The point of the question was just that you shouldn't do it *because Waldorf 
says so*. I'm sure we agree! Please say we agree! :)

Diana








________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2270.10 ---------------

From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 21:32:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

)[Deby]
)
)Waldorf is a trademarked name, Joel. AWSNA determines the criteria of who
)gets to use their name. If I remember correctly, 80% of the teachers must
)be Waldorf -trained in order to use the word "Waldorf" in your name.
)
)In order to be an AWSNA recognized school, it has to be an
)Anthroposophical school.
)
)George, if you don't want to listen to the "critics", contact AWSNA for the
)criteria. Joel is spoon-feeding you the party line, pretending that any one
)can start any kind of school and call it Waldorf. I vote for truth in
)advertising (AGAIN).
)
)AWSNA = Association of Waldorf Schools in North America.


Well, some of this is true.  This subject is one with which I've had some
experience.

I am not aware of any requirement for percentages of teachers being waldorf
trained, but certainly that is not the only criterion for being a
AWSNA-affiliated waldorf school.

AWSNA "member" and  "sponsored" schools are allowed to use Waldorf in their
name.  Such schools generally have full K-8 programs, stable finances, a
suitable site -- their "act together", if you will.  A "sponsored" school
works with its "sponsor" (a more-established school) to reach a point of
stability:  full classes, full administrative staff, solid development,
mature processes, etc. etc. (this is how it's "supposed" to work).

AWSNA "developing" and "initiative" schools are typically not allowed to use
"Waldorf" in their name.  As this rule was established fairly recently,
developing schools that were already had the word "waldorf" in their names
were usually allowed to continue doing so.

Also, AWSNA determines the criteria for AWSNA-affiliated schools only.  It
is not clear to me that AWSNA is able to stop schools not affiliated with
AWSNA from referring to themselves as waldorf (charter schools using
"Waldorf methods" are one example).  I have never heard of legal action
being taken, for instance.

It is true that there is an expectation that the school's faculty will work
together using anthroposophy, that they will study as a group (child study,
anthroposophical study), that they will teach and support each other, that
they will have a strong role in the operation of the school.  I would not
call that being an "anthroposophical school", but perhaps Deby would.

I would also say that AWSNA is more of a "cheerleader" organization than a
source of guidance or direction.  Waldorf schools (private ones, anyway)
really ARE independent schools.  From where I sit (on the board of a
developing waldorf school), I sometimes wish AWSNA were a stronger
organization, and that we didn't have to be quite as independent as we are.

Sometimes I do, anyway (when I'm feeling sorry for myself).  Oftentimes,
though, I relish our independence.  I get the sense that AWSNA is trying to
strengthen itself, too, and be more of a force in shaping waldorf education.

David

_____________________________________________
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.n2270 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2271 --------------

    001 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    002 - "Debra Snell" (snell nets - Re: Open House was: which school?
    003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: Open House was: which school?
    004 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    005 - Peter Farrell (peter.farr - Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
  (
    006 - "Debra Snell" (snell nets - Re: food rules, etc.
    007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Lisa, Diane, Deby
    008 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: Open House was: which school?
    010 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Re: organic food, cotton clothing

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.1 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:48:33 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[Harve}
)Also, t-shirts with media images are inconsistent with the environment.  I 
)don't think that it is particularly shaming to ask a )child to turn his/her 
)shirt inside out or to wear one from the lost )and found if it is done 
)discreetly.

This has been bothering me since I read it earlier today.

Making a child turn his shirt inside out is ABSOLUTELY shaming. And from 
what we know of you, Harve, if it was your kid, you'd be incensed. And 
rightly so.

What if you went to work and your boss asked you to turn your shirt inside 
out? How would you feel? Okay if he/she did it "discreetly?"

Clothing is very personal. Children are people too and have feelings. It is 
intrusive and humiliating to require a clothing change just because it 
doesn't fit some snobbish standard of the teacher's. The only reason a child 
should need to change his clothes at school is if they are too wet or dirty 
to get through the day, and then the child will usually want to, and parents 
send a change of clothes to keep in the child's cubby for this reason.

This is about meanness. It's stupid and ignorant for a teacher to do this. 
Waldorf claims to be about "protecting" childhood, well, I choose to protect 
*my* child from this kind of mindless unkindness. If there is an issue that 
the child's clothes violate the dress code, take it up with the parents.

Having said this, I should say for the record, I did *not* see this practice 
at our school. Parents were certainly hassled to dress their kids 
"correctly," but children were not shamed. I was appalled to hear anyone 
would take it to this length.

Diana

P.S. Harve, do you think you can explain to a child that his clothes are 
"inconsistent with the environment" and not make him feel *he* is 
inconsistent with the environment? Being "image-free" is more important than 
feeling loved and cared for?
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.2 ---------------

From: "Debra Snell" (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 19:24:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

[David]

)Also, AWSNA determines the criteria for AWSNA-affiliated schools only.  It
)is not clear to me that AWSNA is able to stop schools not affiliated with
)AWSNA from referring to themselves as waldorf (charter schools using
)"Waldorf methods" are one example).  I have never heard of legal action
)being taken, for instance.

[Deby]
None of the charter schools may use Waldorf in their name, but they are
allowed to say they are "Waldorf-Inspired." According to Betty Staley,
Milwaukee's public Waldorf school was given AWSNA's sanction to use Waldorf
in their name _because_ AWSNA set it up. 

[David]

)It is true that there is an expectation that the school's faculty will work
)together using anthroposophy, that they will study as a group (child study,
)anthroposophical study), that they will teach and support each other, that
)they will have a strong role in the operation of the school.  I would not
)call that being an "anthroposophical school", but perhaps Deby would.

[Deby]

I'll copy what you wrote, and change the name "Anthroposophical" just for
fun.


It is true that there is an expectation that the school's faculty will work
)together using Catholicism, that they will study as a group (child study,
)Catholicism study), that they will teach and support each other, that
)they will have a strong role in the operation of the school.  I would not
)call that being an "Catholic school", but perhaps Deby would.


Now how many people would believe that, David?


[David]

)I would also say that AWSNA is more of a "cheerleader" organization than a
)source of guidance or direction.  Waldorf schools (private ones, anyway)
)really ARE independent schools.  From where I sit (on the board of a
)developing waldorf school), I sometimes wish AWSNA were a stronger
)organization, and that we didn't have to be quite as independent as we are.

[Deby]

I agree that AWSNA needs to step up to the plate. If they have trademarked
the name, they should know what product they sell. Their quality control is
abominable.


[David]

)Sometimes I do, anyway (when I'm feeling sorry for myself).  Oftentimes,
)though, I relish our independence.  I get the sense that AWSNA is trying to
)strengthen itself, too, and be more of a force in shaping waldorf education.

[Deby]

Young Waldorf schools constantly work towards AWSNA's recognition as a full
member or sponsored school. This desire to gain "full status" contributes to
the Anthroposophical dogma of striving Waldorf initiatives. 

Been there, done that.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.3 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 02:40:23 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[David Cann:]
)It is true that there is an expectation that the school's faculty will 
) )work together using anthroposophy, that they will study as a group 
) )(child study, anthroposophical study), that they will teach and support 
) )each other, that they will have a strong role in the operation of the 
) )school.  I would not call that being an "anthroposophical school", but 
) )perhaps Deby would.


You wouldn't call a school whose faculty works together using anthroposophy 
and does anthroposophical study, an anthroposophical school? Okay.

Or put it this way, if this is *not* an anthroposophical school, what *is* 
an anthroposophical school?

Diana

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.4 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 02:56:51 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


[Lisa wrote:]
I'd like to hear what people feel about the following: a child who -- and 
this was in a lower grade, 1st or 2nd, I think -- consistently squirmed so 
much that he toppled out of his chair. As a punishment, the child was 
required to kneel in front of his desk for about a half hour, doing his work 
that way (on his knees, in other words.) Does that seem unduly harsh to 
anyone but me?

Yes, that is cruel. That is from another era, an era of child-rearing 
practices like washing a child's mouth out with soap (which I have seen a 
Waldorf teacher do) that we should have put behind us now. Waldorf has some 
catching up to do.

It is normal for a 6-year-old, especially a boy, to fall out of his chair.

It is actually a distinct phase, and it passes, and I was very interested to 
read this in a child development book, because my son went through this at 
age 6 like clockwork. Literally, they fall out of their chairs onto the 
floor, even *without* squirming. One minute they are sitting and the next 
they are on the floor, and they are surprised as anyone else. They aren't 
trying to be obnoxious or get attention, it's *NORMAL*. Gosh, I am shouting 
too much tonight, but punishments like this really need to be exposed to the 
light of day.

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.5 ---------------

From: Peter Farrell (peter.farrell vu.edu.au)
Subject: Peter and Joel continue to discuss objective introspection
  (sort of)
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 08:47:25 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

In keeping with my previous post on this topic here is another response to
part of Joel's post.

Joel writes
)    Of course, given the above, as I said, some of the
)practices in teacher training are clearly in violation
)of these fundamental principles and facts, and are
)therefore quite regretable.  This also makes for a
)considerable dilemma on the part of a spiritual
)scientist on this list, because those individuals fully
)living in the paradigm of materialism (the condition
)that is supposed to exist so that humanity could be
)completely free to self determine its knowledge of, and
)relatiionship to, the divine) have a right to their
)views.
)
)    They are not to be dissuaded from them.

I am very happy to be dissuaded. However, I'd like to be dissuaded on my
terms. It seems to me that Joel and others claim to know and understand
something. They claim to know and understand something sufficiently well
that this understanding informs education, medicine, history, science,
religion ... (my list not Joel's) in their view. If there really is
understanding rather than self delusion then that is worth being dissuaded
for. I simply want evidence of this understanding. From where I see it, the
evidence which I can find which is acceptable to me indicates that the
understanding is seriously flawed. 

As well, the notion that others are not to be dissuaded is not
reciprocated. I have stated before that I am perfectly happy for people to
have religious beliefs. If the beliefs are publically claimed to be based
on scientific and empirical principles, then I believe that opens the way
for argument. As well, in my view, if religious believers attempt through
democratic processes to cause laws to be enacted which are based on
religious beliefs that also opens the way for argument. 

I absolutely support Joel's right to his views. Would I like to change
Joel's views? I think just a tiny bit. My views about a number of issues
have been shifted since I have taken part in this list. I can quantify some
of that. In particular, I am grateful to the list for teaching me and
forcing me to learn about Goethe. I have also clarified many of my own
thoughts about the nature of science in the attempt to be clear.


Joel supplies some evidence of argument within Anthroposophy
)   Is this the kind of thing you were looking for?

Probably. I'll examine it some more.

Joel writes and asks

[much cut]
)    Of course, you have asked your question, hoping to
)come up with something that can be "tested".  This
)expectation adds another quality, namely why should the
)doctor use "testing", in the natural science sense, as
)an adjunct to his practice.  I can understand why you
)seem to want it, but I am adding the question, why
)should he want it?

The very short answer is to keep himself honest. It is all very well to say
he knows. It is useful to test this knowing, because one of the most
important lessons to be learned from "materialistic" science is how easy it
is to delude oneself, particularly when one "desires" a particular outcome.
Considerable effort goes into the design of experiments to mitigate against
this. 

I don't think this should just apply to Anthroposophists. I think it should
apply very broadly. Economists need this sort of testing applied to their
work desperately. The predictive power of economists is at best woeful and
at worst non existent, but governments and companies around the world
listen to them and, what's worse, act on the advice. They do us all a great
disservice by claiming science and not subjecting themselves to the failure
of their own predictions.

A bit later after some description of Anthroposophical medical practice
Joel continues
)    Now the point of this is to ask, where does what is
)going on here come to the point of being "tested" in
)the ways habitual within materialistic medicine.
)Clearly the patient recovers from the symptoms (the
)doctor and the patient make this judgment), but except
)to prove things to skeptics, what tool does a "test"
)give the doctor of anthroposophical medicine.  He has
)his "test" completely in whether he is able to give
)relief to the patient.  Why should he satisfy your
)need, driven by your process of doubt?
)
The patient may or may not recover, the progress of the recovery may vary,
all sorts of things might happen. How does he know he gave relief to the
patient as opposed to the possibility that the patient was to recover for
reasons which have nothing to do with the practitioner.

Joel continues

)    Of course, "better" in the above is not to be
)understood in a absolute sense, but in a relative
)sense, for it is the doctor that is choosing to
)practice what Dan, in his overzealousness, wants to
)call "quackery".  As you know, there are many
)safeguards in place, for the protection of patients,
)and if anthroposophical medicine really was "quackery",
)it would certainly have that reputation by now.
)

I note that Antroposophical medicine is at least mentioned at
www.quackwatch.com. I believe that it does have that reputation. What
safeguards are in place? Aren't safeguards at least partly synonomous with
testing in the sense I mean?

Joel continues after a bit.

) At the same time it is the crux of the issue
)between you and I, Peter.  And it is at this crux that
)the whole issue of "spiritual freedom" becomes
)relevant.
)
)    The natural scientist exists within a cultural
)paradigm that believes that if a special elite group of
)workers has established among themselves the proof of
)something, then these proven facts are to be taught to
)children.  Thus materialism is perpetuated in our
)schools as a belief system, although as people mature
)in their educations, they usually discover that the
)real situation is somewhat different.


Unfortunately, I think what Joel says here is right. And it is very bad.

)    My elder brother is a microbiologist.  We have had
)many conversations along these same lines.  He has
)remarked to me (he is now retired) that the biggest
)disappointments of his university teaching career (he
)also did research) were the far too frequent encounters
)with students who expected science to be absolute and
)defined - to be a system of ideas fixed in nature, that
)only needed to be learned, and certainly did not
)contain any ambiguities or problems requiring difficult
)thinking judgments.  It was, of course, nearly
)impossible to teach such a mind anything about
)microbiology, or the scientific research protocols upon
)which its understandings were based.
)
)    So where does this leave us?
)

Joel's decription of his brother's experience is very similar to my own
experience. And it is extraordinarily depressing. I find it difficult to
get students to escape from the authoritarian nature of their primary and
secondary schooling. I want students to engage with me in debate. Very few
do. They want the easiest route to knowledge (as opposed to understanding)
as though there is an easy route. Does this problem arise from the way
science is taught at schools? Is Waldorf science teaching any better or is
it worse? How does Dan's criticism of education theory in general encompass
these notions?  

I don't know the definitive answer to these questions. I think the answer
to the first question is yes. I have read a number of Stephen Tonkin's
posts over the last few years and I suspect he is a very good science
teacher. Have any of his students gone further with science? 

Joel goes on to speak more about spiritual science and goetheanism but I
will address that later.

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.n2271.6 ---------------

From: "Debra Snell" (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:28:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

[Deby]

I imagine Paulina is steaming over this. I hope she is feeling well, we
haven't heard from her in awhile...

When I observed in Max's 2nd grade class, I watched the children play their
flutes. One young girl accidently dropped her reed in the middle of the
song. The Waldorf teacher went running over to stop her from bending down to
retrieve it from the floor. The teacher held her by her shoulders and
insisted that the girl just pretend like she was playing. The girl was
upset. I could tell that she really wanted to play, not just pretend. I
remember thinking that the teacher - student interaction was far more
distracting during the song than it would have been if the girl could have
just quietly picked up the reed, which was lying in front of her feet. 

Another time, during Harvest time, the students were making scarecrows
outside. As the project was winding down, my good friend and I, who
volunteered to help, was standing back and watching his son interact with
the scarecrow he had just completed. Ryan was kind of close dancing with it
- clearly pleased with his work, and was acting like his scarecrow were
almost real. We were watching him and talking about how precious the moment
was. Suddenly, the teacher just grabbed the scarecrow (which he was being
very gentle with...) and verbally chastised Ryan for his behavior. She made
him go sit at the corner of the area, away from the other children. Ryan was
very confused, and his father and I blown away.
None of us saw her coming. She really ruined a precious moment. That kind of
thing happened a lot, but it was subtle stuff, and hard to define. It wasn't
like the other children were all sitting quietly or Ryan was tearing it
apart. Many of the kids had completed their scarecrows and were playing on
the play structures. 



)[Lisa wrote:]
)I'd like to hear what people feel about the following: a child who -- and 
)this was in a lower grade, 1st or 2nd, I think -- consistently squirmed so 
)much that he toppled out of his chair. As a punishment, the child was 
)required to kneel in front of his desk for about a half hour, doing his work 
)that way (on his knees, in other words.) Does that seem unduly harsh to 
)anyone but me?
)
)Yes, that is cruel. That is from another era, an era of child-rearing 
)practices like washing a child's mouth out with soap (which I have seen a 
)Waldorf teacher do) that we should have put behind us now. Waldorf has some 
)catching up to do.
)
)It is normal for a 6-year-old, especially a boy, to fall out of his chair.
)
)It is actually a distinct phase, and it passes, and I was very interested to 
)read this in a child development book, because my son went through this at 
)age 6 like clockwork. Literally, they fall out of their chairs onto the 
)floor, even *without* squirming. One minute they are sitting and the next 
)they are on the floor, and they are surprised as anyone else. They aren't 
)trying to be obnoxious or get attention, it's *NORMAL*. Gosh, I am shouting 
)too much tonight, but punishments like this really need to be exposed to the 
)light of day.
)
)Diana
)________________________________________________________________________
)Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
)



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.7 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Lisa, Diane, Deby
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 18:04:12 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (200005042136.OAA26133 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (200005042342.QAA15201 lists1.best.com)

)[Lisa wrote this to Heather, a Waldorf teacher:]
)"Your answers made so much sense and reflected your obvious respect for
)children and their parents. How I wish all teachers (Waldorf or not!)
)considered matters as thoughtfully as you apparently do."
)
)[Sarina]
)Huh? I thought Waldorf teachers were all cult members or dupes, blindly
)following religious dogma? Could it be that NOT ALL Waldorf teachers shame
)their students and steal their lunches and wrap them in silks?
)
)How balanced of you to finally admit that... or have you?
)
)For the record, the folks at my son's school NEVER
)
)-changed anyone's clothes
)-confiscated lunch items
)-stuck to useless dogma
)-acted like they knew better than parents
)-preached "no TV!"
)
)In fact, the people at my local school make it a point to be respectful of
)parents choices, and their dilemmas. Can you believe that!?


Guess it's that layed back island influence. Don't let them build a Steiner
college anywhere near you, and don't promote continuing education for your
teachers.

What size is your Waldorf school, Sarina? Grades,




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.8 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 11:44:29 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


I don't even understand the teachers' actions in either of these cases, but 
they certainly indicate the teacher was an angry person. Now we are almost 
certainly going to hear from Waldorf defenders today that we are discussing 
"anecdotes" and have "no evidence" that these practices are common in 
Waldorf. (Also, that we ourselves had bad experiences and are thus 
irrational because of our anger. Quick, turn the tables.)

Can we just head this off at the pass and say, "Yes they are anecdotes. No 
we have no statistics for you." Happy?

Nevertheless these incidents have an unmistakable Waldorf character about 
them. It is impossible to imagine either of the incidents Deby described at 
a non-Waldorf school. They just don't make any sense unless you picture 
precisely what the teacher expected, how ritualistic the flute playing was 
supposed to be, and how it was more important for the group to *appear* to 
be playing together than to actually make music -- so important that it is 
okay to achieve the appearance of playing together by force --holding the 
girl by the shoulders. Exactly what the teacher's agenda with the scarecrows 
must have been, I can't guess, but obviously Ryan wasn't having the 
"experience" she expected him to be having.

It ought to be easy to fire a teacher who made a child kneel on the floor 
for half an hour as Lisa described. I'm developing an idea that Waldorf 
actually attracts certain people who don't like children very much, and have 
experienced a lot of control and manipulation, if not outright abuse, in 
their own upbringing. All these precise rules about things like what images 
are okay on your tee-shirt and what kind of container is okay for your lunch 
and which grain is best to eat on Wednesday *lead* to abuses of this sort, 
at least with a person who is already angry; they lead to valuing rules over 
people, appearance over reality (i.e, the environment *looks* nurturing but 
may not be).

[Deby;]
)One young girl accidently dropped her reed in the middle of the
)song. The Waldorf teacher went running over to stop her from bending )down 
)to retrieve it from the floor. The teacher held her by her )shoulders and 
)insisted that the girl just pretend like she was playing

)Another time, during Harvest time, the students were making scarecrows
)outside. As the project was winding down, my good friend and I, who
)volunteered to help, was standing back and watching his son interact )with 
)the scarecrow he had just completed. Ryan was kind of close )dancing with 
)it - clearly pleased with his work, and was acting like )his scarecrow were 
)almost real. We were watching him and talking about )how precious the 
)moment was. Suddenly, the teacher just grabbed the )scarecrow (which he was 
)being very gentle with...) and verbally )chastised Ryan for his behavior. 
)She made him go sit at the corner of )the area, away from the other 
)children.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.9 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 07:55:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


)David:  Answer:  A school that teaches about anthroposophy is a
)anthroposophical school.  IN a Waldorf school the teachers work together
)using anthroposophy; it do not deny it (and I just said it).  The point is
)the school; the anthroposophy is the tool, not the goal.  I recognize that
)you don't believe me.
)
)For Deby:  The "Catholic" substitution is a smokescreen, because it assumes
)an unprovable one-to-one correlation between Catholicism and anthroposophy
)(i.e., one is a religion, so the other must be).  Despite your assertions, I
)don't believe it.

[Deby]

David, get your head out of the sand. Parochial schools don't teach any
more Catholicism than Waldorf schools teach Anthroposophy, yet parochial
schools are considered religious.
Waldorf will be considered religious one day too. Mark my words.







--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2271.10 ---------------

From: "Sarina McDonald" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 07:59:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005050141.SAA03823 lists1.best.com)

Diana

)The point of the question was just that you shouldn't do it *because
Waldorf
)says so*. I'm sure we agree! Please say we agree! :)

WE AGREE! WE AGREE!!! *applause*
:-)

I'm taking my kid to the zoo - have a nice weekend everyone.

Sarina McDonald
Bainbridge Island, WA
pandora aa.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's nice to have a church to go to on Sunday morning.
Especially one that doesn't make you throw up."
                    -  Thomas N. Winter, Unitarian Universalist



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2271 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2272 --------------

    001 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    002 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - RE: Open House was: which school?
    003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: organic food, cotton clothing
    004 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
    005 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: food rules, etc.
    006 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    007 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - RE: Open House was: which school?
    008 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: firsthand knowledge
    009 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: food rules, etc.
    010 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: Steve and Joel discuss evolution

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.1 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 15:04:05 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


I know I'm asking for flak but this clothing-inside-out thing is eating at 
me. I read back over this thread of the past few days.

We need some professional opinions here -- *outside* of Waldorf -- about 
treating children this way. Where is Alan?

[Chand wrote:]
)It is also not clear to me that the teacher was not simply correcting )the 
)situation - removing the logo from view.

The offensive logo is not on a sign by the side of the road, but on a 
child's body. The teacher cannot "remove it from view" without intruding on 
the child's dignity. You cannot explain your views on media contamination to 
the child in any way that they are not going to be simply bewildered by and 
end up feeling they have done something wrong. It is not like, "Whoops! 
There's a great big grape juice stain on your shirt! Let's get a clean 
shirt!"

[Chand:]
)  You assume shaming, but )to really know this, you must ask the )teacher 
)his or her intent, or )talk to someone who put this question )to the 
)teacher.

No, to know if it is shaming you need to ask the child about his or her 
feelings. Or consider what your own feelings might be, imagine yourself back 
in first or second grade and required to change clothes because a shirt you 
felt was perfectly nice looking -- you probably picked it yourself -- is not 
acceptable to the teacher. Or imagine how you would feel if someone at your 
office today quietly requested you wear your shirt inside out for the rest 
of the day because it is not "consistent with the environment," as I think 
Harve put it. Could you show your face to your colleagues later, go out to 
lunch as usual? I think "shame" is the precise word. Anger too, in a healthy 
child.

Diana


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.2 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 15:13:42 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



Here is my take on this perpetual "they don't teach anthroposophy" thing. 
They are having their cake and eating it too. They are teaching it in the 
way that they consider *most* effective: not via direct instruction or 
explication of the abstract concepts of anthroposophy, because that is not 
the best way to teach children *anything*, not even the times tables. The 
best way to teach young children, as you can find elaborated in numerous 
Waldorf and Steiner books, is by story, song, music, movement, images. They 
do this because it works *better*, but then it is disingenous to say, "but 
we're not teaching anthroposophy," just because terms like "anthroposophy" 
are not actually used.

Diana

[David]
)David:  Answer:  A school that teaches about anthroposophy is a
) )anthroposophical school.  IN a Waldorf school the teachers work )together 
)using anthroposophy; it do not deny it (and I just said it).  )The point is 
)the school; the anthroposophy is the tool, not the goal.  )I recognize that 
)you don't believe me.

) )For Deby:  The "Catholic" substitution is a smokescreen, because it 
) )assumes an unprovable one-to-one correlation between Catholicism and 
) )anthroposophy (i.e., one is a religion, so the other must be).  )Despite 
)your assertions, I don't believe it.

[Deby]

)David, get your head out of the sand. Parochial schools don't teach any
)more Catholicism than Waldorf schools teach Anthroposophy, yet )parochial 
)schools are considered religious.
)Waldorf will be considered religious one day too. Mark my words.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.3 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 15:17:17 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[Diana]

) )The point of the question was just that you shouldn't do it *because
)Waldorf says so*. I'm sure we agree! Please say we agree! :)

[Sarina]
)WE AGREE! WE AGREE!!! *applause*
):-)

Thank goodness! I was getting desperate for some peer approval here. :)
Diana

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.4 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing (was: DEBY)
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 16:39:14 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[Heather:]
)Parents would approach me about not being strict enough on this issue and 
)not banning lunchables.  The parent in question a single dad who seemed 
)overwhelmed by the propect of parenting and didn't seems know what to buy 
)for lunch . I wasn't going to condemn him for it.
)I made suggestions- but I wasn't going to force him to do it or make his 
)child feel like Dad's lunch wasn't good enough.

Thank you, Heather! One more comment on this whole teachers-know-best 
mentality: It is distressing for children to learn that the teacher thinks 
their parents are incompetent in dressing and feeding them, and this is what 
the teacher conveys if he or she disapproves of the child's clothing or 
lunch. It isn't nurturing or kind to undermine the child's trust in the 
parent, who is supposed to be their prime source of security, unless there 
is suspicion of actual abuse or neglect, which Waldorf teachers seem oddly 
uninterested in considering.

Diana

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.5 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 11:45:46 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Diana]

)P.S. Harve, do you think you can explain to a child that his clothes are
)"inconsistent with the environment" and not make him feel *he* is
)inconsistent with the environment? Being "image-free" is more important 
)than
)feeling loved and cared for?

[Harve]

Sorry.  When you make a choice to send your child to a school that prohibits 
media images on shirts or requires uniforms you need to get with the 
program.  I don't think there is anything wrong with requiring a change of 
clothes.  When you go to a store that requires shoes, you wear shoes.  When 
you go to a restaurant that requires a tie and jacket, you put it on.  As 
far as me being "incensed"  if it happened to my child--the answer is that I 
would conform with the rules that were set forth when I decided to send my 
child to that school.  I simply do not think there is anything wrong with 
saying that we don't wear shirts with media images and asking the child to 
change the shirt.  It doesn't have to be done in front of the class.  It can 
be done discreetly.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.6 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 17:17:20 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Debra,

Everything you say makes perfect sense if we are debating the why's and 
wherefore's of a school dress code, and discussing what are the parents' 
obligations in adhering to the dress code.

But I am discussing *the child*, who I think gets lost (ironically) in these 
abstractions, and in all these good intentions to avoid media influence, 
etc.. The child who is at school and for whatever reason, is in the "wrong" 
clothes. What do you do? You can schedule another meeting to discuss the 
matter with the parents. And/or you can shame the child by requiring him or 
her to turn the shirt inside out.

If you are interested in nurturing children, you talk over the problem with 
the parents, explain the rules and set limits for what will be acceptable. 
(That is what should be done "discreetly" -- not clothing changes in the 
middle of the school day.)

If you are interested in a "pure" environment, you shame the child.

It is very sad to overlook the child as a person with feelings in favor of 
concern over the "rules" and how the environment looks.

Diana

[Harve]
)
)Sorry.  When you make a choice to send your child to a school that 
)prohibits
)media images on shirts or requires uniforms you need to get with the
)program.  I don't think there is anything wrong with requiring a change of
)clothes.  When you go to a store that requires shoes, you wear shoes.  When
)you go to a restaurant that requires a tie and jacket, you put it on.  As
)far as me being "incensed"  if it happened to my child--the answer is that 
)I
)would conform with the rules that were set forth when I decided to send my
)child to that school.  I simply do not think there is anything wrong with
)saying that we don't wear shirts with media images and asking the child to
)change the shirt.  It doesn't have to be done in front of the class.  It 
)can
)be done discreetly.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.7 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 12:20:59 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

)[Deby]
)
)David, get your head out of the sand. Parochial schools don't teach any
)more Catholicism than Waldorf schools teach Anthroposophy, yet parochial
)schools are considered religious.

[Harve]

I've cut back on commenting because it's reached a point where everything 
seems circular, but the above quote is ridiculous.  First,  children that 
attend Catholic school learn about Jesus and prepare for the sacraments 
based on the Catholic faith.  They learn the substantive theology underlying 
the tradition. They attend Mass.  In a Waldorf school, the children do not 
learn substantive Anthroposophy.  Deby, could you supply a reading list that 
waldorf schools require children to read Steiner?

Additionally, I have a comment concerning the new wave of anecdotal stories. 
  I have no idea whether they are true or not.  I'm sure that incidents 
similar to these happened, but based on the critics' rendition(s) of other 
stories and constant overgeneralizing, I have no faith in their ability to 
report objectively.

Harve
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.8 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: firsthand knowledge
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 12:33:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Lisa]:
)     Gotta correct you, Chand! I do have firsthand knowledge of the
)way children who wear the "wrong" tee-shirt or shirt are handled by
)some Waldorf teachers. In fact, quite some time ago I brought this
)method of dealing with dress code infractions up on both this list and
)the SJU list, and got several responses offlist from parents whose
)children had been made to turn their tee-shirts (or shirts) inside out
)and wear them that way all day.
)     My firsthand knowledge comes from the fact that it happened in my
)daughter's (former) class.

Great, Lisa!  I am glad you are writing of your own experience.   I assume from
your earlier post:

[Lisa]:
)Doesn't it make more sense to see if
)the "infraction" occurs again, and if it does, to take the issue up
)with the parent?

That the child in your case only wore the logo one time, that the teacher had
never discussed this issue with the parent and that the teacher intended to
modify the behavior using shame.  Correct me if I am have jumped to these
conclusions.

This being the case, the teacher is in the wrong.  I do not agree with using
shame in this way.  In the Waldorf schools I am familiar with, unruly children
are often sent to lower (or upper) grades.  This may also be considered a type
of shaming, but I do not have a problem with this as the child in these cases
bears some of the responsibility for his/her actions, which are of course
disruptive to the entire class.  In public school when I was a kid, unruly kids
were often sent to the bench during recess or to the principals office during
class.  These solutions, as I recall, had elements of both shame and fear.
Nobody thought these solution inappropriate, however.

[Lisa]:
)     Chand, you can deny this all you want. But it happens -- and not
just in one classroom at one school.

I do not deny that the inside out tee-shirt happens, or even in more than the
one classroom you have evidence of.  I am not convinced that your interpretation
of it as shaming the child is always true - except in your case where you know
that the teacher never approached the child's parents and inverted the tee-shirt
in a public and shaming way.  This technique is not part of the teacher training
program my wife attended.  In her school, the kids all have a change of clothes
anyway for when they get wet.  She has not removed (or asked the children to
remove) their clothing for any other reason.

[Lisa]:
)Perhaps the reason these thing
)happen has something to do with the fact that Waldorf depends heavily
)on the "authority" of the teacher; read any Steiner lectures about how
)young children learn and develop, and you will see that word --
)"authority" -- repeated.

All classrooms depend upon the authority of the teacher.  Without it, you have
chaos.

 [Lisa]:
)The child is supposed to learn to respect the
)authority of the teacher in all things until age 14 -- even to the
)point where the child should not be thinking for herself (at least in
an abstract way) until age 14. Until then, the student must depend on
the "authority" of the teacher.

In your dreams.  Waldorf is supposed to impart a love of learning and a
curiosity for the world around us.

[Lisa]:
)   So, if the teacher says your clothes and lunch are wrong, they must
)be wrong. Naturally, the child whose tee shirt is wrong (or who eats
)sugar or watches TV) becomes a joke to the other children, who by her
)actions has sanctioned shame as a way of keep

(This is as much of your post as I received)

I am sorry that your daughter had such a lousy teacher.  Ostracizing a child is
not acceptable behavior.  This is not Waldorf education, however.  This is a bad
teacher, and these, unfortunately, populate all school systems.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.9 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 12:44:34 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Diana]
)
)But I am discussing *the child*, who I think gets lost (ironically) in 
)these
)abstractions, and in all these good intentions to avoid media influence,
)etc.. The child who is at school and for whatever reason, is in the "wrong"
)clothes. What do you do? You can schedule another meeting to discuss the
)matter with the parents. And/or you can shame the child by requiring him or
)her to turn the shirt inside out.

[Harve]

I am not in favor of shaming the child.  The teacher should not single out a 
child and point out to everyone that s/he is wearing the wrong shirt.  But I 
think that there are other ways to do it.  The easiest way is to have a 
change of clothing available.  If you let one child wear the PowerRangers 
shirt all day, the next day 5 are going to show up with those types of 
shirts.  You can see that on casual Friday days.  Slacks turn into jeans 
turn into cutoffs turn into bare midriffs and flipflops and then we get a 
stupid memo.  For the record, I have always had a problem at various places 
of employment because I tend to dress down.


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2272.10 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Steve and Joel discuss evolution
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 12:50:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Joel]:
)    There used to be a "monster" theory.   The
)"monster" theory was that nature would produce a big
)change, through some mechanism of mutation, and then
)this would explain the appearence of complicated organs
)in new species.  The problem with this "ad hoc
)hypothesis", is that mutations in nature are always
)sterile - that is they don't reproduce, can't have
)decedents and thus can't pass on their imagined new
)mutated traits.

I don't know about a "monster theory".  I do know that the statement "mutations
in nature are always sterile is false.

Let me point out that mutations that result in duplicated structures are not
difficult to produce.  There are ways to make eye-like structures appear on the
legs (and other parts) of flies by the mis-expression of a single gene.  This
being the case, it is perhaps not so outlandishly ad hoc to move from
light-sensitive pigments (found in plants, bacteria and animals) to specialized
light-sensitive cells, to groups of these cells and so on.

[Joel]:
)    What makes the whole thing really and seriously
)flawed, is that all the mental effort is spent on
)refining the array of "ad hoc hypothesis" rather than
)trying to find a testable and adequate theory in accord
)with the actual facts.  It is as if macroevolution was
)a religion of scientists, and had to be preserved at
)all costs because it is a key element of materialism.
)If the fossil record is allowed to speak, it clearly
)says, sorry, but there are no inbetween species, so
)guess again folks.

It is easier to test microevolution - but the results are not generally as
striking as the production of new species.  I still remember the example of the
North American leopard frog that I learned in high school.  The Northeastern
frogs could breed with the mid-Western frogs, which in turn could breed with the
Southern frogs.  The Southern and Northeastern frogs could not breed, however.
As the definition of a species is really nothing more than a population of
organisms that can interbreed, the leopard frog was interpreted as an example of
microevolution in action.

Perhaps you are more comfortable with Stephen Gould's ideas on punctated
equilibrium.

Chand




--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2272 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2273 --------------

    001 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: organic food, cotton clothing
    002 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - RE: Open House was: which school?
    003 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: food rules, etc.
    004 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: food rules, etc.
    005 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - RE: Open House was: which school?
    006 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    007 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: food rules, etc.
    008 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - RE: Open House was: which school?
    009 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: food rules, etc.
    010 - Chand.Desai mcmail.vander - Re: food rules, etc.

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.1 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: organic food, cotton clothing
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 12:59:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Diana]:
)The point of the question was just that you shouldn't do it *because Waldorf
)says so*. I'm sure we agree! Please say we agree! :)

I agree with this.  I don't agree that Waldorf says this - the critics do.  My
wife offers advice when asked - and asks if the child is getting to bed on time
if the child is consistently late.  If the answere is "yes," she suggests that
the child go to bed earlier.  Some people may interpret this suggestion as a
command.  Some critics may interpret this suggestion as imposition of a
cult-like lifestyle.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.2 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 18:05:43 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[Harve:]
)Additionally, I have a comment concerning the new wave of anecdotal 
)stories.  I have no idea whether they are true or not.  I'm sure that 
)incidents similar to these happened, but based on the critics' rendition(s) 
)of other stories and constant overgeneralizing, I have no faith in their 
)ability to report objectively.

I have a comment about anecdotes too.

No one has any reason to believe they are true, or believe they are not 
true. Though it is sort of strange to imagine that previously happy Waldorf 
parents sometimes, inexplicably, turn feral and decide to make up lies about 
Waldorf on the Internet.

*Everything* that is said here is anecdotal, by critics and supporters 
alike, and can be believed or not believed. The critics generalize. The 
supporters generalize, based on their positive experiences, usually at just 
one or two schools (or in Harve's case, none). The supporters believe, on 
very slim evidence statistically, that their good experiences (or "hearsay" 
about others' experiences) are what Waldorf is "really" about.

If anyone has non-anecdotal information on Waldorf -- such as scientific 
studies with the big numbers, random sampling, control groups, blinded data 
analysis -- please let us know, and we'll discuss that for awhile instead of 
our anecdotes.

Meanwhile, complaints about anecdotes, or generic suggestions that they are 
not credible, are right up there with ad hominems in stopping discussion.

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.3 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:06:33 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Deby]

)I imagine Paulina is steaming over this. I hope she is feeling well, we
)haven't heard from her in awhile...
)
)When I observed in Max's 2nd grade class, I watched the children play their
)flutes. One young girl accidently dropped her reed in the middle of the
)song. The Waldorf teacher went running over to stop her from bending down to
)retrieve it from the floor. The teacher held her by her shoulders and
)insisted that the girl just pretend like she was playing. The girl was
)upset. I could tell that she really wanted to play, not just pretend. I
)remember thinking that the teacher - student interaction was far more
)distracting during the song than it would have been if the girl could have
)just quietly picked up the reed, which was lying in front of her feet.
)
)Another time, during Harvest time, the students were making scarecrows
)outside. As the project was winding down, my good friend and I, who
)volunteered to help, was standing back and watching his son interact with
)the scarecrow he had just completed. Ryan was kind of close dancing with it
)- clearly pleased with his work, and was acting like his scarecrow were
)almost real. We were watching him and talking about how precious the moment
)was. Suddenly, the teacher just grabbed the scarecrow (which he was being
)very gentle with...) and verbally chastised Ryan for his behavior. She made
)him go sit at the corner of the area, away from the other children. Ryan was
)very confused, and his father and I blown away.
)None of us saw her coming. She really ruined a precious moment. That kind of
)thing happened a lot, but it was subtle stuff, and hard to define. It wasn't
)like the other children were all sitting quietly or Ryan was tearing it
)apart. Many of the kids had completed their scarecrows and were playing on
)the play structures.

Well, you've convinced me of what a crappy school you founded.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.4 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:08:38 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Diana]:
)Nevertheless these incidents have an unmistakable Waldorf character about
)them.

They have the unmistakable character of schools the critics children attended.
Hmmm.  I wonder if there is a connection.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.5 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:11:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Deby]

)David, get your head out of the sand. Parochial schools don't teach any
)more Catholicism than Waldorf schools teach Anthroposophy, yet parochial
)schools are considered religious.
)Waldorf will be considered religious one day too. Mark my words.

Not true.  We investigated a Catholic school for our daughters.  Not only did
they give preference to Catholics for entry into the school, they had a hour a
day instruction in the Catholic religion.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.6 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 18:29:22 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



)[Diana]
))
))But I am discussing *the child*, who I think gets lost (ironically) in
))these
))abstractions, and in all these good intentions to avoid media influence,
))etc.. The child who is at school and for whatever reason, is in the 
))"wrong"
))clothes. What do you do? You can schedule another meeting to discuss the
))matter with the parents. And/or you can shame the child by requiring him 
))or
))her to turn the shirt inside out.
)
)[Harve]
)
)I am not in favor of shaming the child.  The teacher should not single out 
)a
)child and point out to everyone that s/he is wearing the wrong shirt.  But 
)I
)think that there are other ways to do it.  The easiest way is to have a
)change of clothing available.  If you let one child wear the PowerRangers
)shirt all day, the next day 5 are going to show up with those types of
)shirts.  You can see that on casual Friday days.  Slacks turn into jeans
)turn into cutoffs turn into bare midriffs and flipflops and then we get a
)stupid memo.  For the record, I have always had a problem at various places
)of employment because I tend to dress down.

Debra, here is what I really truly think, and I'm not getting my work done 
here because I'm really distracted by this!

I don't think you would agree with shaming a child. If I thought you would, 
I'd think you were a jerk and there wouldn't be any point in talking to you 
about it. What happens is, parents hear the explanation of the no-media, no 
cartoons on the T shirts policy, and they like it, because they feel sort of 
antsy about all the media influence and like the idea the teachers are "with 
them" in fighting this. When they see all the kids in solid colors or a 
simple pattern, they think, "It feels right. Little kids get to be little 
kids, and I *can* fight off all the corporations that want to turn my child 
into a consumer, and these people here at the Waldorf school are right on, 
and they're the only ones trying to solve this problem." (Of course they're 
not.)

But now you have a rule, and after you have a rule, you have to enforce the 
rule consistently, for the very reasons you point out (if one child wears 
Power Rangers, tomorrow several more will) and because it is 
against-the-norm it becomes a rule that some people keep breaking, either 
through not getting it or not caring or being too busy or distracted in 
their own lives to worry too much about what the kid wears to school as long 
as it is clean.

You start trying to enforce the rule, and it is hard sometimes, and because 
the principle it represents means something to you, you get a little 
obsessed with your rule, and your rule becomes a fetish, and pretty soon you 
have forgotten why you instituted this rule. (Oh, yea, avoiding media 
influence is *good* for the kids.) Now you have perfectly nice people who 
certainly would not agree with shaming a child, doing exactly that, or 
rationalizing the teacher doing it, because they have not noticed when and 
where this process of making the environment perfect for the children, 
turned into really acting like a jerk and not noticing that they are not 
actually even being nice to the children anymore.

Also, you have people predisposed to be unkind to children, looking for a 
theory to justify their unkindness.

And that is why it is important to point out how things like 
no-images-on-your-t-shirt become cultish. Finally, someone like Heather 
says, "But it's ridiculous to make them turn their shirt inside out," and 
hopefully that's the point where we think, "Oh right. What was I thinking?" 
But inside the culture of Waldorf it's hard to hang onto that kind of common 
sense.

Diana
P.S. When I worked in publishing in New York in the mid-'80s, we had summer 
hours and could leave at noon on Fridays. Some people came Friday mornings 
in their bathing suits, literally. Of course publishing is not as 
"corporate" as other environments.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.7 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:29:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Chand wrote:]
))It is also not clear to me that the teacher was not simply correcting )the
))situation - removing the logo from view.

[Diana]:
)The offensive logo is not on a sign by the side of the road, but on a
)child's body. The teacher cannot "remove it from view" without intruding on
)the child's dignity. You cannot explain your views on media contamination to
)the child in any way that they are not going to be simply bewildered by and
)end up feeling they have done something wrong.

Each of us has our own issues.  When I was a kid, I sometimes dressed myself
with my shirt inside out or my fly down.  This is still an occasional
occurrance.  Just one of those thing I have to live with.  It is not a big deal
having a shirt inside out.  Some of my wife's shirts look that way when they are
inside in and I get confused when folding them - flipping them one way and then
the other.

[Diana]:
) It is not like, "Whoops!
)There's a great big grape juice stain on your shirt! Let's get a clean
)shirt!"

Its like "Whoops! There's a great big media stain on your shirt! Let's get a
clean shirt!"

[Chand:]
))  You assume shaming, but )to really know this, you must ask the )teacher
))his or her intent, or )talk to someone who put this question )to the
))teacher.

[Diana]:
)No, to know if it is shaming you need to ask the child about his or her
)feelings

So the child defines what the teachers actions mean?  Not.  I think intent is
key.  If the teacher intends shame but changes the shirt in a non-shaming way,
that is bad.  If the teacher is trying to deal with a repeated behavior which is
against the rules, and talking to the parent doesn't work, then this is a
solution.  Another solution would be to send the child home, which is more
extreme, in my opinion.



[Diana]:
)Or consider what your own feelings might be, imagine yourself back
)in first or second grade and required to change clothes because a shirt you
)felt was perfectly nice looking -- you probably picked it yourself -- is not
)acceptable to the teacher.

You assume too much.  When I was a kid, if I knew I was breaking a rule, and I
broke it anyway, I felt like I deserved what was coming.  If the kid doesn't
know the dress code, the kid must be told, and his/her parents.

[Diana]:
)Or imagine how you would feel if someone at your
)office today quietly requested you wear your shirt inside out for the rest
)of the day because it is not "consistent with the environment," as I think
)Harve put it. Could you show your face to your colleagues later, go out to
)lunch as usual? I think "shame" is the precise word. Anger too, in a healthy
)child.

I can not only imagine this, but I live it.  I ride in on my bike and change
when I get into my office - at least if I have a meeting.  When I haven't, there
have been remarks.  There are expectations of dress even in a research
environment, and sometimes holey shorts are at odds with it.  You have to be
pretty clueless to be unaware of this.  I am close to clueless - my wife often
has me change pants or shirt if they don't match on those occasions when we go
out.

Chand




--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.8 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 13:37:34 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Diana]
)
)Meanwhile, complaints about anecdotes, or generic suggestions that they are
)not credible, are right up there with ad hominems in stopping discussion.

[Harve]

I'm not complaining about anecdotes.  I'm just saying that I no longer fully 
believe them.  Check the archives--I once assumed their truth and expressed 
my disagreement.

So, go ahead and anecdote away.  If I don't have anything better to do, I 
might just count how many different versions of the same story are told.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.9 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 14:07:40 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Diana]

If I thought you
)would,
)I'd think you were a jerk and there wouldn't be any point in talking to you
)about it. What happens is, parents hear the explanation of the no-media, no
)cartoons on the T shirts policy, and they like it, because they feel sort 
)of
)antsy about all the media influence and like the idea the teachers are 
)"with
)them" in fighting this. When they see all the kids in solid colors or a
)simple pattern, they think, "It feels right. Little kids get to be little
)kids, and I *can* fight off all the corporations that want to turn my child
)into a consumer, and these people here at the Waldorf school are right on,
)and they're the only ones trying to solve this problem." (Of course they're
)not.)

{Harve]

You are making some huge assumptions here based on your experience as an 
assistant to some pretty antisocial preschool teachers.  Maybe some people 
think such as this and maybe some don't.  My son just started talking about 
PowerRangers and I cringed.  Does he wear some media shirts?  Yes, I'm sure 
I've bought some Pooh shirts and he has Hot Wheels shoes and a lot was 
handed down.  Would he wear them to a Waldorf school?  No.  Because the 
school doesn't want the children to wear them.  They are inconsistent with 
the articulated policies and environment.  The classrooms are spare and 
beautiful.  Media clothing is distracting.  They encourage the children to 
talk about the media.  I never thought about it as fighting the 
corporations, but if that has some impact against commercialism, then I 
encourage it.  Some parents send their children to Waldorf because they 
actually believe in these things.  That is the philosophy of the school.  If 
you  don't buy it, then you are at the wrong school.


[Diana]

)But now you have a rule, and after you have a rule, you have to enforce the
)rule consistently, for the very reasons you point out (if one child wears
)Power Rangers, tomorrow several more will) and because it is
)against-the-norm it becomes a rule that some people keep breaking, either
)through not getting it or not caring or being too busy or distracted in
)their own lives to worry too much about what the kid wears to school as 
)long
)as it is clean.

[harve]

Then this should be a wake up call.

[Diana]
)
)You start trying to enforce the rule, and it is hard sometimes, and because
)the principle it represents means something to you, you get a little
)obsessed with your rule, and your rule becomes a fetish, and pretty soon 
)you
)have forgotten why you instituted this rule. (Oh, yea, avoiding media
)influence is *good* for the kids.) Now you have perfectly nice people who
)certainly would not agree with shaming a child, doing exactly that, or
)rationalizing the teacher doing it, because they have not noticed when and
)where this process of making the environment perfect for the children,
)turned into really acting like a jerk and not noticing that they are not
)actually even being nice to the children anymore.
)
)Also, you have people predisposed to be unkind to children, looking for a
)theory to justify their unkindness.


)And that is why it is important to point out how things like
)no-images-on-your-t-shirt become cultish.

[Harve]

This is ridiculous.  If you toss around the word "cult" too much it loses 
its meaning and impact.  Does that mean requiring men to wear ties to court 
is cultish?  Is requiring police officers to wear uniforms cultish?  How 
about bus operators, waitresses?

I've got a lot of work to do too.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2273.10 ---------------

From: Chand.Desai mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 14:25:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline



[Diana]:
)You start trying to enforce the rule, and it is hard sometimes, and because
)the principle it represents means something to you, you get a little
)obsessed with your rule, and your rule becomes a fetish, and pretty soon you
)have forgotten why you instituted this rule. (Oh, yea, avoiding media
)influence is *good* for the kids.) Now you have perfectly nice people who
)certainly would not agree with shaming a child, doing exactly that, or
)rationalizing the teacher doing it, because they have not noticed when and
)where this process of making the environment perfect for the children,
)turned into really acting like a jerk and not noticing that they are not
)actually even being nice to the children anymore.

Please.  This argument applies to any rule.

In a public swimming pool, my friend and I were with our daughters who must have
been three or four at the time.  We were talking while walking along with them
as they held on to the edge of the pool and made their way around it.  The
lifeguard came over and told us it was against the rules to go deeper than you
could stand up if, as was obviously the case with our daughters, you couldn't
swim.  My friend argued with the lifeguard trying to point out that we were
right there beside our girls.  No go.  In exasperation my friend finally said
"Did you ever wonder how the Nazis got started?"

Uh oh - back to the fascists - must be some way to link this up.

You can get obsessed with anything - even criticizing Waldorf.

Chand




--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2273 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2274 --------------

    001 - momof2gals mindspring.com - media obsession
    002 - momof2gals mindspring.com - got cut off
    003 - "debra harvey" (debharve  - Re: media obsession
    004 - SINGERCARP aol.com        - Re: food rules, etc.
    005 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - the t-shirt police are everywhere! was: firsthand knowledge
    006 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Open House was: which school?
    007 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Diana wants to know what an "anthroposophical school" is
    008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: food rules, etc.
    009 - "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2ga - more media matters
    010 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.1 ---------------

From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: media obsession
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 16:42:30 -0400

   Just a thought or two about the issue of protecting children from 
the "media" by not dressing them in clothes bearing media images or 
corporate logos.
     I found that with my own children and with many of their friends, 
the teachers' constant verbal attacks on TV and movies (and the 
inside-out-tee-shirt punishment), etc. combined to make TV, movies, 
Pokemon, Power Rangers, Power Puff Girls, etc. "forbidden fruit" and 
therefore, something to be coveted. The children who were allowed to 
watch some TV -- especially shows like "GooseBumps" -- took great 
delight in whispering with the others that they had "seen that show" 
and those who were not allowed would beg to watch it. (I have seen the 
same thing happen with sugary food and junk. They want it more if a 
big to do is made of it.)
    My daughter's former class was probably typical as far as 
representing Waldorf school families' policies on TV-viewing. We had 
maybe two children in the class who were not allowed any TV, a handful 
who had unlimited access (TVs in their rooms) and the rest were like 
my children -- strictly limited to content and length of time they 
were allowed to watch.  
      I know for sure this was a great frustration to the class 
teacher, because we talked about it. One day, however, she did 
something that thoroughly upset me: she asked the children who watch 
TV at home or who go to movies or rent videos to "raise your hands." 
Of course, many did raise their hands. She then (according to my 
daughter) launched into a talk about how TV is "bad for your brain" 
and that the children in her class were NOT to watch TV or 
movies/videos preferably at all, but if they had to, they could watch 
on Friday or Saturday nights because those were the only "non school 
nights."
     I remember my daughter was quite upset about this because it set 
up a conflict in her. Here were her parents saying that limited 
amounts of TV and movies were OK. Here was her Teacher, who she had 
been told for four years to love and respect, saying the something mom 
and dad said was OK was not, in fact, OK. My daughter (a very obedient 
and well mannered girl and that's not only my opinion) also expressed 
a bit of anger at "why Mrs. XXXX can tell us what to do at our house?"
     This is another example of how children can be made to feel 
ashamed, put on the spot, etc. when a teacher's zeal for doing things 
the "Waldorf Way" -- in this case, protecting their innnocence from 
the assault of the media -- overrules the teacher's common sense about 
how to treat children kindly and fairly.
    (Just for the record, I was not the only parent unhappy with this 
approach. And I did let the teacher know that while I understood her 
wish for us all the be "on the same page" about this, I felt 
addressing the children directly was inappropriate.)
      * Also for the record, I must say that while I support limiting 
children's exposure to TV, my objection is probably not the same 
(completely) as is Waldorf's. I think human beings are probably better 
off (especially small children) doing something instead of watching 
something, and I do not want my children indoctrinated in "consumer 
culture" heavily when they are young. The Anthro objection goes 
deeper, and involves the fact that the TV is a machine and therefore 
"Ahrimanic," and as such, threatening to the child's spirit. I was 
told that Sony Walkmans and c


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.2 ---------------

From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: got cut off
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 17:00:58 -0400

For some reason, when I post from a computer that is not my usual 
machine, messages always get cut off at the end, no matter how many 
times I "return" or how far I scroll down.

My last message on "media obsession" should have said, in the last 
sentence, that "I have been told the same is true of Sony Walkmans and 
computers."

I hope this all comes through. Forgive the inconvenience, please.








--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.3 ---------------

From: "debra harvey" (debharve hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: media obsession
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 16:14:19 CDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

[Lisa]

I found that with my own children and with many of their friends,
)the teachers' constant verbal attacks on TV and movies (and the
)inside-out-tee-shirt punishment), etc. combined to make TV, movies,
)Pokemon, Power Rangers, Power Puff Girls, etc. "forbidden fruit" and
)therefore, something to be coveted. The children who were allowed to
)watch some TV -- especially shows like "GooseBumps" -- took great
)delight in whispering with the others that they had "seen that show"
)and those who were not allowed would beg to watch it. (I have seen the
)same thing happen with sugary food and junk. They want it more if a
)big to do is made of it.)

[Harve]

That was the point the admissions director made at the waldorf school to 
which we applied.  My thought is:  if I'm going to spend $10,000 a year with 
the expectation that my children will be going to a media free school that 
doesn't allow sugar and junk food, why shouldn't I be upset if there are 
children enrolled that have televisions in their rooms, wear PowerRanger 
shirts to school and eat Twinkies at lunch?

[Lisa]

)       I know for sure this was a great frustration to the class
)teacher, because we talked about it.

[Harve]

I can understand her frustration.  She was not getting support from the 
parents.  I think she should have called a parents meeting.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.4 ---------------

From: SINGERCARP aol.com
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 17:34:23 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mom of 2... wrote:
)) Another method of punishment/correction I saw involved having a child 
)) who called out in class without raising of hands stand facing the 
)) front of the class with his arms  -- teacher called them "silver 
)) swords" -- crossed over his chest. He had to stand there for about 15 
)) minutes.) Heather, is that a particularly Waldorf thing to do? I ask 
)) because of the reference to the "silver swords

Heather answered:
)Sounds to me like a rather poor use of the "E' position in Eurythmy.
)"E" is supposed to have  focusing  and grounding qualities ( this could be 
backed
)up by developmental psychology- since it is a midline activity- but I am not 
going
)to give the full research).
)In a class, having the children stand up with arms crossed to get ready for 
the
)next activity is a good way to keep them from poking each other. You don't 
)however, single them out or make them stand for extended periods of time 
with )tensely drawn shoulders.

Two scenes come to mind when I read this:
An )expereinced( class teacher who had her whole class sit with arms held in 
the described position for long streches of time faced serious problems in 
later years and threw in the towel in 6th grade because of discipline 
problems. The class )exploded( and nothing would help.

Is this a typical waldorf thing?
My public school teacher made late coming students stand in the corner of the 
classroom until my father intervened. (He could not stand the idea). The 
teacher stopped when my father forbid me to obey the teacher.
There is something typical Waldorf about the )silver swords(: it seems that 
waldorf teachers make mistakes using the inappropriate waldorf elements and 
public school teachers do the same with inappropriate public school elements.

An other Waldorf teacher who used the )arms crossed for discipline( was asked 
to quit in the middle of the school year because of serious discipline 
problems.

It seems that no matter what pedagogical system you teach by - forcing lower 
grade students to hold still over a long period of time is most frustrating 
for them and eventually results in a counterreaction. The described teachers 
are fortunately a very small minority of the teachers I've observed in 
Waldorf schools. (they also are no longer teaching)

Tom

*****************************************************
******* Tom Singer-Carpenter * www.waldorfseminar.de *******
*******      www.eGroups.com/group/Waldorf-Diskurs      *******
********              (German Waldorf Critics List)              ********
*****************************************************


--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.5 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: the t-shirt police are everywhere! was: firsthand knowledge
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 17:41:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005042017.NAA13217 lists1.best.com)

Dear momof2gals, from popof3galsandtwoguys,

    At the mental hospital where I worked for ten years, there were
t-shirt policies enforced on all units.  As this hospital was part of a
chain of 80 plus for profit hospitals, I always assumed the policies where
pretty much standard in the industry.

    I suppose cartoons were okay, but alcohol, drugs, heavy metal, nudity,
etc were forbidden (basically whatever the nurses wanted to interdict).
The basic idea was that people were in the hospital for a purpose and that
certain kinds of t-shirts violated the spirit of that purpose.

    I saw this argued at a meeting on the chemical dependency unit, with a
group of older addicts and alcholics supporting the hospitals view, while
the younger ones claimed their freedoms were violated.  One of the long
time drunks put it very pointedly.  "If you want to get clean and sober,
you don't want no f'n distractions, period".

    School is certainly a very serious enterprise.  Many schools
(including public) have strong dress codes.  My daughter's LA school
(inner city chicano) has uniforms, a not only not uncommon practice, but
one that is growing.

    None of this is about conforming.  It is all about the nature of the
environment, what kind of influences enter and are fostered, and being
serious about the purposes for which everyone is there.

warm regards,
joel

momof2gals mindspring.com wrote:

)      Gotta correct you, Chand! I do have firsthand knowledge of the
) way children who wear the "wrong" tee-shirt or shirt are handled by
) some Waldorf teachers. In fact, quite some time ago I brought this
) method of dealing with dress code infractions up on both this list and
) the SJU list, and got several responses offlist from parents whose
) children had been made to turn their tee-shirts (or shirts) inside out
) and wear them that way all day.
)      My firsthand knowledge comes from the fact that it happened in my
) daughter's (former) class. I also heard offlist from a former parent
) at our school who became alerted to the fact that this had happened to
) his child when she came running out to the carpool line wearing an
) inside-out tee-shirt! The parent was livid, and felt that sending the
) child back the next day wearing the same shirt -- still inside out --
) might be a suitable response. (Of course, he did not. He just withdrew
) his daughter and found other education alternatives. No, the teeshirt
) was not the single thing that caused the family to leave -- as is
) usual, it was a combination of those kinds of things mixed with fears
) about quality of education.)
)      Chand, you can deny this all you want. But it happens -- and not
) just in one classroom at one school. Perhaps the reason these thing
) happen has something to do with the fact that Waldorf depends heavily
) on the "authority" of the teacher; read any Steiner lectures about how
) young children learn and develop, and you will see that word --
) "authority" -- repeated. The child is supposed to learn to respect the
) authority of the teacher in all things until age 14 -- even to the
) point where the child should not be thinking for herself (at least in
) an abstract way) until age 14. Until then, the student must depend on
) the "authority" of the teacher.
)    So, if the teacher says your clothes and lunch are wrong, they must
) be wrong. Naturally, the child whose tee shirt is wrong (or who eats
) sugar or watches TV) becomes a joke to the other children, who by her
) actions has sanctioned shame as a way of keep





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.6 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Re: Open House was: which school?
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 17:58:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (200005032123.OAA24095 lists1.best.com) (200005042325.QAA01987 lists1.best.com)

Dear Deby,

    You tell only half the story, probably through lack of sufficient
information, or perhaps an unwillingness to think the thing through and ask
questions.

    "Just anyone" has founded schools and called them Waldorf.  David wants to
sell educational materials he calls Waldorf.

    The association did not exist in the beginning of Waldorf education in
America.  The early schools existed first.  The association has a history, part
of which involves trying to create some standards for something that seemed to
be growing out of control.  It is a quite natural response to real events.
Please recall that you noted that its standards are not 100%, but 80%.  This
means that the association honors and respects the freedom of the individual
schools to hire teachers who are not trained.  You may wish the percentage was
some other number, or that the association do other things then it does, but
you're not interesting in promoting Waldorf, or trying to maintain standards
for those schools that want to use that name.

    Has the association sued any school and compelled them not to use the name
Waldorf?  Has it sued David?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

warm regards,
joel

Debra Snell wrote:

) )geo wrote:
) )
) )) This is the exact point which would help alleviate the
) )) problems that some people have with Waldorf.
) )) Dose anyone on the list have a data-base or a central
) )) collection of all the literature from all the Waldorf
) )) schools concerning religion? Is there supposed to be a
) )) certain statement for all the schools?
) )
) [Joel]
) )
) )    I would like to remind you, George, that this list is a
) )very poor place to get real information about Waldorf.
) )PLANS has a quite definite agenda, and much that comes from
) )the critics is "adjusted" to conform to that agenda.
) )
) )    Waldorf Schools don't have a central organizational
) )base.  Usually a Waldorf school is born and grown in a
) )specific place out of the initiative of individuals living
) )in that place.  Frequently schools will start with just a
) )kindergarden, or perhaps also a first grade, depending upon
) )the needs of the children of those individuals founding the
) )school.
) )
) )    There is no centrally organized body that goes around
) )founding Waldorf Schools.
)
) [Deby]
)
) Waldorf is a trademarked name, Joel. AWSNA determines the criteria of who
) gets to use their name. If I remember correctly, 80% of the teachers must
) be Waldorf -trained in order to use the word "Waldorf" in your name.
)
) In order to be an AWSNA reacognized school, it has to be an
) Anthroposophical school.
)
) George, if you don't want to listen to the "critics", contact AWSNA for the
) criteria. Joel is spoon-feeding you the party line, pretending that any one
) can start any kind of school and call it Waldorf. I vote for truth in
) advertising (AGAIN).
)
) AWSNA = Association of Waldorf Schools in North America.





--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.7 ---------------

From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Diana wants to know what an "anthroposophical school" is
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 18:59:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Diana, you wrote in response to a remark of David's:
"You wouldn't call a school whose faculty works
together using anthroposophy and does anthroposophical
study, an anthroposophical school? Okay.

Or put it this way, if this is *not* an
anthroposophical school, what *is*
an anthroposophical school?"

Dear Diana,

    I suspect that you wrote the above hoping to score
a point or two, but on the off chance I am wrong
(something that happens with normal frequency), and
that you would like to know, I will endeavor to shed
some light on an interesting question (when taken
seriously).

    The word "anthroposophical" is a very interesting
word, given what happens when we take a noun
(anthroposophy) and add "ical".  We then change a noun
into an adjective (an adjective is used to give a
"quality" to a noun).  So then we have
"anthroposophical medicine" and similar types of
language.

    So the question becomes what is "anthroposophy" as
a modifying quality of something else.

    Rudolf Steiner said someplace (according to
hearsay) that when anthroposophy acts in the world, it
disappears.

    Even the critics seem to support that view, in that
they insist "anthroposophy" is hidden in all things
Waldorf.  Somehow it has "disappeared" into Waldorf,
and lurks there as some kind of ghost (or spirit?).

    Alas, the critics do suffer a major confusion (and
a major agenda point of view), in that they think
(believe, hope, wish, insist, demand) that
anthroposophy is a religion.  They have even filed a
law suit that they think will settle this. (of course
it won't, for in spite of all the remarkable things our
judiciary can do, it can't change one thing into
something else).

    Now joel has been trying for some time to educate
the critics (and not a few Steinerites as well),  that
anthroposophy is not a what (a content), but a how (a
method).  It is a kind of inner activity (that begins
with objective introspection).

    What this means, is that if something is
"anthroposophical", it is based on this new form of
cognition.

    An anthroposophical "school" is a school where this
intuitive consciousness is sought and practiced in the
soul life of the teachers.  It is invisible, being an
act of consciousness and not a belief system or an
ideology.  It has "disappeared" and become the "spirit"
of the school.

warm regards,
joel







--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.8 ---------------

From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 15:58:30 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (200005051910.MAA04004 lists1.best.com)

)
){Harve]
)
)You are making some huge assumptions here based on your experience as an
)assistant to some pretty antisocial preschool teachers.  Maybe some people
)think such as this and maybe some don't.  My son just started talking about
)PowerRangers and I cringed.  Does he wear some media shirts?  Yes, I'm sure
)I've bought some Pooh shirts and he has Hot Wheels shoes and a lot was
)handed down.  Would he wear them to a Waldorf school?  No.  Because the
)school doesn't want the children to wear them.  They are inconsistent with
)the articulated policies and environment.  The classrooms are spare and
)beautiful.  Media clothing is distracting.  They encourage the children to
)talk about the media.  I never thought about it as fighting the
)corporations, but if that has some impact against commercialism, then I
)encourage it.  Some parents send their children to Waldorf because they
)actually believe in these things.  That is the philosophy of the school.  If
)you  don't buy it, then you are at the wrong school.
)

[Deby]

For the record, my boys clothing and shoes fit in well with Waldorf. We
didn't have to run out and buy anything new. In fact, all of their pants
were homemade, and they wouldn't wear anything else, long before Waldorf.
Many of the WE moms begged me to make pants for their boys. Their little
Doc Martin boots were adored by all. Their shirts were always plain because
their batik fabric pants were not. In other words, my boys were Waldorf
poster kids from the first day.

My point is, even if you agree with the clothing, food, and media rules, it
doesn't necessarily mean Waldorf is for you.
-ds







--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.9 ---------------

From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: more media matters
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 21:14:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Debra Harvey commented that she would not want to spend $10,000 a year
to send her children to a "media-free" school only to have them attend with
classmates who have TVs and computers in their rooms -- a situation that my
family encountered at our local Waldorf school.
    DH suggested that our class teacher should have called a meeting. Well,
we had a meeting of parents about every 6 to 8 weeks, and the subject was
brought up a number of times.
     But let's face it: some people just do not buy into the idea that there
is anything negative about exposing children to TV, unless the content is
extremely violent or sexual. There ARE some people at Waldorf who take in
the whole thing and go home and throw out all their plastic toys, etc. and
put the TV in the attic. And then there are some that are like my family --
in betweeners (I think most fall into this category.) TV/computer use is
strictly supervised and limited, and we have some plastic toys, etc. (We
also could never follow the strictures against recorded music. Music is a
big thing in our home, and there is  no way we could do without our jazz,
blues, rock, classical, bluegrass and opera music!)
    My guess is that the situation is probably the same at most American
Waldorf schools. But I mentioned this before: one of my little daughter's
current kindergarten classmates is from Germany, and her parents are both
doctors who came here to study for a year. At a birthday party for the girl,
her mother told me enthusiastically how much she (the mom) loves the Waldorf
school here, because it is so "flexible" compared to the German school.
(Remember I told how she gestured to the mix of toys -- some plastic, some
natural materials -- on the floor from the party, and said "This would be
impossible in Germany." I asked her what she meant, and she said that a
German Waldorf family could never have plastic toys, even at home.)
    Since then, she has said the same thing a number of times, commenting
that our school store sells rubber/plastic balls and plastic sandtoys, and
saying how much she liked it. She told me that in Germany, if her child went
to Waldorf, she could watch no TV at all, and that was that. (She went on to
say how delightful she found the movie version of "Charlotte's Web" to be,
and she was so glad her daughter got to see it. She professes to be a fan of
moderation.)
    The woman who use to teach German at our school told me some time ago
that in Germany, if you do not promise to take away TV, your child will not
be accepted in Waldorf.



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2274.10 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 01:44:31 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed



[Chand, minimizing the t-shirt-inside-out thing:]
)Each of us has our own issues.  When I was a kid, I sometimes dressed 
) )myself with my shirt inside out or my fly down.  This is still an 
) )occasional occurrance.  Just one of those thing I have to live with.  )It 
)is not a big deal having a shirt inside out.

You're funny, Chand, but the situation is not about how somebody dresses 
*themselves* but an *enforced* change of clothes.


[Diana]:
) ) It is not like, "Whoops! There's a great big grape juice stain on your 
)shirt! Let's get a clean shirt!"

[Chand:]
)Its like "Whoops! There's a great big media stain on your shirt! Let's get 
)a clean shirt!"

You know, I almost wrote that myself, and I thought, no, they'll think I'm 
making fun of them.

[Chand:]
) ))  You assume shaming, but )to really know this, you must ask the 
) )teacher his or her intent,

[Diana]:
) )No, to know if it is shaming you need to ask the child about his or )her 
)feelings

[Chand:]
)So the child defines what the teachers actions mean? Not.

The child defines whether the child feels shame, unless the child has been 
taught not to talk about it.

Diana
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n2274 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n2275 --------------

    001 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    002 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: food rules, etc.
    003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: media obsession
    004 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Re: media obsession
    005 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - anthroposophical medicine and quackwatch
    006 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Re: Steve and Joel discuss evolution
    007 - Rechomba cs.com           - Re: anthroposophical medicine and quackwatch
    008 - "Sarina McDonald" (pandor - Recent Discussions
    009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Admin: ad hominem warning
    010 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Mystery-Mongering (was: WS teachers training reading list)

--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2275.1 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 01:53:39 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed




[Harve, on media images on clothing:]
)They are inconsistent with the articulated policies and environment.  )The 
)classrooms are spare and beautiful.  Media clothing is )distracting.  They 
)encourage the children to talk about the media.  I )never thought about it 
)as fighting the corporations, but if that has )some impact against 
)commercialism, then I encourage it.  Some parents )send their children to 
)Waldorf because they actually believe in these )things.  That is the 
)philosophy of the school.  If you  don't buy it, )then you are at the wrong 
)school.

I think we've exhausted the topic, but for the record I did not disagree 
with the Waldorf dress code, only with shaming children in order to enforce 
it. Though it does seem to me something is not quite right with the policy 
if enforcing it is so bloody difficult.

[Diana:]
))And that is why it is important to point out how things like
))no-images-on-your-t-shirt become cultish.

[Harve]

)This is ridiculous.  If you toss around the word "cult" too much it loses 
)its meaning and impact.  Does that mean requiring men to wear )ties to 
)court is cultish?  Is requiring police officers to wear )uniforms cultish? 
)How about bus operators, waitresses?

I'm not a person who is enthusiastic for dress codes or uniforms in general, 
but the issue was how the dress code is enforced. When you are shaming 
little children in order to enforce it, something has gone awry, and 
cult-like behavior is going on.

Diana

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2275.2 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: food rules, etc.
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 01:57:12 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed


[Diana:]
) )You start trying to enforce the rule, and it is hard sometimes, and 
) )because the principle it represents means something to you, you get a 
) )little obsessed with your rule, and your rule becomes a fetish,

)Please.  This argument applies to any rule.

Yes, it does. Then again, if the rule is serving its purpose, nobody needs 
to obsess over it. If you are constantly having to make people miserable in 
order to enforce it, maybe you should reconsider the rule.

Diana

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n2275.3 ---------------

From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: media obsession
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 02:01:46 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed




[Lisa wrote:]

)     My daughter's former class was probably typical as far as
)representing Waldorf school families' policies on TV-viewing. We had
)maybe two children in the class who were not allowed any TV, a handful
)who had unlimited access (TVs in their rooms) and the rest were like
)my children -- strictly limited to content and length of time they
)were allowed to watch.

I'm sure this is typical, at least in the US. The schools are part of the 
real world around them, much as they might prefer not to be. I suspect 
Waldorf kids watch on average very far less than th