return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
By mdarmody home.com
Sports
By pacbay home.com
RE: Sports
By mdarmody home.com
Re: Sports
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: Sports
By pacbay home.com
Re: Sports
By pacbay home.com
Re: Sports
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: Sports
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Sports
By pacbay home.com
Re: Sports
By pacbay home.com
Re: Sports
By steve premofine.com
Re: Sports
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Sports
By canndw netzero.net
Re: Sports
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Sports
By winters_diana hotmail.com
RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By rbc supranet.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By rbc supranet.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By rbc supranet.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
SWA "science" (Was RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy)
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By soma mwt.net
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:54:22 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
(()There is a large list; Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List,
)with in the order of
)600 participants (early 1998) from all over the world. It can be found via
)http://www.waldorfworld.net/waldorflist/index.htm Maybe the
)participants on that
)list, also comprising a number of waldorf teachers, administrators
)and board members,
)can help out in understanding your experience.
He didn't mention one thing: if you criticize Waldorf there they'll
throw you out. Devotees and dupes only. That policy is the reason
waldorf-critics exists.
-Dan Dugan))
I think I've expended enough energy on the whole thing, clearly we were not
a good fit for Waldorf. Glad I found out now rather than later when perhaps
my child would be labeled a choleric because of one bad day!!! The labeling
really bothers me. My child is an extremist, he's either extremely happy,
personable, talkative charming and delightful, or he's sullen, whiny,
stubborn and uncooperative. There's really no in between with him and I
would hate for him to be treated as one way or the other. I'd like him to
find a happy and healthy balance.
I thank everyone for the information you've shared and will continue to read
this list with interest. I will post again after I've talked to the school
and found out the reasons they give for scoring low on our application.
Thanks,
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19-Apr-2001 16:55:08 GMT
From: (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Sports
Though the reverence notion concerning sports may hold true for some
teachers, there is another reason that reaches further into genuinue
insight into child psychology and development. Having been trained as as
a Waldorf teacher in 1974-75 and student taught, (and being trained in
educational psychology at UW Madison), there is another other more
sensible reason is in examining the role and nature of some sports. In
soccer, football, and other contact sports, Steiner's concern was in
arresting instinctual and violent feelings in children that comes
through the control and use of the legs and arms in some sports. The
legs are the most powerful and potentially damaging limbs to others as
we know from martial arts and soccer. The use of tennis racquets is
simply mock agression towards another as evidenced by modern killer
attitudes in tennis training for kids as young as 5. (This is not to say
some sports cannot be re-taught in a cooperative way. Squash is a good
example- I play it. The sportsmanship and concern for your opponent is
one of the highest in all sports next to Golf.) Thus the main reason for
"banning" certain modern sports is primarily for delaying and not
encouraging at young age the passion, interest and habits of mock
violence and agression. This runs absolutely counter to modern education
and culture. I belong to a health club in Lafayette Ca. (near SF) On a
weekly basis, I watch little kids in karate uniforms learning to kick
and hit other kids in practice rituals. The underlying principles of
discipline and self defenses training (for 6 year olds) is hardly a
reason. In cultures where soccer is the main sport for over 20 years,
the violence of fans and participants is well known with deaths
occuring! Hockey is another one as is football- violence on the field
or ice. (I played for years and know the prevailing attitude- hurt and
overcome your opponent).
Jeff Auen
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:12:05 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: Sports
How about ballet?
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 18:24:23 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
I played hockey all my years ay school, and we were never taught in the way
you describe, hockey is a team game and good exercise!
)
) Hockey is another one as is football- violence on the field
) or ice. (I played for years and know the prevailing attitude- hurt and
) overcome your opponent).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:39:48 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
This may be true a the lower levels but in high school and college and then
into the pros, its another story. In no other sport
would the stick hitting and fights be tolerated. One arm swing in football
and Basketball one would be instantly ejected. It also depends on the region
of the country where one is exposed to hockey.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: Sports
)
) I played hockey all my years ay school, and we were never taught in the
way
) you describe, hockey is a team game and good exercise!
) )
) ) Hockey is another one as is football- violence on the field
) ) or ice. (I played for years and know the prevailing attitude- hurt and
) ) overcome your opponent).
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:11:59 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
I like ballet, especially modern ballet but what are the effects on body and
"soul".
The "muse of Waldorf " may say its an unnatural and artificial connection
to music with movement" - overly stylized and stiff. (that's my opinion, at
least). And it prejudices against certain body types, encourages an
obsession with thinness leading to possible anorexia and damage to the feet,
arches, and toes. I used to be in the orthopedic industry and saw the
crippling effects of ballet on adults. Young adults even in their 30's can
be crippled for life due to hammertoes and arch damage.
I think the issue here is trying to either integrate Waldorf with mainstream
cultural educational needs or vice versa. Those attracted to it or to hybrid
schools are looking to create something for their kids different from the
values and vision of mainstream culture. There are problems with early 20th
century values, the obtuseness and "mystical content" of Steiner writings,
etc. but like a "school of the arts" , its a specialty educational forum
and not for everyone. If one want both worlds, a hybrid school incorporating
the essentials with conventional methods may be better (or created).
Jeff Auen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: RE: Sports
) How about ballet?
)
) Marinell
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:29:15 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
It also depends on the region
) of the country where one is exposed to hockey.
I was exposed to hockey in the UK
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:31:45 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
)
) The "muse of Waldorf " may say its an unnatural and artificial connection
) to music with movement" - overly stylized and stiff.
I must say this describes eurythmy to a T
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
Marinell
) I thank everyone for the information you've shared
) and will continue to read
) this list with interest. I will post again after
) I've talked to the school
) and found out the reasons they give for scoring low
) on our application.
Hi Marinell,
I did not welcome you by written methods via internet
as I am aware that you feel hurt by this scoring
policy set by this school. I have also heard of other
schools setting these kinds of tests for prospective
parents and I must say that I always felt bad for my
freinds who came back feeling dejected. I have always
detested the way schools can set up the mental
attitude 'if you are good enough or your child is good
enough we will accept'...Ugh! I have seen it from pre
school on up.
I wish you well and hope you find the answers and do
not hold it personally as a defintion of anything
wrong about you or your child. You sound really well
balanced to me in your thinking and understanding that
maybe you were really lucky to not have scored high
enough as maybe it was not the right school for your
family.
thoughtfully,
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:12:33 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sharon, you write
) Yes, the American continent sinking and the cycle continuing on to Mercury is from
) Blavatsky. A paraphrase and summary, not a quote, from Encyclopedia of Pseudo
) Science. If you remember... I was trying to give a *quick* explanation of *Atlantis*,
Well, to me trying to make something 'quickly' does not - in my world -
justify doing it consciously incorrectly, not caring or bothering if
what if you write is correct as you write it, which you clearly knew
judging from your awareness of the difference between Steiner and
Blavatsky, yet describing Blavatsky's view as if it was Steiner's.
Seeing the way you did it was the reason for my slightly poisonous
comment on indigestion and suggestion that maybe it would be good if you
were to take a break in between to digest what you read before
presenting it undigested on this list.
It was not, in the way Peter commonly twists things according to his
preconceptions when interpreting them, a suggestion that you should stop
reading what interests you, just that you save other people the work of
trying to digest what I think you should have made an effort at before
putting it on the list.
...
) I am perfectly aware that Steiner's evolutionary chronology goes: Ancient Saturn,
) Ancient Sun, Ancient Moon (which is the third incarnation of the earth),
In the naming of the days of the week out of long historical tradition,
it still lives as a memory of the past; first came a 'Cosmic
Saturn-day', then a 'Cosmic Sun-day', then a 'Cosmic Moon-day' (Lundi;
lunar day), Mardi (Tuesday) and Mercredi (Wednesday), Jeudi
(Jupiter-day; Thursday) and Vendredi (Venus-day, Friday).
) then Earth
) Evolution which consists of 7 epochs. We live in the 5th epoch when, according to
) Steiner, 'Semitism will wane and Christianity will be free from it'.
You write this as if it was a literal quote from Steiner. Can you point
to the source of it?
) After the Seventh
) Epoch Steiner's cycle will continue on Future Jupiter, next comes Future Venus then
) the Vulcan-Evolution continuing on towards the New Jerusalem.
To my understanding, what Steiner refers to as the future 'Jupiter
stage' of Earth is what is described in the Apocalypse of St John as the
New Jerusalem, not something that will come after a future Vulcan-stage.
) ) Sune:
) ) As it - to my understanding - will consist in the final intermingling of
) ) people of all nations, colours and races on a global scale, already seen
) ) developing in the American cultures, especially in North America,
) ) finally eradicating the meaning of 'race', chiselling out the individual
) ) human beings that we are, independent of everything external, calling
) ) the result of this intermingling of peoples of all races a 'race' shows
) ) the irrelevance of the term, only referring to the group consisting of
) ) individuals born out of a mixture of all races.
)
) Sharon:
) Wakey wakey Sune, can't you for one moment smell the pong of your master's racist
) philosophy that rots at the base of all his ramblings?
To tell you the truth, when having read the basic works of Steiner,
constituting the base of what you call his ramblings; Philosophy of
Freedom (http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA004/), Knowledge of the
Higher Worlds And Its Attainment (also at elib;
http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA010/), Theosophy (not yet at elib),
Occult Science - an outline (coming soon at elib) and visited and met
the people working at the Rudolf Steiner College in Jaerna
(http://www.antroposofi.org/pres-eng.htm), 'pong' is about as far from
what I smelled as one can get.
The closest I've come to smelling 'pong' in connection with
anthroposophy is probably at PLANS' site and on this list at times,
except probably for the new recommended book by the Grandt brothers at
PLANS' site, being my impression of it without having read it, yet
having read descriptions of it. In contrast to Peter Staudenmaier's free
fantasy descriptions of literature he has not read, I abstain from
saying more that I know about it.
) From my reading of the texts he
) is clearly saying that the future race will be white, male plant-like spirits.
'Future race' as you refer to it is a quite vague concept, as the
'future' refers to _everything_ lying in the future. I don't know where
you get if from that a future human being - far in the future - whose
speech organs will be transformed in such a way that what is created
with speech will be living beings, (is that what you are referring to?)
should be 'male'.
Also, I don't quite see what the reason should be that it should be
'white' in any present sense.
...
) Steiner tells
) us that those who do not use the opportunity on earth to develop the fifth principle
) will appear on Jupiter as subordinate nature spirits. (Nature Spirits, p 70, Rudolf
) Steiner).
Not having the series you refer to accessible, I can't comment on it.
Some years ago I saw a film with Kurt Russell as the 'hero'; 'Escape
from New York'. It was about a time when New York, or part of it, in the
future had developed into a zone where no civilized person could enter
anymore (http://www.geocities.com/j_nada/carp/escape.html). I think it
in an artistic way points to one similar development into the future,
people having given up up their humanity, slowly leaving the Kingdom of
humanity into the future.
) ) Sune:
) )
) ) I'm sorry for not having taken the time to write the above in my answer
) ) to your posting and instead made a teaser about what to my understanding
) ) stood out as confusing in it.
)
) Sharon:
) I forgive you. Steiner's ramblings leave a giant crease in my forehead every time I
) read them, but I am not confused. I may not be the best writer in the world, nor an
) Oxford scholar, I am merely "mommy the duped" who works to get you guys to own who
) you are! You are entitled to your racist beliefs or denial of them but you won't see
) me supporting or denying them.
I think what we see today as fading off external racial characteristics,
having once come into being far in the future and finally disappearing
in the future are very secondary to the central human element in every
human being, striving to develop independently of any external
characteristic, be it gender or race or any other external
characteristic.
That is also the central view and attitude I've met in all
anthroposophical context I've encountered during the last 30 years.
(Interracial marriages and children I find to be one such good
increasing development, as something that liberates people from the
bonds to 'race', independent of which it might be, as sign of the
future.)
If you want to call that 'racism', you're free to do it.
) ) Sune:
) ) But I admire your persistency in trying to get a clear picture of what
) ) you try to describe in your postings, and am sorry you come to do it for
) ) so bad reasons as your personal experience points to, at times colouring
) ) and distorting your descriptions in such a way as it does.
)
) Sharon:
) You know Sune, it is a pity that your organization duped me because I am not going to
) go away until you lot make some changes so that others, like me, won't have to have
) such a bizarre experience! I actually enjoy reading religion and philosophy and I
) thank Waldorf for giving me a reason to delve into the completely strange and bizarre
) world called "Anthroposophy". I was a Church - State separationist before I had my
) Waldorf nightmare, and now I'm more adamant in my position. I was a freethinker before
) my brush with Rudolf Steiner, now I am resolute in my beliefs, I appreciate my freedom
) from religion and I will work to keep it.
I'm as strong a supporter of freedom of thought as you, but think the
position of PLANS cultivates a subconscious, under noticed element of
cultural xenophobia in its cultivation of a number of the
argumentations. Once you learnt to notice and identify cultural
xenophobia from other contexts, you recognize it in PLANS'
argumentation.
) Religion and cults are not something new to me Sune, I have a very deep understanding
) of them from personal experience, and now from all my reading on the subject I have
) expanded my knowledge. There is no greater peace than freedom and I won't allow people
) like you to take it away.
I have no intention or wish whatsoever of taking any cultural freedom
away of opinion from you, a standpoint I find anthroposophy to be one of
the strongest supports of.
) I know what it means to feel free, and would *never* ask
) that your freedom *of* religion be taken from you. I only ask that your organization
) is forthright to parents, especially prospective ones, and that you respect the
) Constitution.
I think PLANS' misuses the Constitution in its cultivation of cultural
xenophobia in the field of education.
) Church and State...keep them separate!
Quite agree!
Also, State intervention and cultural freedom and diversity in
education, keep them reasonably separate!
The verdict, in the case similar to PLANS, shows there is some sense and
sensibility also in US courts.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:04:05 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
No, I would call Eurythmy an undeveloped movement art form that does not
relate to mundane sensibilities very well. At least Eurthmy has an inner
intention and relationship to language and movement, something most dance
forms do not to my eye. If one has not done it, I suggest at least trying
it. It looks and feels very much like Tai Chi or Chi Gung which from the
outside looks very strange and controlled but on the "inside" is very
effective and powerful. I have practiced all three so I do speak from
experience not theory.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: Sports
)
)
) )
) ) The "muse of Waldorf " may say its an unnatural and artificial
connection
) ) to music with movement" - overly stylized and stiff.
)
)
) I must say this describes eurythmy to a T
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:05:02 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
Hockey training in the Northern states and Canada is very different from my
experience especially in high school and college.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Sports
) It also depends on the region
) ) of the country where one is exposed to hockey.
)
) I was exposed to hockey in the UK
) )
) )
) )
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:08:43 -0700
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
On 19 Apr 2001, at 17:04, jeff auen wrote:
) No, I would call Eurythmy an undeveloped movement art form that does not
) relate to mundane sensibilities very well. At least Eurthmy has an inner
) intention and relationship to language and movement, something most dance
) forms do not to my eye. If one has not done it, I suggest at least trying
) it. It looks and feels very much like Tai Chi or Chi Gung which from the
) outside looks very strange and controlled but on the "inside" is very
) effective and powerful.
I know what all those words mean individually, but I'm not sure what they
mean when you put them all together.
What do you mean by "mundane sensibilities"? What is Eurythmy's "inner
intention" in your view? In what way is Eurythmy "on the inside very
effective and powerful"?
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:49:14 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: Sports
I would like to chip in, about the sports
discussion:
I donĄt think the crucial point here is *why* do
WSs ban this or that sport. They may have one
hundred reasons, as they have for everything;
anthroposophy is a system that can accomodate
anything.
What I personally find most questionable is the
BAN itself. What I find questionable is the
presumption, by WSs, that they can reach that far
into studentsĄ lives.
It could be argued that the school has the right
to choose which sports will be alowed in the
premises, which not. This may be arguable, yes;
but when I remember my school days, and all those
boys longing to kick a ball at break time, and the
teachers coming and puncturing the ball if some
more audacious group dared start a soccer game, I
wonder - which was more harmful for them, playing
the game or the violent reactions by the teachers?
Also, the ban on soccer is not limited to school
premises. In my school, parents were told off if
they alowed kids to play soccer at home or
anywhere. Not to mention *going* to a stadium,
this was certainly not alowed.
That a school finds they have any right to tell a
father not to take his boy to a stadium on Sunday
to watch their team play - this I find incredible
and unacceptable.
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:53:54 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Reading Peter Staudenmaier's discussions of racism within Anthroposophy has
raised what I think is an interesting question. On the plans website you
will find an artice by Hansson
(http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Hansson.html) entitled "Is
Anthroposophy science?". There is a quotation in the article from Steiner
about Einstein's theory of relativity. The question is is this attempt by
Steiner to criticise Einsteien connected to the argument about antisemitism.
It is interesting to note that in Germany in 1920 there was a movement to
discredit Einstein that was essentially antisemitic. There is a brief
reference to this in Banesh Hoffmann's biography (Einstein, Banesh Hoffmann
with the collaboration of Helen Dukas, Paladin, 1975) on page 143. In
particular Hoffmann discusses a German scientist, Lenard, who won the Nobel
prize in 1905, who became a "virulent disparager" of Einstein's work. Lenard
later became an enthusiastic member of the Nazi party. Does Steiner's screwy
science make sense if it is viewed as part of an antisemitic ideology which
attempted to promote Aryan science with Goethe as the spearhead?
Peter Staudenmaier might like to comment. I'm sure others will.
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:18:54 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
I would just like to weigh in to say that while I have had teachers
recommend against having my children play soccer in first and second grade,
the older children (fifth and up, maybe a couple from fourth grade, too)
play every day at lunch, and that kickball has been a staple for years. We
had a large joint kickball game with the (public) alternative "farm school"
program that shares our rented location just last week. My sixth grader's
class teacher encouraged joining team sports (unspecified) for the children
in her class this year.
Reaching back into this thread, we have had yoga in classes in the recent
past, too. Certainly there is nothing mentioned in the parent handbook
about this, so there is nothing like a ban associated with any of these
activities.
David
-----------------
Clara:
I would like to chip in, about the sports
discussion:
snip!
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:47:24 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
Clara wrote:
)when I remember my school days, and all those
)boys longing to kick a ball at break time, and the
)teachers coming and puncturing the ball
Yes, let's just cut the pretentious pseudo-spiritual explanations and admit
that trying to stop boys from kicking a ball is utterly ridiculous. The
motive is pure unkindness, IMO.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 18:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter -
Does Steiner's screwy
) science make sense if it is viewed as part of an
) antisemitic ideology which
) attempted to promote Aryan science with Goethe as
) the spearhead?
)
) Peter Staudenmaier might like to comment. I'm sure
) others will.
dottie -
You know what, it is these kinds of comments that do
not allow parents searching for the truth about
Waldorf schools and whether it is appropriate for them
and their families. Isn't this off topic. Isn't this
supposed to be about Waldorf Education. I actually am
so glad that there is another site they can go to. One
called Survivors and one that Sune pointed out in an
earlier post. This way they wouldn't have to be hurt
from their experience and also here this kind of crap.
Let the parents find out relevant information to their
school and not this racist ideology you are trying to
put forth hoping they catch on.
Mr. Peter uses in his article, a statement that one of
the arguments Anthroposophist use is :
"that we can all be reincarnated into any of the races
of people", according to Steiner. Any race. Yup that
is what he teaches. So now what?
Where does Mr. Peters argument go if Steiner believes
and teaches this. It goes nowhere.
But of course that would be overlooked because he is
not looking for a debate. He is interested in getting
his ideas out for all to be heard. They are his
opinions.
I would be more than willing to listen to an author
who can look at both sides and is interested in
finding the Truth. But unfortunately that is not the
case. Only one side is taken into consideration. For a
Historian whether or not he is, claims he is, or is
considered to be, the truth must be told from both
sides. I can not even imagine a Historian who would
put forth a paper on a subject that he has no
understanding of and seeks none of. One he has no
respect for. That's an opinion not History and one
searching for the Truth can only take it as such.
Steiner claimed to speak on things spiritual, and that
he did.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:55:42 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
)I would just like to weigh in to say that while I have had teachers
)recommend against having my children play soccer in first and second
) )grade, the older children (fifth and up, maybe a couple from fourth
) )grade, too) play every day at lunch, and that kickball has been a )staple
)for years.
Going a bit off topic probably but just curious, what about dodgeball? I
would assume unacceptable? There was an article in our paper today about how
dodgeball is being banned in some schools (for reasons I found rather P.C.
and silly). Hurts kids' self-esteem if they get hit by the ball, etc.
Husband and son and I discussed this at dinner and soon realized that the
three of us were using the term "dodgeball" to refer to three fairly
different games.
Actually my husband said they (jokingly, sort of) called it "bombardment,"
and he described a much more aggressive game than what I remember, where
some kids threw the ball and others dodged it, and if you got hit you just
joined the group doing the throwing, and while I certainly never excelled in
any kind of sport I don't remember having my self-esteem damaged by
dodgeball . . . is any version of this ever found/allowed in Waldorf?
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 22:09:21 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sune writes:
) In contrast to Peter Staudenmaier's free
) fantasy descriptions of literature he has not read, I abstain from
) saying more that I know about it.
What literature that I have not read have I described?
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 03:54:13 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie:
)Isn't this off topic.
Peter
Afraid not. According to the Waldor Critics website the topics discussed in
the email list include among others:
The role of Anthroposophy in Waldorf.
Real science and medicine vs. quack science and medicine.
Dottie:
)"that we can all be reincarnated into any of the races
)of people", according to Steiner. Any race. Yup that
)is what he teaches. So now what?
)
)Where does Mr. Peters argument go if Steiner believes
)and teaches this. It goes nowhere.
Peter:
Again I am afraid not. Your point is irrelevant since Steiner has also
explicitly ranked the races according to their spiritual development. This
is called racism. It may be "polite" racism in the sense that no politically
incorrect words are used but it is still racism.
In so far as the truth goes, it may or may not be the case that there exists
evidence to support or refute the hypothesis that I raised in a question. It
is by asking such questions and by examining the evidence that the truth can
often be found. My opinion is that there is the feel of consistency about
this. Despite what you believe, it seems clear from Peter Staudenmaier's
scholarship that Steiner's speakings and writings are part of the explicit
racism of the time. They might be dressed up in spiritual mumbo jumbo but
racism the statements remain nonetheless.
Good luck with the work with the young folks,
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:15:57 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter Farrell writes:
) Reading Peter Staudenmaier's discussions of racism within
) Anthroposophy has
) raised what I think is an interesting question. On the plans website you
) will find an artice by Hansson
) (http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Hansson.html) entitled "Is
) Anthroposophy science?". There is a quotation in the article from Steiner
) about Einstein's theory of relativity. The question is is this attempt by
) Steiner to criticise Einsteien connected to the argument about
) antisemitism.
I don't think so, at least not in a direct way. The quote from Steiner shows
that he didn't have much of a grasp of Einstein's thought experiments, and
that he assumed his audience shared this incomprehension. Neither of those
two things should be too surprising in 1917 (I think Einstein's first paper
on special relativity was only published in 1905; Peter, can you fill me
in?) The quote doesn't overtly invoke anti-Jewish stereotypes, and it's hard
to see how Steiner's 'criticisms' of Einstein in this passage could depend
on antisemitic assumptions on the part of his audience. My hunch would be
that Steiner saw Einstein's work as yet another instance of "materialistic
science" failing to make sense of the world. There is much to suggest, on
the other hand, that this very notion of "materialistic science" (kind of
funny when you think of that concept being applied to theoretical physics)
was, in Steiner's thinking, related to Jewishness, and it is possible that
this association played a role in his remarks on Einstein. I don't see any
indication of that in the quote in Sven Ove's article, however. But I've
never spent much time with Steiner's writings on science, and it may well be
that this is a connection worth exploring.
) It is interesting to note that in Germany in 1920 there was a movement to
) discredit Einstein that was essentially antisemitic. There is a brief
) reference to this in Banesh Hoffmann's biography (Einstein,
) Banesh Hoffmann
) with the collaboration of Helen Dukas, Paladin, 1975) on page 143. In
) particular Hoffmann discusses a German scientist, Lenard, who won
) the Nobel
) prize in 1905, who became a "virulent disparager" of Einstein's
) work. Lenard
) later became an enthusiastic member of the Nazi party. Does
) Steiner's screwy
) science make sense if it is viewed as part of an antisemitic
) ideology which
) attempted to promote Aryan science with Goethe as the spearhead?
Lenard was an important figure in the ideological warping of German science
during the Nazi period; he called his system "Aryan physics". He's a good
example within the 'hard' sciences of a widespread phenomenon whereby
German scholars who were drawn to various aspects of Aryanism tried to
distinguish their own theories as much as possible from the work of their
Jewish former colleagues; the best known example of this is probably Jung's
distinction between his own psychology and Freud's "Jewish" psychoanalysis.
I don't know the extent to which Steiner's ostensibly Goethean approach to
science partook of this trend, because I don't know much about Steiner's
screwy science. There is a very interesting article by Paul Forman on
related themes in German physics, but it's about the reaction to quantum
theory, not relativity. Forman mentions Steiner several times as one of the
more influential figures in promoting an irrationalist outlook among
educated Germans. The article is called "Weimar Culture, Causality, and
Quantum Theory" and it can be found in Historical Studies in the Physical
Sciences volume 3 (1971, edited by Russell McCormmach). I can't recall what
Forman has to say about Lenard.
My own view on Steiner's relation to the broader cultural antisemitism of
his day is that he swung back and forth between outright rejection of
antisemitism and enthusiastic embracing of its cardinal elements. But his
brief phase of forthright opposition to antisemitism (which was in any case
based on a severe misjudgement of the structure and function of antisemitic
belief, in my opinion) ended with his conversion to theosophy, which seems
to have coincided with his peculiarly supernatural re-interpretation of
Goethe's scientific work. Perhaps this is a case of the reaction against
modernity converging with the "cultural code" of antisemitism? Peter, Dan,
and others, I'd be interested to hear if you've come across similarly
suggestive passages in Steiner's work on the natural sciences.
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
) Dottie:
) )Isn't this off topic.
)
) Peter
) Afraid not. According to the Waldor Critics website
) the topics discussed in
) the email list include among others:
) The role of Anthroposophy in Waldorf.
) Real science and medicine vs. quack science and
) medicine.
)
dottie -
The article is about whether or not Mr. Hanson(?)
found Anthroposophy to be a science. And I thought it
was a very interesting article. I disagree with some
of the quotes and the use of the word disciple in
regards to Anthroposophy as I have never seen Dr.
Steiner use that towards his own group. Now that is an
article I can respect. I may or may not agree with it,
however I can respect it. What you brought in, was
something about racism from a far out idea, trying to
hook it in somehow. It actually feels really quite
desperate and is not in the catagories you mentioned
above.
I mean we really have parents here that are searching
for answers and for them to have to sift through this
stuff is just ridiculous. Feeding on their already
hurt feelings.
Sticking to the agenda of what Waldorf Education is,
can really serve those looking for answers, unless the
hurt of these people doesn't matter to you.
Peter F.
) Good luck with the work with the young folks,
dottie -
Thank you I can use all the luck I can get!
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:08:49 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
dottie zold writes:
) Mr. Peter uses in his article, a statement that one of
) the arguments Anthroposophist use is :
)
) "that we can all be reincarnated into any of the races
) of people", according to Steiner. Any race. Yup that
) is what he teaches. So now what?
)
) Where does Mr. Peters argument go if Steiner believes
) and teaches this. It goes nowhere.
Hi Dottie,
Steiner taught that different races, and different peoples, represent and
embody different spiritual characteristics. It is indeed hard to see, from
one point of view, how that could be reconciled with his notion of karma and
reincarnation, although he did occasionally indicate that "young souls" tend
toward certain races and "older souls" toward others. But the bigger point
is that there are all sorts of things in Steiner's teachings that are
incompatible with each other, and it doesn't make sense to demand that the
critics of anthroposophy straighten all these inconsistencies out. That job
ought to belong to anthroposophists themselves, don't you think?
) But of course that would be overlooked because he is
) not looking for a debate. He is interested in getting
) his ideas out for all to be heard. They are his
) opinions.
The reason I put my opinions out there is that I am looking for a debate
(and it's darned hard to find one sometimes!). The neat thing about opinions
on historical matters is that you can judge them against the record, see
which ones fit the evidence better.
) I would be more than willing to listen to an author
) who can look at both sides and is interested in
) finding the Truth. But unfortunately that is not the
) case. Only one side is taken into consideration. For a
) Historian whether or not he is, claims he is, or is
) considered to be, the truth must be told from both
) sides.
I think there are almost always more than two sides to any interesting
question. But I don't agree that it is the job of historians to tell the
truth from all sides; a more reasonable expectation is that historians can
bring together information and assemble it in a way that tries to make sense
of it, tries to explain it, tries to get to the bottom of it and figure out
why things happened the way they did. It isn't a bad thing for historians to
put forth one-sided arguments, because those arguments will usually enter
into a larger context of counter-arguments and counter-interpretations. My
articles on anthroposophy aren't meant as supposedly neutral history
lessons, they are meant as interventions into ongoing debates about
anthroposophical politics. These debates include a very wide variety of
anthroposophists, as well as critics of anthroposophy like me, and other
scholars who don't have strong views on Steiner's work as such but who do
have a strong interest in understanding the context out of which Steiner's
teachings grew.
) I can not even imagine a Historian who would
) put forth a paper on a subject that he has no
) understanding of and seeks none of. One he has no
) respect for. That's an opinion not History and one
) searching for the Truth can only take it as such.
I quite agree with the your first sentence here, but I don't think it
applies to me. I do have an understanding of anthroposophy, one that is very
different from yours, and I continue to seek a fuller understanding of it
(if I really didn't have any understanding of anthroposophy, you'd have
nothing to get mad at in my work). You're right that I don't have a lot of
respect for anthroposophy, and that is indeed a challenge for me; I often
need to restrain my initial impulse to laugh at what many anthroposophists
say and instead try to understand what they're getting at. It certainly
isn't the case that historians can or should study only those topics they
"respect"; if that were true, we'd have to leave the study of fascism to
fascists, to choose just one example that is close to my heart. I also agree
with your last sentence here, although I don't believe that there is such a
thing as "History" with a capital "H"; all we really have is conflicting
opinions about it, or better, conlicting interpretations of it, that we need
to try to sort out and make sense of. I suspect that so far you haven't
really done that with the interpretations I've offered; I get the sense that
you've simply dismissed them without grappling with them. In my experience,
it's better to engage with those arguments that are at first glance
repulsive instead of waving them away.
) Steiner claimed to speak on things spiritual, and that
) he did.
Yes, of course he did. He also spoke on lots of other not-so-spiritual
things, and even when he was speaking on manifestly spiritual topics he
mixed in a whole lot of political assumptions and social implications.
That's what founders of a new system of thought usually do. I think it's
important to unpack those assumptions and implications to see what they
point toward. You don't have to be a historian to do that unpacking; look at
all the work some of the Waldorf parents on this list have done in trying to
figure out what Steiner's ideas meant for their kids. Isn't this attempt to
understand the real-life effects one way to show a kind of respect for a
system of thought?
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 05:37:19 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter Staudenmaier:
)(I think Einstein's first paper
)on special relativity was only published in 1905; Peter, can you fill me
)in?)
Peter Farrell:
Einstein published "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper" (translated as "On
the electrodynamics of moving bodies" in Annalen der Physik volume 17 in
1905. This was the first publication on the special theory of relativity. I
can't help but comment on your suggestion that few understood relativity in
1917. There is no doubt that the absolute number was small, probably of the
order of a thousand or so, but Steiner claimed an advantage. Surely his
clairvoyance would have given him sufficient understanding to discuss it
correctly, even if he thought it incorrect.
Peter Staudenmaier:
)There is much to suggest, on
)the other hand, that this very notion of "materialistic science" (kind of
)funny when you think of that concept being applied to theoretical
)physics)was, in Steiner's thinking, related to Jewishness, and it is
)possible that this association played a role in his remarks on Einstein. I
)don't see any indication of that in the quote in Sven Ove's article,
)however. But I've never spent much time with Steiner's writings on science,
)and it may well be that this is a connection worth exploring.
)
Peter Farrell:
I think it might be worth exploring as well. I find it very difficult to
make any sense of the "scientific" writings. Of course if they have a
political purpose they don't have to make scientific sense. I suspect I will
find the time to have a browse but I don't think I will be doing this
question justice. Dan has demonstrated real heroism in reading lots of this
stuff. Perhaps he might be aware of passages that shed light on the
question.
Thanks for the reference to the Forman article. This rings a bell although I
haven't read it. I suspect it was refererred to in Brian Easlea's book
"Liberation and the aims of science" which lightly covers some of that
territory.
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:06:47 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: SWA "science" (Was RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy)
--============_-1224375680==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
)Peter Farrell:
)I think it might be worth exploring as well. I find it very difficult to
)make any sense of the "scientific" writings. Of course if they have a
)political purpose they don't have to make scientific sense. I suspect I will
)find the time to have a browse but I don't think I will be doing this
)question justice. Dan has demonstrated real heroism in reading lots of this
)stuff. Perhaps he might be aware of passages that shed light on the
)question.
)Thanks for the reference to the Forman article. This rings a bell although I
)haven't read it. I suspect it was refererred to in Brian Easlea's book
)"Liberation and the aims of science" which lightly covers some of that
)territory.
Over the six years I've been around this list I've done a lot of
arguing about Steiner, Waldorf and Anthroposophical "science".
I've traded blows with all the heavyweights of the SWA mafia here on
whether there is any science at all in SWA, much less what it's
nature is.
It's been a bloody battle, because, as with everything else to do
with SWA, and Steiner's pronouncements in particular, nothing can
change the minds of the faithful about their guru's received wisdom.
It's self-fulfilling.
We've been around the block many times on what is taught as science
in SWA schools, and why it's not anything at all worth teaching to
children as education, but only more of the Anthroposophical
supernatural mumbo-jumbo designed to inculcate irrational thinking in
children.
We've quoted Steiner ad nauseam on science; we've deconstructed
Goethean science; we've argued about the application of Goethean
science to simple physics like light and colour, and the beliefs of
otherwise stable and conventional scientists like the physicist
Arthur Zajonc, high mucky-muck of the Anthroposophical Society of
America.
There is even a special mailing list for science discussion by
Anthropops, anthroposophical-science, and I used to argue on it from
time to time, but that was a complete waste of time. Here, there has
been one notable exception to the complete incontrovertibility of
Steiner's science dogma. There was for a time a British
Anthroposophist and Waldorf school class teacher who was also a
properly-trained scientist. He was also active on the a-s list. While
he had a lot of time for Steiner and Anthroposophy, he eventually
left the British Anthroposphical Society, and he was often on the
side of traditional science over Steiner's wacko brand.
What would be interesting to me, from the point of view of one who is
tired of re-arguing the issue of SWA "science" from the scientific
perspective, is to discuss -- and the two Peters suggest -- the
_political_ genesis and meaning of Steiner's pseudo-scientific
pronouncements.
For instance, two of the defining quotes from Steiner about science,
said to proceed from his spiritual insight into the "higher worlds",
are these:
"Since the 1880's I have tried to gain acceptance for Goethe's theory of
color in spite of the findings of modern physics. Why does nobody
understand that? The answer is that Central Europe has been imbued with the
materialistic principle that has come to us from the British folk soul.
Newton, whom Goethe has to oppose, has been victorious over everything
emanating from Goethe's spirit."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman. (1915)
Trans. Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. Spring Valley, NY: Anthroposophic Press,
1978, p. 30]
and
"Of course, much now incorporated in the body of knowledge known as physics
will have to be discarded to make room for these ideas."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Warmth Course. (1920) Trans. George Adams, revised
by Alice Barton Wulsin and Gerald F. Karnow. Spring Valley: Mercury Press,
1988, p. 139.]
I think there are two keys here, a political one which will be
familiar to Peter S (German superiority) and a philosophical one
which will be familiar to Peter F (religion masquerading as science).
Peters?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--============_-1224375680==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
(!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN")
(html)(head)(style type="text/css")(!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--)(/style)(title)SWA "science" (Was RE: more on
anthroposophy and theos(/title)(/head)(body)
(div)>Peter Farrell:(br)
>I think it might be worth exploring as well. I find it very
difficult to(br)
>make any sense of the "scientific" writings. Of course
if they have a(br)
>political purpose they don't have to make scientific sense. I
suspect I will(br)
>find the time to have a browse but I don't think I will be doing
this(br)
>question justice. Dan has demonstrated real heroism in reading
lots of this(br)
>stuff. Perhaps he might be aware of passages that shed light on
the(br)
>question.(br)
>Thanks for the reference to the Forman article. This rings a bell
although I(br)
>haven't read it. I suspect it was refererred to in Brian Easlea's
book(br)
>"Liberation and the aims of science" which lightly
covers some of that(/div)
(div)>territory.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Over the six years I've been around this list I've done a lot of
arguing about Steiner, Waldorf and Anthroposophical
"science".(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)I've traded blows with all the heavyweights of the SWA mafia
here on whether there is any science at all in SWA, much less what
it's nature is.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)It's been a bloody battle, because, as with everything else to
do with SWA, and Steiner's pronouncements in particular, nothing can
change the minds of the faithful about their guru's received wisdom.
It's self-fulfilling.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)We've been around the block many times on what is taught as
science in SWA schools, and why it's not anything at all worth
teaching to children as education, but only more of the
Anthroposophical supernatural mumbo-jumbo designed to inculcate
irrational thinking in children.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)We've quoted Steiner ad nauseam on science; we've deconstructed
Goethean science; we've argued about the application of Goethean
science to simple physics like light and colour, and the beliefs of
otherwise stable and conventional scientists like the physicist
Arthur Zajonc, high mucky-muck of the Anthroposophical Society of
America.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)There is even a special mailing list for science discussion by
Anthropops, anthroposophical-science, and I used to argue on it from
time to time, but that was a complete waste of time. Here, there has
been one notable exception to the complete incontrovertibility of
Steiner's science dogma. There was for a time a British
Anthroposophist and Waldorf school class teacher who was also a
properly-trained scientist. He was also active on the a-s list. While
he had a lot of time for Steiner and Anthroposophy, he eventually
left the British Anthroposphical Society, and he was often on the
side of traditional science over Steiner's wacko brand.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)What would be interesting to me, from the point of view of one
who is tired of re-arguing the issue of SWA "science" from
the scientific perspective, is to discuss -- and the two Peters
suggest -- the _political_ genesis and meaning of Steiner's
pseudo-scientific pronouncements.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)For instance, two of the defining quotes from Steiner about
science, said to proceed from his spiritual insight into the
"higher worlds", are these:(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)"Since the 1880's I have tried to gain acceptance for
Goethe's theory of(/div)
(div)color in spite of the findings of modern physics. Why does
nobody(/div)
(div)understand that? The answer is that Central Europe has been
imbued with the(/div)
(div)materialistic principle that has come to us from the British
folk soul.(/div)
(div)Newton, whom Goethe has to oppose, has been victorious over
everything(/div)
(div)emanating from Goethe's spirit."(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div) [Steiner, Rudolf. Christ in Relation to
Lucifer and Ahriman. (1915)(/div)
(div)Trans. Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. Spring Valley, NY:
Anthroposophic Press,(/div)
(div)1978, p. 30](/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div) and(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")"Of course, much now incorporated in
the body of knowledge known as physics(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")will have to be discarded to make room for
these ideas."(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")(br)(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000") [Steiner,
Rudolf. Warmth Course. (1920) Trans. George Adams,
revised(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")by Alice Barton Wulsin and Gerald F.
Karnow. Spring Valley: Mercury Press,(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")1988, p. 139.](/font)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)I think there are two keys here, a political one which will be
familiar to Peter S (German superiority) and a philosophical one
which will be familiar to Peter F (religion masquerading as
science).(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Peters?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Cheers from Godzone,(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Michael Kopp(/div)
(div)Wellington, New Zealand(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(/body)
(/html)
--============_-1224375680==_ma============--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 06:11:04 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
dottie -
)What you brought in, was
)something about racism from a far out idea, trying to
)hook it in somehow. It actually feels really quite
)desperate and is not in the catagories you mentioned
)above.
Peter:
You are not quite right. I brought in an idea, the question is how far out.
I don't know if it is true or not. I said as much. I suspect it has some
truth attached to it. Steiner has said an enormous amount of what you might
call science. Hansson's article discusses some of it. My admittedly limited
exposure to it has convinced me that it is just nonsense and much of it has
been demonstrated to be nonsense as Hansson points out. I don't believe it
came from clairvoyance or the reading of some spiritual record. The question
is where did it come from and why. What I see is political and scientific
movements in Germany which as Peter Staudenmaier ponts out were actively
antisemitic and which were involved in attempting to discredit so called
Jewish science. At a similar time in the same place we have Steiner who is
saying things which a reasonable person you admit can interpret as racist or
antisemitic, and he is also arguing against "materialistic" science. Is it
so far out that there might be a connection. I don't think so.
These considerations have everything to do with Waldorf education. The
science that is taught in Waldorf Schools is clearly based on Steiner's
faulty scientific ideas. Discussions of their origin of these ideas are
absolutely part of the discussion and have been so for a long time before
you joined the list.
I have been following the arguments about racism for about three years on
this list. I started out thinking that Steiner was just a woolly thinker. I
now think the evidence from his recorded talks and writings supports the
argument that he incorporated the racist and white supremacist ideology that
was common throughout Europe at the time into his philosophy. What we see on
this list is that supporters of Anthroposophy are incapable of saying
"Steiner was wrong about that". Connect this with various of the stories
from real people about their experiences at Waldorf schools and it might
start to become clear that we are not just talking about some foolish
teachers at some isolated schools but that it may be the history, science
and philosophy of Anthroposophy that you among others seem unable to
question that are the root of the problems.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:48:50 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
soma wrote:
)
)
) Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
))
)) It was not, in the way Peter commonly twists things according to his
))
)) preconceptions when interpreting them, a suggestion that you should
)) stop
)) reading what interests you, just that you save other people the work
)) of
)) trying to digest what I think you should have made an effort at
)) before
)) putting it on the list.
)
) Sharon:
) Peter does not "commonly twist things", you however commonly take the
) role of an over lord with your relentless scoldings. I made an effort,
) sorry you didn't like it "master". Ever heard of the delete button?
)
)) ) then Earth
)) ) Evolution which consists of 7 epochs. We live in the 5th epoch
)) when, according to
)) ) Steiner, 'Semitism will wane and Christianity will be free from
)) it'.
))
)
) Sune:
)
)) You write this as if it was a literal quote from Steiner. Can you
)) point
)) to the source of it?
)
) Sharon:
) "Correspondence and Documents", Steiner includes a nice little
) schematic illustration of his sub race chronology in a letter to
) Marie, the above quote is in the content of the letter. I have lent
) the book out, will post page number when I get it back. (I have posted
) this quote before with all the details.Dan has posted Steiner's
) sketch.)
)
)) ) After the Seventh
)) ) Epoch Steiner's cycle will continue on Future Jupiter, next comes
)) Future Venus then
)) ) the Vulcan-Evolution continuing on towards the New Jerusalem.
)
) Sune:
)
)) To my understanding, what Steiner refers to as the future 'Jupiter
)) stage' of Earth is what is described in the Apocalypse of St John as
)) the
)) New Jerusalem, not something that will come after a future
)) Vulcan-stage.
)
) Sharon:
) You are the Ipisissimus (most oneself) Sune, I'm a mere Neophyte (new
) plant). I got this sequence from Anthroposophist Marie Schindler's
) book entitled "Goethe's Theory of Colour". New Knowledge Books,
) England c 1964 p111. I took the liberty of using it. Here this
) subject is plainly and clearly presented, unlike the mystagogue
) Rudolf Steiner's babblings. It just so happens that this chapter also
) refers to Steiner and this topic. Since Steiner idolized his fellow
) Rosicrucian Initiate Goethe, I thought I couldn't go wrong. Is there a
) possibility that Schindler is confused?
)
)) ) From my reading of the texts he
)) ) is clearly saying that the future race will be white, male
)) plant-like spirits.
)
) Sune:
)
)) 'Future race' as you refer to it is a quite vague concept, as the
)) 'future' refers to _everything_ lying in the future. I don't know
)) where
)) you get if from that a future human being - far in the future -
)) whose
)) speech organs will be transformed in such a way that what is created
))
)) with speech will be living beings, (is that what you are referring
)) to?)
)) should be 'male'.
)
) Sharon:
) According to Steiner the proof of his "occult truth" is that the male
) voice cracks in puberty. He also says that "man will speak forth
) man". (Don't worry, Anthroposophists aren't the only ones who end up
) like this, the Mormons also end up as white male spirits.)
)
)) Sune:
))
)) Also, I don't quite see what the reason should be that it should be
)) 'white' in any present sense.
)
) Sharon:
) The fact that this nonsense was written by a white male secret
) brotherhood member.
)
)) Sune:
))
)) I'm as strong a supporter of freedom of thought as you, but think
)) the
)) position of PLANS cultivates a subconscious, under noticed element
)) of
)) cultural xenophobia in its cultivation of a number of the
)) argumentations. Once you learnt to notice and identify cultural
)) xenophobia from other contexts, you recognize it in PLANS'
)) argumentation.
)
) Sharon:
Oh rubbish, Waldorf is no stranger to me. I am not afraid of the
unknown, rather it is the "known" that I'm afraid of. I was a trusting,
open minded, idealistic parent. It is the Waldorf system and it's hidden
agenda (subconscious) that has created the arguments all over the world
and here on PLANS. If you truly support freedom of thought then get
your organization to be forthright to parents and get out of the United
States public system. If you do not do this, you sit in a loftier,
"holier than thou" position and your supposed support of freedom of
thought is meaningless.
) Sune:
)
)) I have no intention or wish whatsoever of taking any cultural
)) freedom
)) away of opinion from you, a standpoint I find anthroposophy to be
)) one of
)) the strongest supports of.
)
Sharon:
Your organization already took this from me. I am wiser today, I won't
let you take my cultural freedom or opinions away again. Our experiences
differ, you are a believer so naturally you hold a different opinion. I
have never felt so oppressed as I did in Waldorf. My child had a similar
experience.
)) Sune:
))
)) I think PLANS' misuses the Constitution in its cultivation of
)) cultural
)) xenophobia in the field of education.
)
Sharon:
I think you and Supreme Court Justice Scalia don't understand the
Constitution. I am part of a very small and unprotected minority in this
country, I'm not a fool, I know that if I don't fight with all my might
now, this country will be a Theocracy in twenty years. Where does that
leave me? Will you break my legs to make me bough?
)) ) Church and State...keep them separate!
))
)
Sune:
Quite agree!
Sharon:
You do not agree.
)) Sune:
))
)) The verdict, in the case similar to PLANS, shows there is some sense
)) and
)) sensibility also in US courts.
)
Sharon:
The case shows a trend to disregard the Constitution. A travesty of
justice.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:47:58 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
I wrote:
Sharon:
) ) I am perfectly aware that Steiner's evolutionary chronology goes: Ancient Saturn,
) ) Ancient Sun, Ancient Moon (which is the third incarnation of the earth),
)
) In the naming of the days of the week out of long historical tradition,
) it still lives as a memory of the past; first came a 'Cosmic
) Saturn-day', then a 'Cosmic Sun-day', then a 'Cosmic Moon-day' (Lundi;
) lunar day), Mardi (Tuesday) and Mercredi (Wednesday), Jeudi
) (Jupiter-day; Thursday) and Vendredi (Venus-day, Friday).
Just a small self-correction; ;the naming of the weekdays does not only
refer to what _has_ happened, part of the preseent 'cosmic' week belongs
to the future.
What the naming of the days of the weeks
reflect on a small scale, is described by the esoteric tradition more in
its origin, with a cosmic Satur-day, Sun-day and Mo(o)n-day having
passed, we at present live during a two-phased Mardi-Mercredi
(Tuesday-Wednesday) and a cosmic Jeudi (Jupiter-day; Thursday) and
Vendri (Venus-day; Friday) lying ahead.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:48:24 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
=
) Sune writes:
) =
) ) In contrast to Peter Staudenmaier's free
) ) fantasy descriptions of literature he has not read, I abstain from
) ) saying more that I know about it.
) =
) What literature that I have not read have I described?
You actually don't remember? 'Innocence=B4.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 247
-- Topica Digest --
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dan dandugan.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dan dandugan.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dan dandugan.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:52:27 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie, you wrote,
)You know what, it is these kinds of comments that do
)not allow parents searching for the truth about
)Waldorf schools and whether it is appropriate for them
)and their families. Isn't this off topic. Isn't this
)supposed to be about Waldorf Education. I actually am
)so glad that there is another site they can go to. One
)called Survivors and one that Sune pointed out in an
)earlier post. This way they wouldn't have to be hurt
)from their experience and also here this kind of crap.
It is relevant, Dottie. Waldorf is an activity of Anthroposophy.
People should know racist theory is part of its foundations. I bought
Steiner's book with the quote about blue eyes and blond hair being
linked to intelligence *at the San Francisco Waldorf School*. I
didn't go looking for it; it was in my face.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:56:56 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was a code word for
"Jewish," and everybody knew it. Steiner could therefore be
interpreted two different ways according to who was listening, and he
must have been aware of that.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:02:59 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
)Peter Farrell:
)Einstein published "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper" (translated
)as "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies" in Annalen der Physik
)volume 17 in 1905. This was the first publication on the special
)theory of relativity. I can't help but comment on your suggestion
)that few understood relativity in 1917. There is no doubt that the
)absolute number was small, probably of the order of a thousand or
)so, but Steiner claimed an advantage. Surely his clairvoyance would
)have given him sufficient understanding to discuss it correctly,
)even if he thought it incorrect.
"The time is now that we ought to speak of such things, all the
brilliant nonsense which is called relativity theory through which
Einstein became a great man. This would be able to be rejected if one
were to have clear concepts about things, concepts which really
correspond to the reality. ... This idea doesn't have the slightest
relationship to reality. This whole unhealthy idea lives today as the
theory of relativity and enjoys the widest acclaim."
[Rudolf Steiner, The True Nature of Substance & Energy, August 7,
1917 (Rick Mansell translation, tape SL266, Rudolf Steiner Research
Foundation, Redondo Beach, California). The lecture of 7 Aug 1917 is
the second lecture in the KARMA OF MATERIALISM.]
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 09:13:16 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie:
) Let the parents find out relevant information to their
) school and not this racist ideology you are trying to
) put forth hoping they catch on.
)
) Mr. Peter uses in his article, a statement that one of
) the arguments Anthroposophist use is :
)
) "that we can all be reincarnated into any of the races
) of people", according to Steiner. Any race. Yup that
) is what he teaches. So now what?
Bea:
I for one would have like to have seen some of this before I enrolled my
children in the steiner school, its easy to say:leave if you dont like it,
but in my experience its very difficult to leave, the children are WAY
behind their peers at other schools, they have made strong friendships,etc
they have very little confidence fotr the outside world.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 09:17:18 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
dottie:)
) I mean we really have parents here that are searching
) for answers and for them to have to sift through this
) stuff is just ridiculous. Feeding on their already
) hurt feelings.
Bea:
please dottie this is a trifle patronising,us parents (duped and searching)
would like to hear it all and make our own minds up
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:55:53 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
In response to what is below those of you who use Global position system
devices use Einstein to know accurately where you are. It might be
reasonable at this point to ask who is right and who is wrong on the basis
of that data.
Peter
)From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
)Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:02:59 -0700
)
))Peter Farrell:
))Einstein published "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper" (translated
))as "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies" in Annalen der Physik
))volume 17 in 1905. This was the first publication on the special
))theory of relativity. I can't help but comment on your suggestion
))that few understood relativity in 1917. There is no doubt that the
))absolute number was small, probably of the order of a thousand or
))so, but Steiner claimed an advantage. Surely his clairvoyance would
))have given him sufficient understanding to discuss it correctly,
))even if he thought it incorrect.
)
)"The time is now that we ought to speak of such things, all the
)brilliant nonsense which is called relativity theory through which
)Einstein became a great man. This would be able to be rejected if one
)were to have clear concepts about things, concepts which really
)correspond to the reality. ... This idea doesn't have the slightest
)relationship to reality. This whole unhealthy idea lives today as the
)theory of relativity and enjoys the widest acclaim."
)
)[Rudolf Steiner, The True Nature of Substance & Energy, August 7,
)1917 (Rick Mansell translation, tape SL266, Rudolf Steiner Research
)Foundation, Redondo Beach, California). The lecture of 7 Aug 1917 is
)the second lecture in the KARMA OF MATERIALISM.]
)
)-Dan Dugan
)
)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 248
-- Topica Digest --
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
RE: Sports
By canndw netzero.net
RE: anthroposophy and theosophy
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: Re: bias
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: bias
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: Sports
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Simplified logic [Re: bias]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: Re: bias
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
By mdarmody home.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By mdarmody home.com
another new person - list of questions
By bhaisanjay hotmail.com
RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By rbc supranet.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By rbc supranet.com
RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By rbc supranet.com
RE: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
By rbc supranet.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By rbc supranet.com
Religion and Mysticism
By pacbay home.com
The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By steve premofine.com
Karma- mistakes of
By pacbay home.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Sports
By pacbay home.com
RE: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By rbc supranet.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:35:09 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dan wrote:
| I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was
a code word for
| "Jewish," and everybody knew it. Steiner could
therefore be
| interpreted two different ways according to who
was listening, and he
| must have been aware of that.
VERY interesting. This can be a valuable insight;
could you please elaborate, Dan? I will re-read
some stuff under this light.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 11:57:28 GMT
From: David Cann (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Sports
Diana Winters wrote:
((Going a bit off topic probably but just curious, what about dodgeball?
I would assume unacceptable? There was an article in our paper today
about how dodgeball is being banned in some schools (for reasons I found
rather P.C. and silly). Hurts kids' self-esteem if they get hit by the
ball, etc. Husband and son and I discussed this at dinner and soon
realized that the three of us were using the term "dodgeball" to refer
to three fairly different games.))
David:
I saw the article too, and I agree with your opinion of it.
I have never heard the subject of dodgeball come up, as a recess game,
as a part of "games" class, or as something to be avoided.
My sense (and only my sense) of dodgeball (circle of kids, throwing a
ball at kids in the middle who, well, dodge it, becoming part of the
circle when they're hit) is that it's at its best as a 'rainy day' game,
a way to keep a class of kids busy and moderately active when they can't
go outside. We don't have an appropriate indoor space for it.
David
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 12:23:16 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: anthroposophy and theosophy
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
)
) I think you're mostly right about that; the heart of the dispute was
) whether
) any person, of any color, could possibly be a reincarnation of Christ.
) Steiner's racism, if my hypothesis is correct, played a secondary role.
Su here: Kind of behind on my posts, but I was interested in your
commentary on these things. I would guess that Steiner really wanted to
promote the "Christian Values" of his culture, as opposed to the "Asian"
philosophical and religious principles.
But didn't this all have to do with his big involvement with the
Rosicrucians--a variant masonic lodge--which in general promotes
conservative Anglo-saxon type beliefs? Isn't this is where the racism
creeps in?
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 12:30:53 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
) I know you love playing games with words, gliding in and out of
) untruthfulness in a
) mostly indistinguishable way, playing an innocence charade when
) discovered. In the
) case of anthroposophy you're a master of it.
)
) Sune Nordwall
Su: from what I have seen of your posts, you are a master, also...
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 12:34:57 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Re: bias
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Dan wrote:
)
) ) Dottie, you wrote,
) )
) ) )How can you evaluate
) ) )Steiners teachings if you do not come from a spiritual
) ) )level.
)
) Dan:
) ) Pardon me for being direct, but that's pretentious crap,
) ) Dottie.
) ) Steiner put his pants on the same way you and I do, one
) ) leg at a time.
)
) Just to clarify the non-crapness of your your argument;
)
) It is:
)
) For all people who put on their pants one leg at a time
) it is true that they all can fully understand each other
) and evaluate the meaning and truth-character of each others
) thoughts, opinions and views.
)
) Interesting.
)
) Have you consulted your professor of philosophy on that?
)
) Regards,
)
) Sune Nordwall
)
Su here: I guess we all need to take a spirituality test before reading
Steiner or going to our houses of worship--else we just won't *get* it
!!!!
Right Dottie/Sune?
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 12:39:06 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: bias
Alice Klinge wrote:
) Keep the faith - not the bullshit..
Su: Wonderful quote!!!!
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:15:18 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Sports
David wrote:
)I have never heard the subject of dodgeball come up, as a recess game,
)as a part of "games" class, or as something to be avoided.
)My sense (and only my sense) of dodgeball (circle of kids, throwing a
)ball at kids in the middle who, well, dodge it, becoming part of the
)circle when they're hit) is that it's at its best as a 'rainy day' )game, a
)way to keep a class of kids busy and moderately active when )they can't go
)outside. We don't have an appropriate indoor space for )it.
That's the dodgeball I remember too (must be the New England version; I grew
up in Connecticut). Except we played it on the playground at recess, not
just inside. Apparently in the version used today, if you get hit with the
ball, you're just "out" and you go sit down. That seems silly when you can
just let the kids who get hit join the circle.
At my son's school the person who is "it" stands *outside* the circle and
throws the ball at/to someone, who if they catch it then becomes "it" - if
they get hit with it instead, they're "out." So the number of kids actually
playing dwindles, and the rest are bored and inactive. Now the game my
husband described wasn't in a circle, more like two roving camps of kids
trying to attack each other with a bunch of balls, more war-like (like
paintball?). I think the circle sort of contains it (tho now I will probably
be told I'm advocating something pagan:)
I have many unpleasant memories of gym and games at recess, but with
dodgeball I just remember it being good rowdy fun and nobody being
humilated. I guess some places it's rougher.
Okay, to actually tie this off-topic back to Waldorf, the article also said
these people have the same criticism of Duck Duck Goose! which is a favorite
in Waldorf kindergartens. The criticism is that some kids don't get picked
(unless the teacher insists), and everybody spends a lot of time sitting
while just a couple of kids run around.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:25:58 GMT
From: Sune Nordwall (sune.nordwall home.se)
Subject: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
Su wrote:
) Sune Nordwall wrote:
) ) Just to clarify the non-crapness of your your argument;
) )
) ) It is:
) )
) ) For all people who put on their pants one leg at a time
) ) it is true that they all can fully understand each
) ) other and evaluate the meaning and truth-character of
) ) each others thoughts, opinions and views.
) )
) ) Interesting.
) )
) ) Have you consulted your professor of philosophy on that?
) Su here: I guess we all need to take a spirituality test
) before reading Steiner or going to our houses of worship--
) else we just won't *get* it !!!!
)
) Right Dottie/Sune?
I see you have the same liking for extremely simplified
arguing as Dan demonstrated in the comment above.
What I commented on was this extremely simplified logic,
and pointing out that - maybe - in some instances, it takes
more than people taking on their pants in a similar way
for them to be expected to understand each other in some
more depth.
'Depth' by the way being one of the concepts Dan does not
seem to like very much, at times ironizing about it on this
list.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological
cell biology, EU and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 06:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
) Bea:
) please dottie this is a trifle patronising,us
) parents (duped and searching)
) would like to hear it all and make our own minds up
)
dottie -
I actually wasn't speaking of you Bea, or the other
parents that have been on this list a while. I am
speaking of the two new members who joined and also
the ones who have contacted me off list.
I was very saddened to hear of these parents and how
they were feeling. I am always deeply touched by
things like this.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 06:54:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
) I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was a
) code word for
) "Jewish," and everybody knew it. Steiner could
) therefore be
) interpreted two different ways according to who was
) listening, and he
) must have been aware of that.
)
Dan,
You see? Trying to interpret things to bring about a
conclusion the man was a racist and brought that
ideology. Mr. Peter F, says that no matter what WC
brings forth Steiners readers will not believe it.
Well the same can be said here at WC. No matter what
quotes that show Steiners teaching of universality Wc
members won't believe it.
I mean his books are filled with quotes on love for
all no nationality, unity, everywhere in its pages.
Someone mentioned that a flag was not allowed in the
classrooom for The Pledge. I would imagine this would
be one of the ways of seeing unity as a whole versus a
pride in where you come from.
I was taught to be pro american by my country when i
was in school. Okay. So now there is a war over in
Kuwait/Iraqi and I'm worried about the Americans. Oh I
hope they don't die. Well than I got to thinking about
what I had read in The Arch Angel Michael His Mission
and Ours. Now it took me three years to read that book
and the gem was at the end. It said that nationality
is one thing that had to fall by the way side. We
would have to see one another in a different light.
So I dropped to my knees and just was so saddened that
men and women were going to lose their lives. It
didn't matter where they were from to me any longer
it mattered that they would die and their families
would be hurt. All of them.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 06:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
) Dan wrote:
)
)
) | I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was
) a code word for
) | "Jewish," and everybody knew it. Steiner could
) therefore be
) | interpreted two different ways according to who
) was listening, and he
) | must have been aware of that.
)
) VERY interesting. This can be a valuable insight;
) could you please elaborate, Dan? I will re-read
) some stuff under this light.
)
dottie -
You guys do such a disservice to to the real problems
that were faced by these parents. It is no wonder that
people consider PLANS to be such a fanatical site. No
wonder at all. It is quite sad.
dottie
)
_________________________________________________________
) Do You Yahoo!?
) Get your free yahoo.com address at
) http://mail.yahoo.com
)
)
)
)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 07:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: anthroposophy and theosophy
--- Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com) wrote:
)
) Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
)
) )
) ) I think you're mostly right about that; the heart
) of the dispute was
) ) whether
) ) any person, of any color, could possibly be a
) reincarnation of Christ.
) ) Steiner's racism, if my hypothesis is correct,
) played a secondary role.
)
)
) Su here: Kind of behind on my posts, but I was
) interested in your
) commentary on these things. I would guess that
) Steiner really wanted to
) promote the "Christian Values" of his culture, as
) opposed to the "Asian"
) philosophical and religious principles.
)
) But didn't this all have to do with his big
) involvement with the
) Rosicrucians--a variant masonic lodge--which in
) general promotes
) conservative Anglo-saxon type beliefs? Isn't this is
) where the racism
) creeps in?
dottie -
Keep reaching for that star Su, keep reaching for that
star. The more I read here on this subject it feels to
me that someone must not think that their main case
can stand in court. I mean that is what it is
beginning to feel like. Trying to pull all of it out
to see what will fit. Sad just sad it goes to this
extent.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 07:06:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Re: bias
) Su here: I guess we all need to take a spirituality
) test before reading
) Steiner or going to our houses of worship--else we
) just won't *get* it
) !!!!
)
) Right Dottie/Sune?
)
)
It has nothing to do with a spirituality test. Most on
this list so far have pronounced atheist or agnostic
or other views that would definitly contradict the
teachings of Steiner.
And to see my name next to Sune, how cool. I've
checked out his website and saw his picture. And he
has a lot of quotes regarding Steiners understandings
of universality that I have never read before. Like
the pages he left here on The Slavs. Very cool.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 07:17:46 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf Education E-mail Discussion List
((I wish you well and hope you find the answers and do
not hold it personally as a defintion of anything
wrong about you or your child.
thoughtfully,
dottie))
No, I can assure you I in no way feel there is anything wrong with us. I'm
just so disappointed that the school is not as it was portrayed to be. I
see upon closer inspection that we wouldn't have been happy there so I'm
glad I was screened out. Just disappointed that it's not the warm,
nurturing creative wonderful learning place I thought it was going to be.
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:18:20 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie:
)No matter what quotes that show Steiners teaching of universality Wc
)members won't believe it.
No, we believe he taught "universality." That isn't always contradictory to
racism. He taught that it doesn't matter if you are a member of a less
spiritually advanced race, because you can work on your karma and come back
higher ( = lighter skin) next time. Or, if you aren't a good person, you
might regress and come back in a darker-skinned race! There for the grace of
God go I! I'd better be nice to everybody then!
He didn't teach hate for less advanced races, you're right that he preached
universality and acceptance. (Still racist, just on the off chance you're
not getting my drift, Dottie.)
)So now there is a war over in Kuwait/Iraqi and I'm worried about the
) )Americans.
)So I dropped to my knees and just was so saddened that
)men and women were going to lose their lives.
Steiner believed that in all such conflicts, the side that loses was
karmically destined to lose, Dottie. In some cases they are karmically
"weakened" already and just looking for a big mean country to come and
extinguish them. I'm sure he'd approve of your sympathizing with both sides,
though, it shows you yourself are advanced spiritually.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:30:06 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie:
)You guys do such a disservice to to the real problems
)that were faced by these parents.
Whoops Dottie, it was Clara you were answering, and Clara herself was one of
"those parents," not to mention a Waldorf student herself; perhaps as Bea
suggested you could, in general, let list members decide for themselves if
PLANS has done them a disservice in providing a place where people (many of
whom, like yourself, once approached Steiner uncritically) can reapproach
his writings critically.
I remember religious people in my own childhood stating that Jews were
"materialists." Having heard it used explicitly to slander Jews, it's not a
stretch to me that "materialist" could be a code word for "Jew." I'm not
even sure in Steiner's circles it was a "code" so much as a synonym.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 07:57:51 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
((dottie -
I actually wasn't speaking of you Bea, or the other
parents that have been on this list a while. I am
speaking of the two new members who joined and also
the ones who have contacted me off list.))
Dottie,
I think you're referring to me and I also find the constant references to
"hurt feelings" patronizing. As if I don't have a legitimate right to
question and research but just have "sour grapes". Please, my husband and I
are both college educated and we are certainly capable of "wading through
this stuff".
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20-Apr-2001 15:38:45 GMT
From: Bhai Sanjay (bhaisanjay hotmail.com)
Subject: another new person - list of questions
i am new to this list and am essentially interested in getting more
balance to my perspective because i am considering waldorf for my child.
politically, i agree with your stand that public funds should not go
into this kind of education.
personally, however, i feel attracted to what has been labelled in some
of the posts on your list as 'new age' spirituality.
professionally, i am a cultural anthropologist and appreciate your
effort at rigor though i seek a balanced perspective that might deviate
from your clearly oppositional stance.
and, yes, i have read steiner and have serious problems with his
racialist views. but i feel that those views reflect a conceptual
language of that particular era and it remains to be seen how 'dogma'
and 'practice' play out in actual institutions historically situated in
a very different time-space.
i look forward to stimulating discussions and wish to start by
requesting the list of questions offered by Lisa Ercolano.
-----------
---from lisa
I have a list of questions that another list member and I drew up to
give to parents looking at Waldorf. One learns much about Waldorf ed
just by reading the list of questions. Shall I send it to you, or post
it?
-----------
thanks
sanjay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:58:24 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sune said:
) ) ) In contrast to Peter Staudenmaier's free
) ) ) fantasy descriptions of literature he has not read, I abstain from
) ) ) saying more that I know about it.
and I asked:
) ) What literature that I have not read have I described?
to which Sune replied:
) You actually don't remember? 'InnocenceĄ.
You're avoiding the question, Sune. As I am not clairvoyant, I cannot
remember the contents of your mind. What literature do you mean?
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:05:00 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter Farrell wrote:
) I can't help but comment on your suggestion that few understood
) relativity in 1917. There is no doubt that the absolute number
) was small, probably of the order of a thousand or so, but Steiner
) claimed an advantage. Surely his clairvoyance would have given
) him sufficient understanding to discuss it
) correctly, even if he thought it incorrect.
An excellent point. Along with anthroposophy's pseudo-religious
self-conception, I suspect that this factor helps account for contemporary
anthroposophists' general unwillingness to acknowledge that their founder
made blunders.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:07:30 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sharon wrote:
) ) "Correspondence and Documents", Steiner includes a nice little
) ) schematic illustration of his sub race chronology in a letter to
) ) Marie, the above quote is in the content of the letter. I have lent
) ) the book out, will post page number when I get it back. (I have posted
) ) this quote before with all the details.Dan has posted Steiner's
) ) sketch.)
I would love to see this, the sketch as well.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:14:34 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
I think I missed the import of this the first time around. Sune, are you
really saying that you think people cannot "fully understand each other and
evaluate the meaning and truth-character of each others thoughts, opinions
and views", even when those views are clearly expressed?
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:25:45 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Diana already gave a fine answer to this post, but the point is important so
I'd like to try from a different angle. Dottie wrote:
) No matter what
) quotes that show Steiners teaching of universality Wc
) members won't believe it.
)
) I mean his books are filled with quotes on love for
) all no nationality, unity, everywhere in its pages.
I think the critics go out of their way to point out the universalist,
tolerant, humanist elements in Steiner's work; it is precisely these
elements that strike some of us as most alarming and unsettling. If Steiner
and anthroposophy were *avowedly* reactionary and chauvinist, we wouldn't be
nearly as concerned with the topic. What we're trying to say is that the
frightening components of Steiner's teachings can't be separated from the
friendly ones without unraveling the system altogether. The real task isn't
finding quotes (you can find quotes to support just about anything in
Steiner's vast work), it's figuring out how all the parts fit together.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:08:41 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Religion and Mysticism
Peter,
It seems that you are unaware of several "Steiner" or anthroposophical
oriented discussion groups where his "errors" are openly discussed without
prejudice or interest in protecting his position.
Though I am not an card carrying member, I do respect and place Steiner as
one the foremost philosophers and
spiritual teachers of the 20th century. And he was not perfect by any means
and did not have an answer for every situation in life.
On many occasions we have seen where he made scientific errors, offered
personal opinions that exuded bias toward some individual or movement
(nothing to write home about- like calling someone an idiot in their
thinking).
By the way, I make no excuses for his spiritual position in the world. He
was an esoteric or mystical/teacher/ researcher and claimed to possess
abilities to access states of metaphysical phenomena. AP's call this
clairvoyance. I find it more helpful to see this within less mystical
context and more an extension of capacities that we all possess- intuition,
the ability to visualize, etc. Many other historical figures from Plato to
Jesus to William Blake shared in some degree what Steiner possessed. If some
want to rationalize away all religious wisdom, inspiration, and experience,
so be it, but at least see this for what it is. In many regards, Steiner is
part of the mystical tradition though he positioned himself in the world in
many different ways.
The is a enormous difference between religion and "rationally based
mysticism" - if some dislike the term esoteric and initiation, which I do.
Among other things, religion is commonly based on exclusive metaphysical
knowledge and by this fact, faith and belief are elicited -since most
cannot duplicate or enter into the original experiences the founder.
Classic and modern mystical disciplines start from a similar place- the
establishment of a paradigm based the assertion of metaphysical knowledge
but offer training and methods that encourage interested parties to find the
same things for themselves. The modern bridge work between these two is
parapsychology, which as many know is an established discipline within many
Universities. Belief is actually a hindrance to this discipline. Those
that become defensive or protective in their spiritual convictions fall
into the believer trap whether they are Waldorf teachers, Anthroposophist or
Jehovah witnesses..
Jeff Auen
Original Message -----
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 9:05 AM
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
) Peter Farrell wrote:
)
) ) I can't help but comment on your suggestion that few understood
) ) relativity in 1917. There is no doubt that the absolute number
) ) was small, probably of the order of a thousand or so, but Steiner
) ) claimed an advantage. Surely his clairvoyance would have given
) ) him sufficient understanding to discuss it
) ) correctly, even if he thought it incorrect.
)
) An excellent point. Along with anthroposophy's pseudo-religious
) self-conception, I suspect that this factor helps account for contemporary
) anthroposophists' general unwillingness to acknowledge that their founder
) made blunders.
)
) Peter S.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:14:37 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sharon wrote, answering a posting, where I among other things pointed to
the cultural xenophobia of some of the argumentation, cultivated by
PLANS at its site and on this list:
) I think you and Supreme Court Justice Scalia don't understand the
) Constitution. I am part of a very small and unprotected minority in this
) country, I'm not a fool, I know that if I don't fight with all my might
) now, this country will be a Theocracy in twenty years. Where does that
) leave me? Will you break my legs to make me bough?
That is what I was referring to.
Some weeks ago I saw a TV-program on the xenophobic 'Danish people's
party' that clearly made me aware of it.
It is the same type of argumentation at times cultivated by 'People for
Legal and Non-Secterian Schools' that also is used by the 'Danish
people's party' in Denmark against Muslims in Denmark and its smearing
and fear-cultivating campaign against Islam.
The 'people's party' depicts Muslims as invading and wanting to 'take
over' Denmark in a not very different way from how PLANS and a number of
its supporters, even if in a somewhat restrained way, clearly cultivate
the picture of anthroposophy and of Waldorf education as a dangerous
'German' (probably a typical catch-word to many Americans) 'threat' to
and violation of the American democracy and Constitution and a 'uniform'
secular American public school system (spread like 'Kudzu' among
American children by hideous anthroposophists, as 'Newpaul' described it
in January on this list).
PLANS draws on and cultivates different people's cultural xenophobia in
different articles at the site of PLANS and on this list, in the
description of this list at Topica using the typical xenophobic
technique of encouraging the telling of 'horror stories' of Waldorf
education in the same way that the xenophobic 'Danish people's party'
and other 'people's parties' encourages and tells its members and the
public 'horror stories' about different people not being born in Denmark
and coming there from a different cultural context.
The recent argumentation on anthroposophy as having integrated and
spreading 'Zoroastrism' through Waldorf schools in US stands out as just
another expression of this xenophobia of PLANS.
I think PLANS and its supporters should reflect on this central strain
of PLANS' work and activities.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:25:40 -0700
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
On 20 Apr 2001, at 10:08, jeff auen wrote:
) On many occasions we have seen where [Steiner] made scientific errors
Jeff,
Would you please post examples of scientific errors made by Steiner that
at least some Anthroposophists have acknowledged to be erroneous?
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:35:22 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Karma- mistakes of
Steiner believed that in all such conflicts, the side that loses was
) karmically destined to lose, Dottie. In some cases they are karmically
) "weakened" already and just looking for a big mean country to come and
) extinguish them. I'm sure he'd approve of your sympathizing with both
sides,
) though, it shows you yourself are advanced spiritually.
) Diana
)
Diana,
This reference above is not correct. Steiner presented karma (bad use of an
Indian term) as something that had
epigensis latent within it- creative possibilities that were unseen and
unpredictable. Karma is not about cause and effect and favoritism. WWI was a
case in point. He described how it was coming through political leaderships
machinations in Germany, Austria, and elsewhere. He claimed it did not have
to "happen" and if it did, it would be devastating to Europe. He actually
sent message and envoys to certain political leaders to warn them of their
momentum in this direction and to re consider.. He also said the same thing
about pre-Hitler Germany and that is one of the reasons, the early storm
troopers and pre- Nazis drove his movement away from Berlin and other parts
of Germany. He also asserted there were times when spiritual assistance to
one side or another was evoked, though.. But this did not just come from
him. There is a well known English "legend" or story of British soldiers
fighting tooth and nail with the Germans in WWI when all of a sudden hosts
of winged spiritual beings filled the field and gave them extra strength and
"weakened" the courage of the Germans. This is often recounted in paranormal
literature and in fact has been experienced by others in war as well.
Jeff Auen
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:29:09 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
| ) Dan wrote:
| )
| )
| ) | I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic"
was
| ) a code word for
| ) | "Jewish," and everybody knew it. Steiner
could
| ) therefore be
| ) | interpreted two different ways according to
who
| ) was listening, and he
| ) | must have been aware of that.
| )
| ) VERY interesting. This can be a valuable
insight;
| ) could you please elaborate, Dan? I will
re-read
| ) some stuff under this light.
| )
| dottie -
|
| You guys do such a disservice to to the real
problems
| that were faced by these parents. It is no
wonder that
| people consider PLANS to be such a fanatical
site. No
| wonder at all. It is quite sad.
|
Clara here:
I am sorry Dottie - I donĄt usually read your
posts, but as this one concerns me directly, I
tried to. However, I donĄt understand you at all.
Let us try to summarize it all step by step:
1) Dan sends a note suggesting "materialistic"
was, in Steiner Linguo, a code for "Jew";
2) Clara [I] write a note stating I find this
insightful and interesting, and ask him to
elaborate further.
3) you write a post stating:
A. [Dottie] | You guys do such a disservice to to
the real problems
| that were faced by these parents.
Question 1: who is "you guys"?
Question 2: which disservice?
Question 3: which problems?
Question 4: who is "these parents"?
B. It is no wonder that | people consider PLANS to
be such a fanatical site. No| wonder at all. It is
quite sad.
Question 5: who considers PLANS such a fanatical
site?
Question 6: What is sad?
And finally -
Question 7: In which way are your statements
relevant at all as regards DanĄs idea about
SteinerĄs use of the word "materialism"?
Waiting for any light on that matter,
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:45:21 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
) ) No, I would call Eurythmy an undeveloped movement art form that does not
) ) relate to mundane sensibilities very well. At least Eurthmy has an inner
) ) intention and relationship to language and movement, something most
dance
) ) forms do not to my eye. If one has not done it, I suggest at least
trying
) ) it. It looks and feels very much like Tai Chi or Chi Gung which from the
) ) outside looks very strange and controlled but on the "inside" is very
) ) effective and powerful.
)
) Steve,
Sorry about the confusion but I always try to avoid lingo and AP terminology
in these discussions. By mundane sensibilities, I meant that most people are
rarely exposed to Eurythmy. Hip hop or Michael Jackson type moon walking
send people ga ga. A good ballet is seen here or there but for the vast
majority its abstract and boring compared to figure skating. Thus, Eurythmy
runs counter to our sensibilities and expectations of dance or movement. If
one does it, this perception changes. Tai Chi is often viewed the same way
by Westerners- slow, graceful, boring, mindless, strange.
Though Eurythmy is not the same as Tai Chi or Chi Gung there are
similarities in intent and practice, in my opinion. All these arts and
disciplines involve the use of the "will" or focused physical attention to
movement and pattern. Since most us do not engage in movement disciplines
and arts, we do not know the inner experiences that can come with them. In
Eurythmy, Tai Ch, Chi Gung and Hatha Yoga, the the intent is varied but the
general principles are there.
In general, as I see it, the intention is, firstly: develop control and
sensitivity of the body and feelings associated with movement- the sense of
locomotion, if you will 2. to train the mind and emotions to follow a set
pattern of movements as perfectly as possible without stumbling or resorting
to fatigue or habit; 3. to become aware of the elements of "feeling energy"
within the body that are associated with certain movements and
visualizations; 4. to transform our bodies and consciousness to produce a
more supple, pliant and responsive body to live with. 5. To explore the
possibility that some of these experiences may point to a non-material
source for certain sensations or insights.
There is more but this may be enough. One important sidelight is the
discovery of subtle forces or energies spoken perennially as Chi, Prana,
life forces, etc. We can talk all day about this and that, but experience
creates something other than thoughts. If one has a pain no amount of talk
will explain it. So it is for those who have engaged this work- they
experience something real and substantial that most people are unaware of.
And this may be the most significance discovery- the insight that who we
think we are physically is not as clear as we think- flesh, bone, water and
neurological responses.
A simple experiment will do. Rest your hand on your leg while sitting or
standing. Now take two minutes and slowly raise your hand to shoulder height
and straight out. Do this four or five times in a row (by lowering it again
at the same rate). Notice the results. Often new and unusual sensations come
up. Frustration and irritation can arise. Its common. Why do this? Its a way
of exploring internal body functions and other things that we take
unconsciously. Bringing unconscious functions to awareness is probably the
most essential part of all these arts and disciplines.
jeff
.
A simple exercise may be
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:51:04 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
why is what you describe "cultural xenpohobia", Sune? Isn't it simply a
hostility toward certain ideas and practices, none of which is peculiar to
any culture? And why are critics of anthroposophy to be found across many
cultures? How does Sven Ove Hansson's article, for example, fit into your
thesis of cultural xenophobia? Or Clara's posts here?
Peter S.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 249
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Religion and Mysticism
By rbc supranet.com
RE: Karma- mistakes of
By rbc supranet.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
On Reflection
By pacbay home.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pacbay home.com
RE: On Reflection
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Karma- mistakes of
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By canndw netzero.net
Re: New here
By canndw netzero.net
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By canndw netzero.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mdarmody home.com
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By soma mwt.net
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By soma mwt.net
Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
By soma mwt.net
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By soma mwt.net
Re: xenophobia
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pkraybil tampabay.rr.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:00:23 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff writes:
) It seems that you are unaware of several "Steiner" or anthroposophical
) oriented discussion groups where his "errors" are openly discussed without
) prejudice or interest in protecting his position.
Don't know much about these groups, but I trust your description of them is
accurate. I referred to a general unwillingness to acknowledge Steiner's
errors, not a universal one.
) Though I am not an card carrying member, I do respect and place Steiner as
) one the foremost philosophers and
) spiritual teachers of the 20th century. And he was not perfect by
) any means
) and did not have an answer for every situation in life.
) On many occasions we have seen where he made scientific errors, offered
) personal opinions that exuded bias toward some individual or movement
) (nothing to write home about- like calling someone an idiot in their
) thinking).
I don't think this last part is an adequate account of Steiner's statements
on race (if that's what you were getting at). Those statements were not
incidental to his philosophy.
) By the way, I make no excuses for his spiritual position in the world. He
) was an esoteric or mystical/teacher/ researcher and claimed to possess
) abilities to access states of metaphysical phenomena. AP's call this
) clairvoyance. I find it more helpful to see this within less mystical
) context and more an extension of capacities that we all possess-
) intuition,
) the ability to visualize, etc. Many other historical figures from Plato to
) Jesus to William Blake shared in some degree what Steiner
) possessed. If some
) want to rationalize away all religious wisdom, inspiration, and
) experience,
) so be it, but at least see this for what it is.
I don't know what it is. I see it as a form of self-delusion in Steiner's
case.
) In many regards,
) Steiner is
) part of the mystical tradition though he positioned himself in
) the world in
) many different ways.
)
) The is a enormous difference between religion and "rationally based
) mysticism" - if some dislike the term esoteric and initiation, which I do.
) Among other things, religion is commonly based on exclusive metaphysical
) knowledge and by this fact, faith and belief are elicited -since most
) cannot duplicate or enter into the original experiences the founder.
Sounds okay to me. I'm not attached to categorizing anthroposophy as a
religion; it's a broad enough term that it may be more fruitful to focus on
the content rather than the label. But much of what Steiner taught falls
under your own description of religion, doesn't it?
) Classic and modern mystical disciplines start from a similar place- the
) establishment of a paradigm based the assertion of metaphysical knowledge
) but offer training and methods that encourage interested parties
) to find the
) same things for themselves. The modern bridge work between these two is
) parapsychology, which as many know is an established discipline
) within many
) Universities.
Economics is a much more established academic discipline; that doesn't stop
critics of maintstream economics from pointing out its various unsupportable
assumptions and unpleasant implications.
) Belief is actually a hindrance to this discipline. Those
) that become defensive or protective in their spiritual convictions fall
) into the believer trap whether they are Waldorf teachers,
) Anthroposophist or
) Jehovah witnesses..
I'm not sure if you mean "belief" in general; if so, I can't agree. All
disciplines depend on a set of beliefs, which can be examined from within
the discipline or from outside of it. I like your description of the
"believer trap", though. But my beef with anthroposophists isn't so much
that they believe too strongly in their chosen doctrine, but that they
haven't reflected on the doctrine's social resonance.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:06:00 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Karma- mistakes of
Jeff wrote:
) WWI was a
) case in point. He described how it was coming through political
) leaderships
) machinations in Germany, Austria, and elsewhere. He claimed it
) did not have
) to "happen" and if it did, it would be devastating to Europe. He actually
) sent message and envoys to certain political leaders to warn them of their
) momentum in this direction and to re consider.. He also said the
) same thing
) about pre-Hitler Germany and that is one of the reasons, the early storm
) troopers and pre- Nazis drove his movement away from Berlin and
) other parts
) of Germany.
I submit the above passage as evidence for the lack of reflection I
mentioned in my previous post.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:10:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter wrote:
) Diana already gave a fine answer to this post, but
) the point is important so
) I'd like to try from a different angle.
)
Peter
) I think the critics go out of their way to point out
) the universalist,
) tolerant, humanist elements in Steiner's work; it is
) precisely these
) elements that strike some of us as most alarming and
) unsettling.
dottie -
Well let me tell you what I find alarming about some
of the things discussed here in the last day that
nobody seems to be paying attention to:
Mr. Peter F wondered about Einstein comments made by
Dr. Steiner and if they could be consider antisemetic,
then others come on the list and hook the word
MATERIALISTIC with Jews....and try to apply that to
Dr. Steiner and even goes as far to say this was a
code word....
Now please remind me WHO tried to connect the word
Materialistic and Jews? Who?....Now turn the mirror
towards yourselves, ye who would connect this and see
the racism seeping out unconsciously...see it?
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:58:05 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: On Reflection
And I submit the comment below about my post is as one of arrogance and
avoidance.
JA: WWI was a
) case in point. He described how it was coming through political
) leaderships
) machinations in Germany, Austria, and elsewhere. He claimed it
) did not have........
)
----- )
)Peter S: I submit the above passage as evidence for the lack of reflection
I
) mentioned in my previous post.
)
) Peter S.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:16:08 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
-----
) Jeff writes:
)
) ) ) Don't know much about these groups, but I trust your description of
them is
) accurate. I referred to a general unwillingness to acknowledge Steiner's
) errors, not a universal one.
)
Jeff :It probably wouldn't help much in your research but they are there and
we fight constantly for freedom from dogma
and the attempts to keep Steiner enthroned.
Peter: ) I don't think this last part is an adequate account of Steiner's
statements
) on race (if that's what you were getting at). Those statements were not
) incidental to his philosophy.
Jeff : I have always acknowledged that he made what appears to us, silly
and biased statements about blacks, the French, Chinese, English,
Americans, Italians, some Jews, and some American presidents (he loathed
Wilson). etc.
I still contend that within the boarder context of evolutionary thinking, he
not a "racist" in the strict use of this term. I have studied his work for
25 years and read copiously of his lectures and books. Nowhere, do I detect
a running belief in the inferiority of races but rather the evolutionary
purpose of races or cultures. Just as I would be out of place in Borneo, so
would they be out of place in America, if instantly transported. .
I think hammering this issue has flattened it and Waldorf people and AP
should cop to it and deal with this contradiction in Steiner and some of
his followers.
..Jeff: .the ability to visualize, etc. Many other historical figures from
Plato to
) ) Jesus to William Blake shared in some degree what Steiner
) ) possessed. ) )
Peter: I don't know what it is. I see it as a form of self-delusion in
Steiner's
) case.
I find this hardly the case if one really studies the man's work and
attempts the training he advised and then cross checks the results with
other sources and traditions. My greatest gripe is his choice not to
"theosophize" his delivery to the public. He did to want to make his efforts
sound simple and systemized so people would digest it easily. On the other
hand, he could have created a better bridge of style and communication at
times. Study of Man by Steiner used in Waldorf is beyond the pale of any
student and even most philosophers and physiologists! The same problem can
be found with Gurdjieff's work and writings. Talk about obtuse! but there
is something beyond the words if one engages the practices they recommend.
I have done this to an extent and found much agreement by experience.
Peter) Sounds okay to me. I'm not attached to categorizing anthroposophy as
a
) religion; it's a broad enough term that it may be more fruitful to focus
on
) the content rather than the label. But much of what Steiner taught falls
) under your own description of religion, doesn't it?
Not really. All religion starts with a primary revelation and "visionary
experience" of "other" realities. Religion begins after this event with
attempts to articulate the founder's primary experience by others. Remember
neither Christ or Buddha or Socrates wrote down anything. Mystical
disciplines start with similar beginnings but the primary teachers instruct
students not to rely on authority or belief but only on direct recreation of
experiences and peer review. This is found in Zen and most schools East and
West. In the West though, there are no gurus or belief systems per se. All
knowledge is used as a working hypothesis until proven to be true or false
or inaccurate. If followers become believers, that's another issue.
)
Economics is a much more established academic discipline; that doesn't stop
) critics of mainstream economics from pointing out its various
unsupportable
) assumptions and unpleasant implications.
)
No problema here. Putting aside hard sciences for now, all academic
disciplines are an experiment in knowledge - not in establishing the Truth.
If someone's says oil is 38 bucks a barrel right now and it will translate
into a 2.11 a gallon, that a fact. If someone, like Steiner says, forcing
children to read and fixating vision too early on in life will affect
eyesight and brain physiology (even if the research was not available at his
time) and it proves to be true (with eyesight problems from reading and
computers on the rise with children), I would say he was being fairly
rational and predictive based on his research and observations of children
and adults.
)
) I'm not sure if you mean "belief" in general; if so, I can't agree. All
) disciplines depend on a set of beliefs, which can be examined from within
) the discipline or from outside of it. I like your description of the
) "believer trap", though. But my beef with anthroposophist isn't so much
) that they believe too strongly in their chosen doctrine, but that they
) haven't reflected on the doctrine's social resonance.
)
By belief, I simply mean, accepting something as true and factual without
sufficient proof or direct experience that can be repeated.
I can believe in God but if I have not "met It" , its a belief even if its
based on partial experience like intuition- but that's not enough for me.
If I "believe" in the concept of atoms, I am actually falling into a trap
because its a workable theory without direct evidence (we cannot see or
measure atoms and their properties vary from "solid" to plasmic states).
Most people visualize atoms as little solid balls in chemistry class. This
is nonsense, of course, but an educational "tool". But we do not jump on
Chem teachers for this. Most people believe their bodies are "solid" but we
are over 80% fluid.
We live in a "belief box" most of the time and not in direct experience of
life, as it is. If we felt the body as it is (if we could internalize our
senses, we would probably feel like pulsating fish with blood and lungs
pumping fluids throughout). Instead we live on our skin and in the "weight"
of the body- on the surface. Its all a matter of perspective. In fact,
there are a whole group of people whose sense perceptions are mixed where
they see - smells; and hear- colors; and taste- tones. Imagine living this
way. Nabovov (sp), the author of Lolita, had this condition. Are they
delusional?different yes or maybe progenitors of a strange future
evolutionary condition?
The point for me is: there is more to heaven and earth than we know and a
little tilt here or there can really change our experience of "reality" and
our beliefs. Just ask Terrance McKenna, if you can (now dead) or Jay Allan
Woolf, physicist- both experimented with South America tribal psychotropics
and were never the same thereafter. Not that I am saying get stoned and lets
agree but certain primal social experiences, whether spontaneous like a near
death experience or excursion into the jungles of Brazil, can change
perception, belief and "reality".
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:23:03 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: On Reflection
Jeff wrote:
) And I submit the comment below about my post is as one of arrogance and
) avoidance.
I plead guilty to arrogance. You don't know what you're talking about on
this topic, and I have no patience for that. As for avoidance, I didn't go
into detail because everyone who's been on the list the past few months has
already heard the details a dozen times. I recommend a quick peek into
Steiner's writings on the First World War to disabuse you of your
impressions. If you really want to know my own opinions on the topic, we
could continue our exchange offlist if you prefer (or on-list for that
matter, it would just mean a lot of repetition for others).
Cheers,
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:28:38 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Karma- mistakes of
I wrote that in war:
)Steiner believed that in all such conflicts, the side that loses was
)karmically destined to lose
Jeff says:
)This reference above is not correct. Steiner presented karma (bad use )of
)an Indian term) as something that had epigensis latent within it- )creative
)possibilities that were unseen and unpredictable.
I'm sure you're right. This sounds like how Waldorf teachers understand
karma. Karma is quite flexible in practice. If they like what's happening,
it's karma; if they don't like what's happening, karma requires that they
intervene.
You said:
)Karma is not about cause and effect and favoritism.
and:
)There is a well known English "legend" or story of British soldiers
)fighting tooth and nail with the Germans in WWI when all of a sudden )hosts
)of winged spiritual beings filled the field and gave them extra )strength
)and "weakened" the courage of the Germans.
Uh-huh. So it is not about favoritism, but sometimes spirits swoop in and
give a little help to one side or the other. Got it.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:35:52 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff writes:
)I find this hardly the case if one really studies the man's work and
)attempts the training he advised and then cross checks the results with
)other sources and traditions.
Peter Farrell:
I have a serious problem with this view. It would be easy for me to say as a
physicist that you can't understand quantum mechanics (for example) without
years of appropriate and directed study. However it is not necessary to
personally understand quantum mechanics to understand that quantum mechanics
"works" in some sense because there is any amount of evidence which can be
personally experienced by people with no understanding of quantum mechanics.
One such example could be the transistor.
If I consider Steiner's work, there are outcomes of his methods that are in
the public domain many of which have been quoted here which are simply
wrong. In fact I think you might be hard pressed to come up with any
original notions of Steiner's which are independently testable which have
subsequently been demonstrated to be true. Why then should I consider
undergoing any form of training to experience some "truth" when the
independent evidence indicates that the methods don't work?
Jeff:
)
) If I "believe" in the concept of atoms, I am actually falling into a trap
)because its a workable theory without direct evidence (we cannot see or
)measure atoms and their properties vary from "solid" to plasmic states).
)Most people visualize atoms as little solid balls in chemistry class. This
)is nonsense, of course, but an educational "tool". But we do not jump on
)Chem teachers for this. Most people believe their bodies are "solid" but we
)are over 80% fluid.
Peter Farrell:
Who says yoiu can't see individual atoms? For about a decade or so this has
not been true. Many people have seen one or two individual atoms of sodium
not using a microscope. I can obtain references but it will have to wait
until Monday (Australian time).
Jeff goes on talk about living in the world and experiencing. How does Jeff
know what my experience of the world is like? Does he think I don't smell
and see and hear and feel and understand?
Peter Farrell.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:03:53 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
I would like to say some more about what Jeff has said about atoms as a
working hypothesis.
)Jeff:
))
)) If I "believe" in the concept of atoms, I am actually falling into a
))trap
))because its a workable theory without direct evidence (we cannot see or
))measure atoms and their properties vary from "solid" to plasmic states).
))Most people visualize atoms as little solid balls in chemistry class. This
))is nonsense, of course, but an educational "tool". But we do not jump on
))Chem teachers for this. Most people believe their bodies are "solid" but
))we
))are over 80% fluid.
)
I think that the evidence for the real existence of atoms is so absolutely
overwhelming that the argument that Jeff makes with atoms as an example is
simply ludicrous. Of course it is not Jeff's argument, it is the standard
Anthroposophical science argument. And of course it has not changed since
the 1920s.
So what if most people believe that there bodies are fluid. I don't. There
are contributors to this list who are real experts in particular areas of
study.I claim physics in particular and science in general. You can't bring
out arguments used by Anthroposophist to convince the faithful and expect
those arguments to carry any weight with people who know something about the
subject at hand.
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:37:57 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff wrote:
)If someone, like Steiner says, forcing children to read and fixating vision
)too early on in life will affect eyesight and brain physiology (even if the
)research was not available at his time)
Jeff, you seem to be suggesting this research *is* available now. Please
cite some studies for us if so. Of course the way this is stated is rather
loaded: no educator would advocate "forcing" children to read "too early."
If you just define "too early" as "before Waldorf teachers think is
appropriate," it's going to be a hard sell here.
There isn't any research to back up Steiner's theories that change of teeth
indicates reading readiness, or that reading before age 7 or 8 negatively
affects vision or brain physiology.
)and it proves to be true (with eyesight problems from reading and
) )computers on the rise with children),
Jeff, please post what you studies are referring to, so we can see whether
they validate Waldorf practices or claims. While I can believe someone may
be claiming excessive computer time could cause eyesight problems, Waldorf
calls *any* computer time excessive, and I don't think you're going to find
any studies showing that *any* computer use before puberty causes eyesight
problems. I'm even more dubious that there is a study out there showing an
increase in children having "eyesight problems from reading."
There are no studies "proving" Steiner's rigid nonsense about not reading
before change of teeth (actually, he would have preferred children not read
till puberty). His concern with "early" reading was not "eyesight" but
spiritual receptivity.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 22:50:58 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff, to Peter:
| We live in a "belief box" most of the time and
not in direct experience of| life, as it is. If we
felt the body as it is (if we could internalize
our
| senses, we would probably feel like pulsating
fish with blood and lungs| pumping fluids
throughout). Instead we live on our skin and in
the "weight"| of the body- on the surface. Its
all a matter of perspective. In fact,| there are a
whole group of people whose sense perceptions are
mixed where| they see - smells; and hear- colors;
and taste- tones. Imagine living this| way.
Nabovov (sp), the author of Lolita, had this
condition. Are they| delusional?different yes or
maybe progenitors of a strange future|
evolutionary condition?
|
| The point for me is: there is more to heaven
and earth than we know and a| little tilt here or
there can really change our experience of
"reality" and| our beliefs. Just ask Terrance
McKenna, if you can (now dead) or Jay Allan|
Woolf, physicist- both experimented with South
America tribal psychotropics| and were never the
same thereafter. Not that I am saying get stoned
and lets| agree but certain primal social
experiences, whether spontaneous like a near|
death experience or excursion into the jungles of
Brazil, can change| perception, belief and
"reality".
Clara:
I just want to suggest a counter-argument. Change
of perception through the use of psychotropics is
*not* evidence that "there is more to heaven and
earth than we know".
Psychotropic substances, wether tribal or
industrial, act on the brainĄs physical
structure/fluids exchange/impulses circuits or
whatever. Same with people with crossed senses;
this condition can be due to neuro-physiological
problems, constituting very concrete phenomena.
So, the xamans in the Amazon, or the white people
who go through their initiation - you argue (if I
understand you well) theyĄve "expanded" their
perceptions and can now perceive things [that are
out there, in the world] that the other people
cannot perceive.
IĄd argue, the reason they see
[sense/smell/hear...] all that is, theyĄve messed
up their neural circuits by means of a chemical
substance.
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:22:07 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff:
)Just ask Terrance McKenna, if you can (now dead) or Jay Allan|
)Woolf, physicist- both experimented with South America tribal
) )psychotropics| and were never the same thereafter. Not that I am )saying
)get stoned and lets| agree
Well, that would be the first thing you've said that I might agree with. If
we all got stoned, we would realize we all agree with each other in a most
beautiful way after all, and Steiner would finally make sense :)
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:26:15 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Clara, I thought Dottie was commenting that she thought (and I happen to
agree with her) that Dan was "fishing" by claiming (without any support
other than his opinion) that Steiner was referring to Jews when he said
"materialistic".
This is not too different from Debra Snell's recent tangle with Neil Faiman
over the "meaning" of the Advent Garden.
David
Dan wrote:
I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was a code word for "Jewish,"
and everybody knew it. Steiner could therefore be interpreted two different
ways according to who was listening, and he must have been aware of that.
And Clara replied:
VERY interesting. This can be a valuable insight; could you please
elaborate, Dan? I will re-read some stuff under this light.
dottie -
You guys do such a disservice to to the real problems | that were faced by
these parents. It is no wonder that | people consider PLANS to be such a
fanatical site. No wonder at all. Its quite sad.
Clara here:
) I am sorry Dottie - I donĄt usually read your
) posts, but as this one concerns me directly, I
) tried to. However, I donĄt understand you at all.
)
) Let us try to summarize it all step by step:
)
) 1) Dan sends a note suggesting "materialistic"
) was, in Steiner Linguo, a code for "Jew";
)
) 2) Clara [I] write a note stating I find this
) insightful and interesting, and ask him to
) elaborate further.
)
) 3) you write a post stating:
) A. [Dottie] | You guys do such a disservice to to
) the real problems
) | that were faced by these parents.
)
) Question 1: who is "you guys"?
) Question 2: which disservice?
) Question 3: which problems?
) Question 4: who is "these parents"?
)
) B. It is no wonder that | people consider PLANS to
) be such a fanatical site. No| wonder at all. It is
) quite sad.
)
) Question 5: who considers PLANS such a fanatical
) site?
) Question 6: What is sad?
)
) And finally -
)
) Question 7: In which way are your statements
) relevant at all as regards DanĄs idea about
) SteinerĄs use of the word "materialism"?
)
) Waiting for any light on that matter
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:42:50 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: New here
Hello.
Could you please tell me how is it evinced that a choleric child "is not
appreciated" at your school?
David (all the kids seem choleric to me at our school)
-----------
I am new to this list. My son is currently enrolled in a Waldorf school in
Alaska. He has
been profiled as a choleric and as I have recently found out, this type of
child is not appreciated in this school. Currently our son and family are
operating in a mode of utter devastation. I hope the list will help me come
to some sort of understanding on how a school can be allowed to operate in
such a discriminatory manner.|
--------------
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:52:02 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
Sharon: Why don't you tell parents that the reason there is a strong
presence of gnomes in the classroom is because Steiner believed that gnomes
actually exist?
David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes in
gnomes.
Then Sharon asked: Let me ask...have you ever belonged to any other
religious group besides Waldorf? If so, in what way is/was it different to
Waldorf? I am glad that you will continue to think about this subject, that
means there is hope.
Well, there's my church (United Church of Christ - Congregationalist). In
my earlier days, one could say my interest in the Grateful Dead bordered on
religious. In both cases, I can easily differentiate from how we speak of
our school.
If I haven't said it before, maybe I should now. Some of what I read here,
even though my school doesn't reflect the same pathologies, worries me quite
a lot. I am very conscious that perhaps my own school is not at all
representative of waldorf education as a whole. For my part, I view every
school independently, because I have seen how very different the schools can
be.
David
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:59:16 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
in
gnomes.))
As in little dwarflike people who live in the interior of the earth?
Wow....
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:06:17 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
) ((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
) in
) gnomes.))
)
Sharon:
Tell people that on your brochures and be sure they understand that *before*
they move across states for your Athroposophic Initiation.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:48:50 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
) Sharon wrote:
)
) ) ) "Correspondence and Documents", Steiner includes a nice little
) ) ) schematic illustration of his sub race chronology in a letter to
) ) ) Marie, the above quote is in the content of the letter.
Peter:
I would love to see this, the sketch as well.
Sharon:
I got the book back today, I'll quote it here and send you the sketch. I'll
lend you the book as I think you will find it *very* interesting, just send
me a mailing address. (Sune...hope you are listening as you also asked for
this.)
"Correspondence and Documents", 1901-1925. Rudolf Steiner Marie Steiner von
Sivers. C 1988 Rudolf Steiner Press London, Anthroposophic Press New York.
ps. 58-59.
Letter to Marie from Steiner, 28 April 1905.
...."Because the important thing is that the theosophical point of view
should unite with science. We cannot and must not protect the dilettante
bungling of natural medicine. That would be dangerous. One has to look at
these things on a deeper level. The whole thing is connected with our Race
cycle. All the sub-races of our five Root races had a Semitic element up to
now. The last came to Europe via Spain, as you know. But such elements become
exhausted at the end of a cycle and a new element must evolve. Actually we
already have the new element in our culture, but it has not unfolded fully.
The whole thing must be seen as the interlinking of two spiritual whirls
which meet in Christ. I enclose a symbolic diagram which you can study and
decipher.
We are now at the sign (circle with arrow). We are not completely Christian
yet and the Semitic elements from an earlier time are still present, but they
are acting as a dissolving ferment. It is no coincidence that the men who
have had the strongest influence on the European masses in recent times
through their sharp, clear, but totally materialistic thinking, Marx and
Lasalle, were Jewish. And it is no coincidence that men who worked for
synthesis and construction, not intellectual dissolution, such as Bismarck,
Haeckel etc., are minor thinkers, dilettantish and still dull with regard to
all higher concerns of mankind."
Sharon:
Etc, etc., he goes on and on as usual. The illustration is a swirl called
"Line of initiations", with Christ in the middle of swirl. Steiner goes
through the sub races and branches:
"Branch of the ancient Indian culture 1st sub-race
Branch of the old Zarathrustra culture 2nd sub-race
Branch of the Babyl. Assyr. culture 3rd sub-race
Greco Roman world 4th sub-race
continuing Semitic influence
Fertilization of Germanic culture through Semitism and Christianity 5th
sub-race (circle and arrow)
The Semitic influence wanes here gradually. Christianity in the future will
be free therefrom"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:11:03 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Dissolving confusion [Re: Zoroastrianism]
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
) Just a small self-correction; ;the naming of the weekdays does not only
) refer to what _has_ happened, part of the preseent 'cosmic' week belongs
) to the future.
)
) What the naming of the days of the weeks
) reflect on a small scale, is described by the esoteric tradition more in
) its origin, with a cosmic Satur-day, Sun-day and Mo(o)n-day having
) passed, we at present live during a two-phased Mardi-Mercredi
) (Tuesday-Wednesday) and a cosmic Jeudi (Jupiter-day; Thursday) and
) Vendri (Venus-day; Friday) lying ahead.
Sharon:
According to Steiner the whole progression of the Earth's evolution was laid down by the
initiates in the course of the days of the week, and each day is divided into four
parts. Each part has a planet assigned to it. For example, part 1 Monday - moon.
morning.
part 2 Venus afternoon. [mercury]
part 3 Mercury [Venus] pre-midnight
part 4 Sun.post midnight.
Waldorf schools are on this schedule, right?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 03:02:02 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
) Some weeks ago I saw a TV-program on the xenophobic 'Danish people's
) party' that clearly made me aware of it.
)
) It is the same type of argumentation at times cultivated by 'People for
) Legal and Non-Secterian Schools' that also is used by the 'Danish
) people's party' in Denmark against Muslims in Denmark and its smearing
) and fear-cultivating campaign against Islam.
Sharon:
As I pointed out before Sune, I am afraid of your organization. Xenaphobia is
fear of the unknown. I'm not afraid of the unknown, I'm afraid of the known.
I do not trust your organization in any way, shape or form. You guys don't
play fair, you withhold information and you duped my family. The very fact
that you hide who you are is cause for alarm. You take by stealth. I fear
your deception.
There is a massive push in this country to undo many of the things that I
hold dear. I have reason for concern.
) Sune:
)
) The 'people's party' depicts Muslims as invading and wanting to 'take
) over' Denmark in a not very different way from how PLANS and a number of
) its supporters, even if in a somewhat restrained way, clearly cultivate
) the picture of anthroposophy and of Waldorf education as a dangerous
) 'German' (probably a typical catch-word to many Americans) 'threat' to
) and violation of the American democracy and Constitution and a 'uniform'
) secular American public school system
Sharon:
You guys do want to take over, it is your grand plan, I have read it from
Steiner many times. You are dangerous because you don't tell us who you are
and you cause people suffering because of this deception. I have never heard
of any stealth Muslim group in the public school system, neither has any
Muslim group duped my family. I think you are a threat to Democracy and the
Constitution.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:10:37 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: xenophobia
) Sharon:
) As I pointed out before Sune, I am afraid of your organization. Xenaphobia is
) fear of the unknown. I'm not afraid of the unknown, I'm afraid of the known.
) I do not trust your organization in any way, shape or form. You guys don't
) play fair, you withhold information and you duped my family. The very fact
) that you hide who you are is cause for alarm. You take by stealth. I fear
) your deception.
Bea:
This is definately true of the steiner schools and organisation in the UK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 04:49:05 -0700
From: "Paula Kraybill" (pkraybil tampabay.rr.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
There is a study (or studies) somewhere, and I will find them when I have a
chance. In this study, researchers have documented vision problems as the
result of persistent low level light in infancy (nightlight in the room
where baby sleeps, and the infant never experiences periods of complete
darkness).
Paula K
----- Original Message -----
From: Diana Winters (winters_diana hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)
)
) Jeff wrote:
)
) )If someone, like Steiner says, forcing children to read and fixating
vision
) )too early on in life will affect eyesight and brain physiology (even if
the
) )research was not available at his time)
)
) Jeff, you seem to be suggesting this research *is* available now. Please
) cite some studies for us if so. Of course the way this is stated is rather
) loaded: no educator would advocate "forcing" children to read "too early."
) If you just define "too early" as "before Waldorf teachers think is
) appropriate," it's going to be a hard sell here.
)
) There isn't any research to back up Steiner's theories that change of
teeth
) indicates reading readiness, or that reading before age 7 or 8 negatively
) affects vision or brain physiology.
)
) )and it proves to be true (with eyesight problems from reading and
) ) )computers on the rise with children),
)
) Jeff, please post what you studies are referring to, so we can see whether
) they validate Waldorf practices or claims. While I can believe someone may
) be claiming excessive computer time could cause eyesight problems, Waldorf
) calls *any* computer time excessive, and I don't think you're going to
find
) any studies showing that *any* computer use before puberty causes eyesight
) problems. I'm even more dubious that there is a study out there showing an
) increase in children having "eyesight problems from reading."
)
)
) There are no studies "proving" Steiner's rigid nonsense about not reading
) before change of teeth (actually, he would have preferred children not
read
) till puberty). His concern with "early" reading was not "eyesight" but
) spiritual receptivity.
) Diana
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:57:26 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
David:
)Clara, I thought Dottie was commenting that she thought (and I happen )to
)agree with her) that Dan was "fishing" by claiming (without any )support
)other than his opinion) that Steiner was referring to Jews )when he said
)"materialistic".
I supported it mentioning that I have had religious people (Christians)
explain to me earnestly that the problem with Jews is that they are
materialistic. They aren't interested in Jesus because they prefer worldly
wealth, etc. It is not said so openly today in the US as it was maybe 30
years ago, but it is a well-known stereotype of Jews (they control world
finance, pull strings behind the scenes, etc.) that I have little doubt
everyone reading this list has heard another time in their life, so I find
this disingenuous, David.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 250
-- Topica Digest --
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
By winters_diana hotmail.com
The cultural xenophobia of PLANS
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By soma mwt.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: New here
By snell netshel.net
Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
By rbc supranet.com
RE: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Sports
By sarina bainbridge.net
Fix for Topica / Macintosh Outlook Express "Date Sent" bug
By faiman jlc.net
The real contribution to education
By pacbay home.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pacbay home.com
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pkraybil tampabay.rr.com
Education and false values
By pacbay home.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
By pacbay home.com
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By canndw netzero.net
Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By canndw netzero.net
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By canndw netzero.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pacbay home.com
Re: Karma- mistakes of
By pacbay home.com
Re: On Reflection
By pacbay home.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 11:43:01 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sune:
)It is the same type of argumentation at times cultivated by 'People for
)Legal and Non-Secterian Schools' that also is used by the 'Danish
)people's party' in Denmark against Muslims in Denmark and its smearing
)and fear-cultivating campaign against Islam.
Sune, this is ridiculous even for you.
The critics of Waldorf do not have a problem with the ethnic origin of
Waldorf educators. You cannot distinguish criticism of an organization's
practices and principles from racial prejudice?
)The 'people's party' depicts Muslims as invading and wanting to 'take
)over' Denmark in a not very different way from how PLANS and a number )of
)its supporters, even if in a somewhat restrained way, clearly )cultivate
)the picture of anthroposophy and of Waldorf education as a )dangerous
)'German' (probably a typical catch-word to many Americans)
Except that most of the parents on this list were eating up this "German"
education for years - put our kids on waiting lists, begged them to take our
children, worked like slaves for the schools. We were dancing Maypoles for
years, doing Martinmas and Michaelmas and Whitsuntide and enthusiastically
embracing cultural traditions we barely understood and revering saints we
had never heard of before Waldorf. To picture us as having some creepy idea
about Germans, or a fear of their culture, would be funny if it weren't such
a pathetic argument.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:05:06 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sharon wrote:
) Sune Nordwall wrote:
) ) Some weeks ago I saw a TV-program on the xenophobic 'Danish people's
) ) party' that clearly made me aware of it.
) )
) ) It is the same type of argumentation at times cultivated by 'People for
) ) Legal and Non-Secterian Schools' that also is used by the 'Danish
) ) people's party' in Denmark against Muslims in Denmark and its smearing
) ) and fear-cultivating campaign against Islam.
)
) Sharon:
) As I pointed out before Sune, I am afraid of your organization. Xenaphobia is
) fear of the unknown.
Webster's New World Dictionary (1974) of your language; American, does
not agree with your turn of it. It says: Xenophobia - fear or hatred of
strangers or foreigners.
) Sharon:
) You guys do want to take over, it is your grand plan, I have read it from
) Steiner many times.
This is a typical xenophobic view cultivated by PLANS of the same
caliber as that of different 'nationalists' in relation to 'Muslims' in
Europe and as that of right-wing Americans in relation to 'Communists'
during a greater part of last century.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:03:41 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
) I think I missed the import of this the first time around. Sune, are you
) really saying that you think people cannot "fully understand each other and
) evaluate the meaning and truth-character of each others thoughts, opinions
) and views", even when those views are clearly expressed?
Human language is a potentially extremely complex means of expression.
At times it is used in a simple way to express (at least seemingly)
simple thoughts, concepts, opinions and views, feelings and intentions.
In those cases the criterion for probable understanding to a reasonable
degree between two people expressed by Dan; that they both take on their
pants in a similar way, one leg at a time, possibly has some degree of
applicability. How very imprecise it can be even in those cases is shown
by the fact that also more or less mentally handicapped in a number of
cases put on their pants one leg at a time.
But I think what Dan expressed on pants, legs and understanding, even if
polemic, gives a hint of his views and demands on people; that they
really should not think thoughts that cannot be expressed as or reduced
to simple statements about what is more or less immediately possible to
see with the eyes and touch with the hands by anybody having eyes and
hands, at least in principle.
I think such a world, implicit in the demand by Dan, if actually
developed in a consequent way, in the end demands the reduction of man
to an automaton. I don't want to live in such a world, reduced to a
humanoid. Therefore I argue Dan's simplified expressions of such demands
and arguments, as his last version of it; the way of putting on pants as
a criterion of ability to understand people.
As to your specific question, it refers to what you describe as 'views
[that] are clearly expressed'. In the case of people like Steiner and
other more than normally complex individuals, I think if you do some
reading of what he wrote and expressed in and outside lectures, it
becomes increasingly clear how complex the thoughts, concepts and views
were that he tried to express.
In such cases, what at the face in normal contexts may stand out as
'clearly expressed views' at times reveals itself as something much more
complex than what you think you understand when at first reading it, in
the case of Steiner often far beyond what one normally meets.
Judging it from your first reading then at times becomes a quite
haphazard(?) undertaking, possible to clarify only by also looking at
what he said in a previous or following lecture, often the full lecture
series or lecture series over a longer period.
A journalistic way of reading one or other sentence or lecture can both
turn out to be a key to understanding as well as lead to serious
misunderstanding, depending on what you read and your previous
experiences and conceptions, preconceptions or misconceptions. I think
PLANS, its site and this list, including much of what you write, makes
that clear.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:42:10 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Paula wrote:
) There is a study (or studies) somewhere, and I will find them when I have a
) chance. In this study, researchers have documented vision problems as the
) result of persistent low level light in infancy (nightlight in the room
) where baby sleeps, and the infant never experiences periods of complete
) darkness).
... http://www.cnsnews.com/InDepth/archive/199905/IND19990513e.html ;-)
?
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:50:44 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sune:
)This is a typical xenophobic view cultivated by PLANS of the same
)caliber as that of different 'nationalists' in relation to 'Muslims' in
)Europe and as that of right-wing Americans in relation to 'Communists'
)during a greater part of last century.
Sune, you cannot distinguish between being afraid of dangerous ideas or
practices, and being afraid of people of a particular national origin?
Considering that Waldorf educators are of many different national origins,
it's clearly absurd, and as I pointed out, the "German" aspects of Waldorf,
which you think Americans fear, were eagerly embraced by the American
Waldorf parents here.
If anything, the alternative (non-mainstream) cultural aspects of Waldorf
are a big draw to American Waldorf parents.
It's interesting to watch you try to come up with new angles all the time,
Sune.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:04:05 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
Sune:
)But I think what Dan expressed on pants, legs and understanding, even )if
)polemic, gives a hint of his views and demands on people; that they
)really should not think thoughts that cannot be expressed as or reduced
)to simple statements about what is more or less immediately possible to
)see with the eyes and touch with the hands by anybody having eyes and
)hands, at least in principle.
)I think such a world, implicit in the demand by Dan, if actually
)developed in a consequent way, in the end demands the reduction of man
)to an automaton. I don't want to live in such a world, reduced to a
)humanoid.
Oh give it a rest, Sune. The "we all put on our pants the same way" thing is
a figure of speech, pointing out pomposity and pretentiousness. You are such
a chuckle. You go on spouting the same pretentious earnest nonsense Dan was
making fun of, with such obvious sincerity, I'm sure the irony is lost on
you.
)In the case of people like Steiner and other more than normally )complex
)individuals, I think if you do some reading of what he wrote )and expressed
)in and outside lectures, it becomes increasingly clear )how complex the
)thoughts, concepts and views were that he tried to )express.
Good grief, Sune. (shaking head)
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 17:05:45 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS
Diana Winters wrote:
) Sune:
) )It is the same type of argumentation at times cultivated by 'People for
) )Legal and Non-Secterian Schools' that also is used by the 'Danish
) )people's party' in Denmark against Muslims in Denmark and its smearing
) )and fear-cultivating campaign against Islam.
)
) Sune, this is ridiculous even for you.
)
) The critics of Waldorf do not have a problem with the ethnic origin of
) Waldorf educators. You cannot distinguish criticism of an organization's
) practices and principles from racial prejudice?
Xenophobia is a broad term that does not primarily or necessarily have
to do with racial prejudice but that just as much includes cultural
prejudice and the cultivation of it, the way PLANS does. See
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=xenophobia or
http://www.cjd.org/paper/truth.html or probably any dictionary you have
at home.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 11:13:10 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) )
) ) Sharon:
) ) As I pointed out before Sune, I am afraid of your organization. Xenaphobia is
) ) fear of the unknown.
Sune:
) Webster's New World Dictionary (1974) of your language; American, does
) not agree with your turn of it. It says: Xenophobia - fear or hatred of
) strangers or foreigners.
Sharon:
The dictionary definition agrees with me Sune. As I said, "fear of the unknown".
Waldorf is no *stranger* to me. "Stranger" is the *very* word that I *chose* to
use in the post I made that started this discussion. I know Waldorf intimately,
from experience and from my reading, it is not foreign to me. I am clearly not
xenophobic because Waldorf is not a stranger to me. Ps. I understand the meaning
of xenophobia.
)
) ) Sharon:
) ) You guys do want to take over, it is your grand plan, I have read it from
) ) Steiner many times.
Sune:
) This is a typical xenophobic view cultivated by PLANS of the same
) caliber as that of different 'nationalists' in relation to 'Muslims' in
) Europe and as that of right-wing Americans in relation to 'Communists'
) during a greater part of last century.
Sharon:
Hardly Sune. Your argument is weak. Read Steiner. Why does Waldorf operate by
stealth? Why did Waldorf dupe my family? Why do Anthroposophists promote a racist
dogma? Why do you ignore our Constitution?
Anthroposphy is fascist.
Rudolf Steiner: "To put it bluntly, we can say that the earth and all it can yield
will belong to those who now cultivate their individualities. Those, however, who
do not develop their individual I will be dependent on joining a group that will
instruct them in what they should think, feel, will and do". (The Universal Human,
Rudolf Steiner, p24. Anthroposophic Press. Lectures given between 1909-1916. c
1990.)
Same book p 16 and 17: "Indeed, it is the peculiar nature of anthroposophical
truth that the observer must not hold any opinion of his or her own about it and
must not have any preference for this or that theory. The observer must not like
this or that view more than any other because of his individual peculiarities. As
long as we have our own opinions, it is impossible for the true secrets of the
world to be revealed to us. We must pursue knowledge quite individually, but our
individuality must be so developed that it no longer retains anything personal; it
must be free of sympathies and antipathies. This must be taken very seriously.
Those who still prefer personal ideas and views and are inclined to this or that
because of their education or temperament will never know objective truth......
The anthroposophical world view in its true form is closely interwoven with human
individuality, for this world view must spring from the I-force of the
individuality and yet be independent of it. The individuality as such does not
matter. The person in whom anthroposophical wisdom appears must be completely
unimportant compared to this wisdom; the person as such does not matter at all. It
is only essential that this person has developed so far that his or her personal
likes, dislikes, and opinions do not taint the anthroposophical wisdom".
United States Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia: "A dead Constitution, that's
what I'm selling." (Speech given at Wisconsin University).
"The death penalty - that's a laugher. Right to die - forget about it. Right to
abortion - the same thing." (Wisconsin State Journal).
"If you don't like white males, persuade the people and lead a revolution. And
you'll get beat, too." (Capital Times).
Dan Barker, Freedom from Religion Foundation: "Theists are afraid people will
think for themselves. Athiests are afraid they won't."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
)
) I supported it mentioning that I have had religious
) people (Christians)
) explain to me earnestly that the problem with Jews
) is that they are
) materialistic. They aren't interested in Jesus
) because they prefer worldly
) wealth, etc.
dottie -
Well see the problem that my Christian have with Jews
is not that they are materialistic. No, it is because
they hold that the Jews killed Gd...bottom
line...nothing to do with materialism...
I believe that the people here tied it together
because it is something that most of us have heard
since we were children. And unfortunately still here
although more under the table than before.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:47:10 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: New here
)-----------
)I am new to this list. My son is currently enrolled in a Waldorf school in
)Alaska. He has
)been profiled as a choleric and as I have recently found out, this type of
)child is not appreciated in this school. Currently our son and family are
)operating in a mode of utter devastation. I hope the list will help me come
)to some sort of understanding on how a school can be allowed to operate in
)such a discriminatory manner.|
Debra:
Waldorf schools do not operate by the same rules as other institutions.
They use Steiner. All children are labeled in Waldorf. Every single one of
them are being spiritually judged. This judgement affects how they are
treated. If your son is acting out at school, LISTEN to him. Chances are
great that he is having a normal reaction to a wacky environment. From my
experience, most of the boys who are labeled in Waldorf as problematic,
move into other (read: normal) schools and lose the label and the behavior
problems.
Waldorf is wacky and some children are more sensitive to being in a wacky
environment than others. I think the children who act out are healthier
than the ones who don't. Take your son and RUN to the nearest Waldorf exit.
I have two boys who are former Waldorf students. Welcome to the list.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:51:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS [Re: Dissolving confusion]
) Sharon:
) Hardly Sune. Your argument is weak. Read Steiner.
) Why does Waldorf operate by
) stealth? Why did Waldorf dupe my family? Why do
) Anthroposophists promote a racist
) dogma? Why do you ignore our Constitution?
) Anthroposphy is fascist.
)
) Rudolf Steiner: "To put it bluntly, we can say that
) the earth and all it can yield
) will belong to those who now cultivate their
) individualities. Those, however, who
) do not develop their individual I will be dependent
) on joining a group that will
) instruct them in what they should think, feel, will
) and do". (The Universal Human,
) Rudolf Steiner, p24. Anthroposophic Press. Lectures
) given between 1909-1916. c
) 1990.)
)
dottie -
Hi Sharon,
We must read this two different ways. For me how I
read the quote above is about the free thinker willing
to go past what our society tells us we must think.
And those that do stay in the box will be followers of
those who were unafraid to think of their own and come
about conclusions that serve the whole.
The quotes below that you posted I take as sharing
with me that I must be above judging people and having
my emotions run away with me and how that can affect
my outlook on things. To be a most unbiased as I can.
I also get that from the Budhha, remaining unmoved by
peoples emotions in order to get to the truth.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:01:31 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: Simplified logic [Re: bias]
Sune wrote:
) Judging it from your first reading then at times becomes a quite
) haphazard(?) undertaking, possible to clarify only by also looking at
) what he said in a previous or following lecture, often the full lecture
) series or lecture series over a longer period.
)
) A journalistic way of reading one or other sentence or lecture can both
) turn out to be a key to understanding as well as lead to serious
) misunderstanding, depending on what you read and your previous
) experiences and conceptions, preconceptions or misconceptions.
A very good point, and I happliy accept this as a major premise. Your
conclusion below, however, is missing a minor premise:
) I think
) PLANS, its site and this list, including much of what you write, makes
) that clear.
What instances have you come across, on the PLANS site or on this list,
where a critic has quoted from a Steiner text with which you are familiar
and has in your view misunderstood Steiner's meaning? The usual response to
an out of context quote is to provide the context so that readers can decide
for themselves. How about if we try that method with one particular lecture
series of your choosing, and then with one of mine, and see what results we
get? You might be surprised by the human capacity for mutual understanding.
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:01:33 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: The cultural xenophobia of PLANS
Sune wrote:
) Xenophobia is a broad term that does not primarily or necessarily have
) to do with racial prejudice but that just as much includes cultural
) prejudice and the cultivation of it, the way PLANS does.
I still don't understand why you think PLANS's presentation of international
critics of anthroposophy constitutes *cultural* xenophobia. Ideological,
maybe, but cultural? Do you think anthroposophy is its own "culture" unto
itself? If not, how does bringing together German, Scandinavian, and other
critics of anthroposophy count as a cultural prejudice? Your lack of
response to Diana's repeated query on this matter suggests that you really
can't or don't distinguish criticism of ideas from fear of different
cultures. If that is in fact your position, then everything you've said so
far about PLANS would qualify ipso facto as instances of cultural prejudice
(or reverse cultural prejudice, if you prefer). Is this what you mean by
people being unable to communicate with each other?
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:51:31 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarina bainbridge.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
Diana wrote:
) Actually my husband said they (jokingly, sort of) called it
"bombardment,"
) and he described a much more aggressive game than what I remember
Hey, I remember "bombardment"! That's what we called it, no joke
intended. Your husband was right, our version was a very different
game from dodgeball. We played it lined up against a wall, like a
firing squad. It was tricky running and leaping sideways, and it was
definitely way more aggressive (sometimes would leave marks). The best
part about it was that everyone got nailed in the end, even the
"jocks," but it was pretty damn serious. I could see the names being
used interchangeably, though, depending on where you are.
Dodgeball was where one or several kids were "it," and they tried to
tag the others with the ball (by either throwing it at you or touching
you with it). If you got tagged by a ball you were "frozen", and the
only way out was to make a bridge with your body so someone else could
squiggle underneath to "release" you. Kind of like freeze tag or TV
tag...
Hey, thanks for the memories. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sarina McDonald
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:13:09 -0400
From: Neil Faiman (faiman jlc.net)
Subject: Fix for Topica / Macintosh Outlook Express "Date Sent" bug
Gary Bonhiver and I have observed a bug in the Outlook Express mail program
(version 5) for the Macintosh, which causes it to come up with an erroneous
"Sent" date (typically in 2018) for mail messages which were created by the
Topica mailing list web submission feature.
If you are an Outlook Express user who has experienced this problem, I have
created an Applescript that you can use to repair the dates on the corrupted
messages in your mail folder. To download the script (and for complete
instructions on its use), go to
(http://www.jlc.net/~faiman/topica_fixup.html).
-Neil Faiman
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:21:12 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: The real contribution to education
Ah, but we don't have to get stoned to see alike or agree with some things
Steiner may have said. If one engages in an authentic spiritual practice or
path ( especially with others), commonly shared insights and experiences
become a everyday matter of fact. And argumentation would cease. The only
issue would be clarifying fine points of discussion and becoming creative
and independent thinkers. And then we would rise to the occasion and support
the effort of all to create a better educational system for our kids.
I see no movement towards synthesis or collaboration here so far. The real
issue for me is: there anything in Waldorf or Steiner's methodologies that
have value or are truly insightful in educating kids. If there are, discuss
this thoroughly. If not, move on, let go of the discussion group buzz. There
are more important matters like the increase in illiteracy and the public
school system's tendency to adopt a Ritalin therapy campaign to stop "wild
kids" who cannot concentrate or learn. Maybe these parents should be looking
at dietary factors among other things and see the quantity of caffeine,
sugar and stimulants are in their cereal, pop and yogurt bars. Mountain dew,
by the way, has more caffeine and sugar than coke as I recall. Televison and
computer video games are creating a generation with an attention span of 1.5
seconds before the next exciting image or sound comes forth..
jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)
) Jeff:
)
) )Just ask Terrance McKenna, if you can (now dead) or Jay Allan|
) )Woolf, physicist- both experimented with South America tribal
) ) )psychotropics| and were never the same thereafter. Not that I am
)saying
) )get stoned and lets| agree
)
) Well, that would be the first thing you've said that I might agree with.
If
) we all got stoned, we would realize we all agree with each other in a most
) beautiful way after all, and Steiner would finally make sense :)
) Diana
)
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:33:20 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
David:
Clara, I thought Dottie was commenting that she
thought (and I happen to | agree with her) that
Dan was "fishing" by claiming (without any
support| other than his opinion) that Steiner was
referring to Jews when he said| "materialistic".
(snip)
Clara:
Hi David, ok, that *might* be what she meant,
though I repeat, I find her words so encrypted I
wouldnĄt have guessed. I would have no problem if
she said just what you say above; it is a valid
position, we can argue it, etc. The way you put
it - I may agree with you or disagree; we can have
a decent exchange of ideas about it.
But note, this is *not* how Dottie put things.
What happened was - Dan mentioned an idea - I
wrote that I found it interesting and asked him to
elaborate further - Dottie sends a wraped post
about how "you guys" are doing a disservice to
"those parents" and how this is "sad" and shows
that PLANS is "fanatic". To this moment I still
cannot envisage the logical connection between
what she said to me and what I commented about
DanĄs post. I would think I have the right to like
something he suggested and ask him to tell me
more.
Likewise, I think you have every right to
disagree with Dan and claim that his statement is
not well founded. I find this very legitimate;
bring forward your counter arguments, etc, let us
discuss. What I find difficult to bear is this
zealot attitude, "donĄt say anything I donĄt like
about Dr Steiner or IĄll say you are doing people
wrong and are fanatical".
I hope you see my point, David.
Clara
| Dan wrote:
| I believe in Steiner's time "materialistic" was
a code word for "Jewish,"
| and everybody knew it. Steiner could therefore
be interpreted two different
| ways according to who was listening, and he must
have been aware of that.
| And Clara replied:
| VERY interesting. This can be a valuable
insight; could you please
| elaborate, Dan? I will re-read some stuff under
this light.
|
| dottie -
| You guys do such a disservice to to the real
problems | that were faced by
| these parents. It is no wonder that | people
consider PLANS to be such a
| fanatical site. No wonder at all. Its quite
sad.
|
| Clara here:
| ) I am sorry Dottie - I donĄt usually read your
| ) posts, but as this one concerns me directly, I
| ) tried to. However, I donĄt understand you at
all.
| )
| ) Let us try to summarize it all step by step:
| )
| ) 1) Dan sends a note suggesting "materialistic"
| ) was, in Steiner Linguo, a code for "Jew";
| )
| ) 2) Clara [I] write a note stating I find this
| ) insightful and interesting, and ask him to
| ) elaborate further.
| )
| ) 3) you write a post stating:
| ) A. [Dottie] | You guys do such a disservice to
to
| ) the real problems
| ) | that were faced by these parents.
| )
| ) Question 1: who is "you guys"?
| ) Question 2: which disservice?
| ) Question 3: which problems?
| ) Question 4: who is "these parents"?
| )
| ) B. It is no wonder that | people consider
PLANS to
| ) be such a fanatical site. No| wonder at all.
It is
| ) quite sad.
| )
| ) Question 5: who considers PLANS such a
fanatical
| ) site?
| ) Question 6: What is sad?
| )
| ) And finally -
| )
| ) Question 7: In which way are your statements
| ) relevant at all as regards DanĄs idea about
| ) SteinerĄs use of the word "materialism"?
| )
| ) Waiting for any light on that matter
|
|
| NetZero Platinum
| No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
| Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
| http://www.netzero.net
|
|
=================
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:38:21 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
David wrote:
| Then Sharon asked: Let me ask...have you ever
belonged to any other
| religious group besides Waldorf? If so, in what
way is/was it different to| Waldorf? I am glad
that you will continue to think about this
subject, that| means there is hope.
| | Well, there's my church (United Church of
Christ - Congregationalist). In| my earlier days,
one could say my interest in the Grateful Dead
bordered on| religious. (snip)
Clara here:
Sorry to "intrude"; David, this is so great. Such
a relief to read humorous lines in this list for a
change.
BTW - where there is humor, not everything is
lost. Please keep your ability to be ironical and
funny - this is one of the ultimate things that
are lost when people become really taken over by
anthroposophy. Keep it as a 'shield', just in
case...
All the best
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:58:24 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Clara,
I appreciate your response to this but your position is clearly based on the
currently held biological model of human consciousness and being. This model
has holes in it and does not the " facts" or research. I am not advocating
the use of drugs to expand perception or insight into nature but there are
just too many parallels between drug experiences and genuine religious,
mystical and paranormal experiences that have been uncovered by too many
people like Huxley, Woolf, Lilly, Pierce, James, et. al. The failure of this
model can be found in near death studies and research to mention just one
research source (Asian medical models and modalities are another). This
study, which is dealt with in both religious and parapsychological research,
is very perplexing to some but not to those who have had it or something
similar. . As much as brain researchers try to explain this phenomena within
the neurological model, they simply cannot deal with the evidence. For
example, in many cases the patient or victim is brain dead, with no heart
beat, eyes closed, senses not "working", etc. But after resuscitation, all
the movements and conversations (and nurse and doctor jokes as well- to
their embarrassment and surprise) are recalled and described and even some
events occurring outside of the room. . In addition, I personally know
people who have had this type of spontaneous experience and were able to
describe events ongoing across the country or world at a certain time with a
friend or family member. Afterwards they talk and enquire as to what was
going on. The details of "consciousness extension across distance" were
accurate to a tee. This is just two of many examples in the literature and
research (and I am not using the National Enquirer or Its a Miracle as my
sources). Were they simply coincidences? Unlikely.
There continues to be things in "heaven and on earth" that we do not
understand. I do not want to go into a diatribe here about this but this
issue does weigh in on the Waldorf "context" issue. Is there more to human
beings and nature than water, chemicals and brain chemistry. There are some
who believe that this view is an error and in itself an contemporary
illusion..
jeff
Clara:
)
) I just want to suggest a counter-argument. Change
) of perception through the use of psychotropics is
) *not* evidence that "there is more to heaven and
) earth than we know".
)
) Psychotropic substances, wether tribal or
) industrial, act on the brainĄs physical
) structure/fluids exchange/impulses circuits or
) whatever. Same with people with crossed senses;
) this condition can be due to neuro-physiological
) problems, constituting very concrete phenomena.
)
) So, the xamans in the Amazon, or the white people
) who go through their initiation - you argue (if I
) understand you well) theyĄve "expanded" their
) perceptions and can now perceive things [that are
) out there, in the world] that the other people
) cannot perceive.
) IĄd argue, the reason they see
) [sense/smell/hear...] all that is, theyĄve messed
) up their neural circuits by means of a chemical
) substance.
)
) Clara
)
)
) _________________________________________________________
) Do You Yahoo!?
) Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:03:13 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
Marinell wrote:
| ((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very
up-front that she believes| in| gnomes.))
|
| As in little dwarflike people who live in the
interior of the earth?
| Wow....
|
Clara here:
Exactly that. Little people who
ACTUALLY are THERE. If you canĄt see them, the
explanation is, youĄve lost your ability to be in
touch
with the elementals, and have to develop your
spirituality further if you want to be able to
again.
And at least in my experience - *every* waldorf KG
teacher believes in them. Or at least say they do.
In waldorf upside-down outlook, it is weird NOT to
believe in gnomes.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 21:44:57 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff wrote [re: debate on perception altered by
psychotropic drugs and other experiences as an
evidence towards the existence of a spiritual
world]:
| Clara,
| I appreciate your response to this but your
position is clearly based on the| currently held
biological model of human consciousness and being.
Clara here:
Yes, of course it is. As I said, my position was
meant ot be a counter argument; I was suggesting
the facts your surmmoned as evidence for "more to
heaven and earth" can be explained too by an
opposite perspective. Is this a problem? I think
it is a valid argument.
Jeff:
This model| has holes in it and does not the "
facts" or research.
Clara:
Granted. But I still prefer this models with its
'holes' to other models such as anthroposophy,
which for me is one big hole with nothing
substantial to hold it. I donĄt think science (in
the current sense of the word, you understand) has
the definitive answers; I do think it has the most
appropriate answers we can get right now.
Jeff:
I am not advocating| the use of drugs to expand
perception or insight into nature (snip)
Clara:
I know you arenĄt !
Jeff:
(snip) but there are| just too many parallels
between drug experiences and genuine religious,|
mystical and paranormal experiences that have been
uncovered by too many| people like Huxley, Woolf,
Lilly, Pierce, James, et. al.
Clara:
Again, matters of epistemological positioning
arise. The fact that there are these parallels is
no evidence in favour of your argument. At least,
no more so than in favour to my argument. The
parallels between drug experiences and "genuine"
mystical experiences (whatever that means) can
very well be atributed to the fact that they were
all produced by the same system: the human brain.
Jeff:
The failure of this| model can be found in near
death studies and research to mention just one|
research source (Asian medical models and
modalities are another). This| study, which is
dealt with in both religious and parapsychological
research,| is very perplexing to some but not to
those who have had it or something| similar. . As
much as brain researchers try to explain this
phenomena within| the neurological model, they
simply cannot deal with the evidence. For|
example, in many cases the patient or victim is
brain dead, with no heart| beat, eyes closed,
senses not "working", etc. But after
resuscitation, all| the movements and
conversations (and nurse and doctor jokes as well-
to
| their embarrassment and surprise) are recalled
and described and even some| events occurring
outside of the room. . In addition, I personally
know| people who have had this type of spontaneous
experience and were able to| describe events
ongoing across the country or world at a certain
time with a| friend or family member. Afterwards
they talk and enquire as to what was| going on.
The details of "consciousness extension across
distance" were| accurate to a tee. This is just
two of many examples in the literature and|
research (and I am not using the National Enquirer
or Its a Miracle as my| sources).
Clara:
I would agree that the model of human conciousness
with a materialistic basis does not explain
exhaustivelly many registered phenomena. But
again, we interpret this differently - you say
this reveals the "failure" of this model (and you
imply, it confirms the pertinence of the opposite
model). It could be said, alternativelly, that it
reveals the complexity of the human brain, and the
long way still to be walked until we can
understand it well.
One interesting point is: the neurological model
and the letĄs say "spiritualistic" model are not
our only options. I even might agree that
considering conciousness solely in terms of a
combination of chemical impulses around a
neurological structure is a simplifyed view. But
this does not mean the only more complex
explanation is sprirtualistic. In other words -
neurological approach may not explain it all, but
the answer is not necessarilly that there are
THINGS around that some people can see.
Jeff:
Were they simply coincidences? Unlikely.
Clara:
You see, this is where this kind of argument gets
me. First of all, I never understand what is wrong
with coincidences - why is it so difficult for
people to accept them? Or actually -
non-determination - why canĄt things NOT be
determined by something? OK - sorry for this
venting - so let us agree - these events are not
coincidences. Even so - not an evidence for your
argument. If there is something that must explain
this, the existence of "superior", or "outer"
realities is not the only answer.
Jeff:
| There continues to be things in "heaven and on
earth" that we do not
| understand.
Clara:
Yes, I understand that. My point is: why does the
explanation for this have to be searched in
paranormality, mysticism, etc? The problem is - in
your view, there is an idealistic explanation - as
in, the THINGS are THERE, somewhere, and we donĄt
see them (essence vs. substance). I seek a
materialistic explanation - I think these
phenomena are in US, not somewhere outside; or
iow - can be CONCRETELLY understood. This is
getting really hard for me to argue in a foreign
language, so forgive my imprecision.
Jeff:
I do not want to go into a diatribe here about
this but this| issue does weigh in on the Waldorf
"context" issue. Is there more to human
| beings and nature than water, chemicals and
brain chemistry. There are some| who believe that
this view is an error and in itself an
contemporary| illusion..
Clara:
I donĄt think this is in any way a diabrite. I too
consider it relevant for the discussions on
waldorf, and not off-topic.
And again - I agree, there is more to it than
water/chemicals/neurons, but as I said - this MORE
is not necessarily what you imply (=spiritual
world). It may well have a concrete explanation,
albeit a complex one - such as, conciousnessĄ
subjective mechanisms as explained in
psychoanalisis, for example. Or the materiality of
parallel universes such as is quantum physics -
the quantum sponge or whatĄs its name in English.
Hole in the time-space axis. I donĄt know - just
brainstorming to myself.
My point, just to conclude, is - the fact that
things happen that we donĄt understand is not an
evidence for the existence of a spiritual world.
It can be an evidence of our ignorance and
primitive state as regards the CONCRETE
understanding of CONCRETE phenomena.
Regards
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:58:31 -0700
From: "Paula Kraybill" (pkraybil tampabay.rr.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
----- Original Message -----
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
I will look for my conference notes and articles from a recent conference on
the environment of the newborn. There was some further research on this
topic.
Paula
!
(P.S. I noticed your eyeless smiley.......)
http://www.cnsnews.com/InDepth/archive/199905/IND19990513e.html ;-)
) ?
)
) Sune Nordwall
) Stockholm, Sweden
)
) http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
) - a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
) biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:20:45 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Education and false values
Diana,
I wish I had the time to get the sources but they are packed away from years
ago. I suggest trying the net under eye strain and reading in early
education or talk to eye doctors about the increase in vision problems among
the young (focusing and the "need for glasses")
I just saw an article in the SF Chronicle about this recently but did not
save it.
By forcing reading, I obviously mean encouraging. We don't "force" but our
reading goals and fears of "learning disabilities and falling behind" are
certainly not gentle in our culture. The change of teeth issue is more
subtle and I would not use this as a criteria unless the connecting link is
obvious (the interest and ready capacity to read and become more
intellectually interested). Some kids do as young as three. Do we stop them
out of fear? I don't think so but I as a parent would make sure other types
of learning capacities are attended to as well to keep the child balanced.
The film the Search for Bobby Fischer is a great example of this and I
recommend it for any kid and parent. (precocious in chess when young but
loved baseball, toys and normal stuff too- and the parents let this unfold
naturally).
There isn't any research to back up Steiner's theories that change of teeth
) indicates reading readiness, or that reading before age 7 or 8 negatively
) affects vision or brain physiology.
)
Look into the work of Joseph Chilton Pierce on the above. He has written
several books leaning in this direction.
Since I am not in ed psych anymore, I do not have the sources at hand and do
not have the time to look for them. I can see from a antidotal perspective
(when observing kids) how the content, frequency and type of reading
materials "form" their outlook on life quickly and decisively.
I am not interested in validating Waldorf claims unless they can show
evidence or impact. If a principle or reason for a method makes sense, I
will look into it but using a set of generic principles and unwavering
"rules" does not make sense for all kids.
) Jeff, please post what you studies are referring to, so we can see whether
) they validate Waldorf practices or claims. While I can believe someone may
) be claiming excessive computer time could cause eyesight problems, Waldorf
) calls *any* computer time excessive, and I don't think you're going to
find
) any studies showing that *any* computer use before puberty causes eyesight
) problems. I'm even more dubious that there is a study out there showing an
) increase in children having "eyesight problems from reading."
)
The difference above is general exposure and too much use. I feel most kids
use computers and related media too much but the opinions about how much may
not be resolved right now. I would not put a moratorium on all computer use
but I also understand the "pure" intent of Waldorf. If one is trying to
encourage a certain condition of sensitivity and inner development in a
child then any exposure may be disruptive. This is an high ideal and I
suspect even Steiner would say, don't be a fuddy duddy, let them watch a
little TV and learn about computers but with clear guidelines. (not at four
and five with Nintendo and video games used as babysitting). Studies are
also clear that the radiation and flickering of the electrons in the tube of
monitors affect the user and eyesight. I know this for a fact. I had to
switch from a tube to a flat screen LCD to protect my eyes two years ago
(liquid crystal display has no tube flickering and far less radiation
effects). If I can notice the difference of using a computer 8 hours a day
and laying off for two with my eyesight "recovering" to clearer vision and
not using reading glasses, I can only imagine what is going on with the eyes
of kids using hand held devices or gameboys for hours at a time. Common
sense and eye physiology is clear- frequent long and short focusing is
important for the health and development of the eyes.
Another broader issue that Waldorf teachers and Steiner were concerned about
was the de-sensitization of humanity through mechanical and electronic
devices. This may sound strange and prosaic to us in the midst of our
electronic dependence but step back and consider the consequences. It not
just the "spiritual component" but there is a psychological and physical
impact these devices (like radiation, magnetic fields, cell phones short
waves, and declining eyesight from computer use, etc).
All electronic devices are artificial and do not give any human being "real
experience" or contact with life and others. An example may illustrate
this. I have a friend who is about 56. He is fairly educated and life
experienced but not especially "cultured" around the arts. Often I ask him,
lets go to a concert or play (do something other than films) and he says,
why spend the bucks when I can just buy the CD. It sounds better anyway. I
say, but, its not the same experience as being with an group or audience in
the act of creating the music or drama. This former attitude has crept into
our culture over the past 30 years as electronic duplication media get
better and clearer. Soon we will have, why go the Grand Canyon when I can go
see it at IMAX. Many people do not see the importance of this distinction.
Others do. The more we out of touch with real life experience, the more
abstract and distant we become from: global warning (its happening over
"there"); noise pollution (we played loud music as kids and 35 year olds are
wearing hearing aids); toleration of sensory overload and stress (a sign of
the times); abuse of animals in farming (we have to eat meat all the time);
gun violence (lets just "cap him"), and so on.
This is the point. Many modern people have totally lost any feeling or
distinction between "real experience" and the substitution experience via
electronic media insulation. Its all the same and is far more appealing and
satisfactory. (I think this is at the root of Steiner's vision of the
future and Waldorf. And it may to be taken to an extreme). Is it any wonder
our society is producing social deviants without conscience or military
generals who blow up people via video relays on ships or in war rooms in
Washington . "They were just collateral" Timothy McViegh said of the
children killed in Oklahoma.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:35:41 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
Please show me where we can "see" an "atom", pure and simple rather than
its trail, or shadow or effects in a cyclotron or chamber. What "color" and
shape are atoms? Are they round like little billiard balls or energetic
spheres composed mostly of "empty space" or whirling vortexes that shift
from a "solid" to plasmic states depending on conditions? Are they unitive
in composition or are they now deconstructed in quarks and even primal
quarks or gravitons?
I do not know about AP attitudes about atoms (I did not study high school
Waldorf curriculum) though I read somewhere where Steiner pooh poohed the
idea as nonsense. Babbitt predated Steiner with his Theory of Light and
Color (no Goethe, please) and brought up this up as a metaphysical issue
within science. Its a dated but interesting read.
I am asking this from a purely metaphysical and scientific perspective.
"Something" exists that composes our world but what it "is" has yet to be
seen by man or microscope as far as my understanding goes. To use aids in
school is one thing but to create a false sense of "knowledge" rather than
firm theory is something again. Most of life is about theory and supposition
not about knowledge.
Just like gravity, magnetism and electricity, our senses and minds fail us.
I can sense magnetism between too magnets but we do not really know what it
is. I know its a force but do forces have shape, color, tone, size, as
phenomena?
Jeff
-----
Original Message -----
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)
)
) I would like to say some more about what Jeff has said about atoms as a
) working hypothesis.
)
) )Jeff:
) ))
) )) If I "believe" in the concept of atoms, I am actually falling into a
) ))trap
) ))because its a workable theory without direct evidence (we cannot see or
) ))measure atoms and their properties vary from "solid" to plasmic states).
) ))Most people visualize atoms as little solid balls in chemistry class.
This
) ))is nonsense, of course, but an educational "tool". But we do not jump on
) ))Chem teachers for this. Most people believe their bodies are "solid" but
) ))we
) ))are over 80% fluid.
) )
)
) I think that the evidence for the real existence of atoms is so absolutely
) overwhelming that the argument that Jeff makes with atoms as an example is
) simply ludicrous. Of course it is not Jeff's argument, it is the standard
) Anthroposophical science argument. And of course it has not changed since
) the 1920s.
) So what if most people believe that there bodies are fluid. I don't. There
) are contributors to this list who are real experts in particular areas of
) study.I claim physics in particular and science in general. You can't
bring
) out arguments used by Anthroposophist to convince the faithful and expect
) those arguments to carry any weight with people who know something about
the
) subject at hand.
)
) Peter Farrell
) _________________________________________________________________________
) Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 23:27:20 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
in gnomes.))
Marinell:
) As in little dwarflike people who live in the interior of the earth?
) Wow....
Before their weekly walk in the forest, the kindergarten asks the gnomes
(who, after all, live there) for permission to enter. It was also a common
practice (in my daughter's class) for the children to sew little coats and
hats and mittens for the gnomes.
This teacher has a real connection with the children and the parents in her
class. As small as our school is (which is very small), we are lucky to
have a kindergarten teacher who can create such a connection with her
parents. Nearly every kindergarten child continues on to first grade at our
school.
and...
((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
in gnomes.))
Sharon:
Tell people that on your brochures and be sure they understand that *before*
they move across states for your Athroposophic Initiation.
David: Sharon, did you actually *talk* with Pleasant Ridge (visit classes,
take tours, etc.) before you moved? Or did you decide to send your daughter
there on the basis of a brochure?
David
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 23:35:40 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
With apologies to the list's "critics", I thought I'd let any Waldorf
teachers who might be lurking on this list know that we at Meadowbrook
School (in Rhode Island, USA) are still seeking an early childhood teacher
and a first grade teacher for the upcoming 2001-2002 school year.
If I speak about my school on this list with great pride, I can confidently
say you will find a similar amount of pride throughout our faculty and our
Board of Trustees, and that our parent body is an enormously supportive one.
As with all Waldorf schools, the hours are long and the pay lousy, but we
just implemented a five year plan to raise salaries by some 40%.
Feel free to contact me off-list for more information.
Back to the regular feature, the critics' list,
David (apologies to Dan for the off-topic post)
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 23:45:34 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
David wrote:
In my earlier days, one could say my interest in the Grateful Dead bordered
on religious. (snip)
Clara here:
Sorry to "intrude"; David, this is so great. Such
a relief to read humorous lines in this list for a
change.
BTW - where there is humor, not everything is
lost. Please keep your ability to be ironical and
funny - this is one of the ultimate things that
are lost when people become really taken over by
anthroposophy. Keep it as a 'shield', just in
case...
David: Thanks for the advice, Clara. I don't think everything is lost.
In fact, around the waldorf school hereabouts everything is going great.
David
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:48:31 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
-----
) Peter Farrell wrote:
)
) I have a serious problem with this view. It would be easy for me to say as
a
) physicist that you can't understand quantum mechanics (for example)
without
) years of appropriate and directed study. However it is not necessary to
) personally understand quantum mechanics to understand that quantum
mechanics
) "works" in some sense because there is any amount of evidence which can be
) personally experienced by people with no understanding of quantum
mechanics.
) One such example could be the transistor.
) If I consider Steiner's work, there are outcomes of his methods that are
in
) the public domain many of which have been quoted here which are simply
) wrong.
I agree some of his ideas appear wacky and in error but so are there many
that are right-
be a moral human being;
be intellectually honest;
examine yourself daily and strive to become a better person;
seek to know something more than oneself and mundane life (God or Nature,
take your pick);
help the world and be of service to others-
knowledge is not truth- there is much more to know than we think;
living off the earth's is not possible without gravity being present (given
other life support elements present) without damaging the body (he
mentioned this in a Physics Course to Workers, if I recall )- see bone
density defects with astronauts
mysticism and psychism can be dangerous nonsense and escapist without
rationalism, peer review and specialize training and guidance from a mentor;
the eastern spiritual notion of non-identity or non-self is an error (which
may include the Buddha);
if one learns to control thought process and imagination for long periods of
time, one can learn more of thought and imagination than is normally
understood
spiritual wisdom is universal and can be found in every culture....
Objective spiritual experience and knowledge can be achieved if one takes
the time and effort
In fact I think you might be hard pressed to come up with any
) original notions of Steiner's which are independently testable which have
) subsequently been demonstrated to be true. Why then should I consider
) undergoing any form of training to experience some "truth" when the
) independent evidence indicates that the methods don't work?
Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm (nearing retirement time) for
three months without fail (and without falling asleep in the process),
intently recreate as vividly as possible the entire day's events from
memory in reverse order; pay attention to how you interacted with others in
daily life; see each interaction as vividly as possible with the intention
of noticing how you felt with them and how they felt with you during
interactions; note also whether personal goals and promises were kept and
the consequences to oneself and others; did one perform tasks and work well
or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some people and comfortable with
others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
See if this "experiment" produces results. Now as with any experiment, you
have to Do It as described. It can be done in about 10 minutes, but will
take longer and I guaranteed you will probably fall asleep (or not be able
to get through the entire day to the first act of the day -awakening and
getting out of bed). In principle, if you miss a night or fall asleep you
must start from scratch again. That's okay. Just continue along.
Why do this?. Just for the challenge and the zest of it. What will happen? I
could give clues but I suggest you tell us in three months if any changes
occurred in memory, recall, behavior, visualization ability, the suppression
of automatic thinking in daily situations and general self awareness of your
relationships and maybe some odd things during sleep and dreaming.
Now is this scientific? Its not a hard science project but I am not
physicist or geologist. But psychologists are scientists too and they do
have experiments and research to do. You may not know the hypothesis but
you have an "innocent" experiment.
) Peter Farrell:
) Who says you can't see individual atoms? For about a decade or so this has
) not been true. Many people have seen one or two individual atoms of sodium
) not using a microscope. I can obtain references but it will have to wait
) until Monday (Australian time).
Please send details.
)
) Jeff goes on talk about living in the world and experiencing. How does
Jeff
) know what my experience of the world is like? Does he think I don't smell
) and see and hear and feel and understand?
)
Peter,
I don't know what your experience of the world is but I would guess its
pretty close to mine and everyone else's. Not everyone experiences the world
the same granted but we are all pretty close in "bandwidth". Schools are
should be designed to let musical kids play music, would be biologists pull
the wings off insects; little gymnasts fly over a parallel bars; and so.
Each has a predominant sense of the world. Some feel it in movement; some in
thinking and math; some in music; some in color painting; etc.
If you could hear the thump of a fly landing on desktop, then we would
really have something to discuss. (by the way, Nicola Tesla claimed to have
had this experience when deathly ill as a 12 year old child in
Czechoslovakia- see his biography- Tesla- the Man of Wonders, I believe is
the title).
It was fun reading your response by the way.
Jeff Auen
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:51:59 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Karma- mistakes of
Now, now lets not get too jaded here. You know the intent of my correction
and most Waldorf teachers are not playing monolopy karma with kids. I they
are, I would boot them.
) )There is a well known English "legend" or story of British soldiers
) )fighting tooth and nail with the Germans in WWI when all of a sudden
)hosts
) )of winged spiritual beings filled the field and gave them extra )strength
) )and "weakened" the courage of the Germans.
)
)
) Uh-huh. So it is not about favoritism, but sometimes spirits swoop in and
) give a little help to one side or the other. Got it.
) Diana
)
Not really. The Romans claimed something similar against the Hordes and
other cultures have similar stories. Just in this case the bad guys are
clear.
jeff
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:52:43 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: On Reflection
Fair enough. I did jump in mid stream.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 4:23 PM
Subject: RE: On Reflection
) Jeff wrote:
)
) ) And I submit the comment below about my post is as one of arrogance and
) ) avoidance.
)
) I plead guilty to arrogance. You don't know what you're talking about on
) this topic, and I have no patience for that. As for avoidance, I didn't go
) into detail because everyone who's been on the list the past few months
has
) already heard the details a dozen times. I recommend a quick peek into
) Steiner's writings on the First World War to disabuse you of your
) impressions. If you really want to know my own opinions on the topic, we
) could continue our exchange offlist if you prefer (or on-list for that
) matter, it would just mean a lot of repetition for others).
)
) Cheers,
)
) Peter
)
)
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 251
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By snell netshel.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By snell netshel.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 04:51:55 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
In several laboratories in the US and Europe where inidividual atoms are
isolated in high vacuum and illuminated using lasers. I am not sure who has
set this up in the last few years, but the visible atom which I am certain
this has been set up for is sodium. It is of course yellow, just like the
sodium lamps that you see about the place. I know that it has also been ste
up for cesium and rubidium but these are invisible, that is our eyes do not
detect the light these atoms fluoresce with, and researchers use infrared
cameras to "see" such atoms. Someone may have done this with lithium which
will be red but I am not sure of that. It has aslo been don for a number of
ions, singly ionised calcium comes to mind and one of the ionic states of
ytterbium. I don't have references at hand but this was widely reported some
time age. Some recent physics texts show photographs and so on.
We could argue about gravity and magnetism and so on but I'm not sure it
would be productive. But there is another issue here. This is the difference
between direct evidence (I saw Fred steal the biscuits from the kitchen) and
circumstantial evidence (The biscuits are gone and Fred has some crumbs on
his chin). How much evidence do you want?
Over the last century, it is true that the physicists conception of atoms
has changed dramatically, from the original "billiard ball" model that comes
from the kinetic theory of gases through Rutherford's model (electron -
nuclear solar system), to the very detailed (but probably not final) quantum
mechanical conception of today. The conception may change because it is
difficult to see atoms (but it can be done), and so more detailed
experiments lead to new theoretical conceptions. But the new conceptions
don't remove the usefulness of the old models. The billiard ball model is
worth learning because it is relatively easy to understand and one can still
do useful calculations associated with real technical problems. Of course
that billiard ball model also led to further understanding because scintists
don't sit baqck saying we have this sewn up despite some famous quotes you
can come up with to the contrary. They push the models looking for the
boundaries of applicability. This was understood at the time the kinetic
theory was being organised. Information about the limits to the hard sphere
model was obtained essentially by measuring pV=NkT to high pressures and
temperatures looking for departures from this law which of course thay
found. This gave useful information to scientists trying to understand if
atoms had internal structure.
Let me come back to Steiner. He was clairvoyant. He could see the future and
the past. Show me something that he suggested that has led to some new
understanding with independent evidence. There's none in Zajonc's books.
Why not? Because it doesn't exist. Because Steiner wasn't clairvoyant.
Because he could not see the past or the future. He was either simply a
fraud, or self deluded. I can't find and alternative.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 04:58:48 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Which are original? Which ones do not have independent supporting evidence?
My response to the experiment is first convince me using independently
verifiable evidence that this worth doing. If you can't, then why should I
try t5his rather than read Shirley Maclaine? (or any of a thousand others
with dubious claims to secret knowledge).
Having said that I might ask you to do something much easier than the
experiment you suggested. (Ten minutes quiet at home...one of my kids would
wake up for sure). Read Jeffrey Masson's book "My Father's Guru". Most
amusing.
Peter
)From: jeff auen (pacbay home.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:48:31 -0700
)
)
)-----
)
) ) Peter Farrell wrote:
) )
) ) I have a serious problem with this view. It would be easy for me to say
)as
)a
) ) physicist that you can't understand quantum mechanics (for example)
)without
) ) years of appropriate and directed study. However it is not necessary to
) ) personally understand quantum mechanics to understand that quantum
)mechanics
) ) "works" in some sense because there is any amount of evidence which can
)be
) ) personally experienced by people with no understanding of quantum
)mechanics.
) ) One such example could be the transistor.
) ) If I consider Steiner's work, there are outcomes of his methods that are
)in
) ) the public domain many of which have been quoted here which are simply
) ) wrong.
)
)
)I agree some of his ideas appear wacky and in error but so are there many
)that are right-
)
)be a moral human being;
)be intellectually honest;
)examine yourself daily and strive to become a better person;
)seek to know something more than oneself and mundane life (God or Nature,
)take your pick);
)help the world and be of service to others-
)knowledge is not truth- there is much more to know than we think;
)living off the earth's is not possible without gravity being present
)(given
)other life support elements present) without damaging the body (he
)mentioned this in a Physics Course to Workers, if I recall )- see bone
)density defects with astronauts
)mysticism and psychism can be dangerous nonsense and escapist without
)rationalism, peer review and specialize training and guidance from a
)mentor;
)the eastern spiritual notion of non-identity or non-self is an error (which
)may include the Buddha);
)if one learns to control thought process and imagination for long periods
)of
)time, one can learn more of thought and imagination than is normally
)understood
)spiritual wisdom is universal and can be found in every culture....
)Objective spiritual experience and knowledge can be achieved if one takes
)the time and effort
)
)
)In fact I think you might be hard pressed to come up with any
) ) original notions of Steiner's which are independently testable which
)have
) ) subsequently been demonstrated to be true. Why then should I consider
) ) undergoing any form of training to experience some "truth" when the
) ) independent evidence indicates that the methods don't work?
)
)Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm (nearing retirement time)
)for
)three months without fail (and without falling asleep in the process),
)intently recreate as vividly as possible the entire day's events from
)memory in reverse order; pay attention to how you interacted with others in
)daily life; see each interaction as vividly as possible with the intention
)of noticing how you felt with them and how they felt with you during
)interactions; note also whether personal goals and promises were kept and
)the consequences to oneself and others; did one perform tasks and work well
)or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some people and comfortable with
)others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
)
)
) See if this "experiment" produces results. Now as with any experiment,
)you
)have to Do It as described. It can be done in about 10 minutes, but will
)take longer and I guaranteed you will probably fall asleep (or not be able
)to get through the entire day to the first act of the day -awakening and
)getting out of bed). In principle, if you miss a night or fall asleep you
)must start from scratch again. That's okay. Just continue along.
)
)Why do this?. Just for the challenge and the zest of it. What will happen?
)I
)could give clues but I suggest you tell us in three months if any changes
)occurred in memory, recall, behavior, visualization ability, the
)suppression
)of automatic thinking in daily situations and general self awareness of
)your
)relationships and maybe some odd things during sleep and dreaming.
)
)Now is this scientific? Its not a hard science project but I am not
)physicist or geologist. But psychologists are scientists too and they do
)have experiments and research to do. You may not know the hypothesis but
)you have an "innocent" experiment.
)
)
)
) ) Peter Farrell:
) ) Who says you can't see individual atoms? For about a decade or so this
)has
) ) not been true. Many people have seen one or two individual atoms of
)sodium
) ) not using a microscope. I can obtain references but it will have to wait
) ) until Monday (Australian time).
)
)Please send details.
) )
) ) Jeff goes on talk about living in the world and experiencing. How does
)Jeff
) ) know what my experience of the world is like? Does he think I don't
)smell
) ) and see and hear and feel and understand?
) )
)Peter,
)
)I don't know what your experience of the world is but I would guess its
)pretty close to mine and everyone else's. Not everyone experiences the
)world
)the same granted but we are all pretty close in "bandwidth". Schools are
)should be designed to let musical kids play music, would be biologists pull
)the wings off insects; little gymnasts fly over a parallel bars; and so.
)Each has a predominant sense of the world. Some feel it in movement; some
)in
)thinking and math; some in music; some in color painting; etc.
)
) If you could hear the thump of a fly landing on desktop, then we would
)really have something to discuss. (by the way, Nicola Tesla claimed to have
)had this experience when deathly ill as a 12 year old child in
)Czechoslovakia- see his biography- Tesla- the Man of Wonders, I believe is
)the title).
)
)It was fun reading your response by the way.
)
)Jeff Auen
)
)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 22:19:07 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)With apologies to the list's "critics", I thought I'd let any Waldorf
)teachers who might be lurking on this list know that we at Meadowbrook
)School (in Rhode Island, USA) are still seeking an early childhood teacher
)and a first grade teacher for the upcoming 2001-2002 school year.
Debra:
David,
You may have better luck advertising on the SJU list. Try advertising
there. However, if the wc list nets you any potential WE teachers, let us
all know. I'm curious now.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 23:03:00 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff:
)Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm (nearing retirement time) for
)three months without fail (and without falling asleep in the process),
)intently recreate as vividly as possible the entire day's events from
)memory in reverse order; pay attention to how you interacted with others in
)daily life; see each interaction as vividly as possible with the intention
)of noticing how you felt with them and how they felt with you during
)interactions; note also whether personal goals and promises were kept and
)the consequences to oneself and others; did one perform tasks and work well
)or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some people and comfortable with
)others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
Debra:
This is so revealing, Jeff. A prescription right off of Steiner's
prescription pad. Should be considered controlled medicine. Too much
Steiner will suck out your brains. This occult exercise is a huge waste of
time, folks. I'll stick to a good book.
)
)
) See if this "experiment" produces results. Now as with any experiment, you
)have to Do It as described. It can be done in about 10 minutes, but will
)take longer and I guaranteed you will probably fall asleep (or not be able
)to get through the entire day to the first act of the day -awakening and
)getting out of bed). In principle, if you miss a night or fall asleep you
)must start from scratch again. That's okay. Just continue along.
Debra:
Jeff, this is the wrong list to prescribe Steiner's indications. Most of
the critics here have peeled off the the layers. We know Steiner when we
see it.
)
)Why do this?. Just for the challenge and the zest of it. What will happen? I
)could give clues but I suggest you tell us in three months if any changes
)occurred in memory, recall, behavior, visualization ability, the suppression
)of automatic thinking in daily situations and general self awareness of your
)relationships and maybe some odd things during sleep and dreaming.
Debra:
"Suppression of automatic thinking?" Is that another word for critical
thinking skills? Are you trying to teach us how to not think? Wrong parking
lot, Jeff, but we can give you directions...
)
)Now is this scientific? Its not a hard science project but I am not
)physicist or geologist. But psychologists are scientists too and they do
)have experiments and research to do. You may not know the hypothesis but
)you have an "innocent" experiment.
Debra:
This isn't an innocent experiment. It is Anthroposophy!
)
Jeff tp Peter:
)It was fun reading your response by the way.
Debra:
And he is patronizing to boot! Who screens these people? Must be an open
list. We should consider charging some people money to express their
thoughts here. New members cost money... All those charts to set up - case
histories, backgrounds. Time is money, you know... Next PLANS board
meeting, I'm bringing this up. The high cost of services is astounding. We
should request insurance cards to join...
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 22:41:08 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
)((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
)in gnomes.))
)
)Sharon:
)Tell people that on your brochures and be sure they understand that *before*
)they move across states for your Athroposophic Initiation.
)
)David: Sharon, did you actually *talk* with Pleasant Ridge (visit classes,
)take tours, etc.) before you moved? Or did you decide to send your daughter
)there on the basis of a brochure?
David,
I not only visited (but not classes, that's not allowed, as critic
after critic has stated), read all the books easily obtainable about
Steiner and Waldorf, asked the school pointedly if there was any
Anthroposphyin the school, etc., etc., to great length.
Nobody told me about the fundamental beliefs in reincarnation, karma
and things like gnomes. Nobody told me they not only "inform" Waldorf
education, but are it's very reason for existence (not temporal
education, as one would think).
In other words, I (and Sharon, and Dan Dugan, and Debra Snell, and
every other critic who ever came on this list, WAS LIED TO.
If you don't tell people interested in enrolling their children in
your school what they don't have the background, reading,
understanding or nous to ASK you, THEN YOU, LIKE ALL THE OTHER
STEINER, WALDORF AND ANTHROPOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS, ARE LYING, CHEATING
AND DUPING PARENTS AND STEALING THEIR CHILDREN FROM THEM.
Which, of course, was Steiner's intention.
He was not a misguided idealist and pioneering child psychologist and educator.
He was not a not a spiritual seer or reincarnated spirit; he was an
ordinary man. That's a safe assumption, since there is NO evidence of
the existence of anything supernatural.
He was a completely irrational and sociopathic, if not psychopathic,
political control mono-megalo-maniac. And the cancer he started
society grows today like a meme of cultural consensus in the
irrational.
Nobody wants to hear talk like that here, because it just seems so
far out and un-PC to be slagging off a nice old Austrian guru and his
current-day cult of nice people like David Cann. But that's the truth.
Other SWA critics who speak the truth, like Felix and Christopher,
don't stay around here because the chat is ever so polite -- and thus
ever so ineffectual.
But it is good to hear you admitting that you KNOW that your teachers
believe in Steiner's irrational spiritual Universe. It means you
can't hide behind your Mr Nice Guy and effective administrator mask.
If you want your and other people's kids to be in the care of people
who believe in gnomes and spirits and reincarnation and karma, that's
fine with me. But it marks you as one of them, not just an average
guy who wants a good education for his kids.
Maybe that's why you've stopped answering direct questions from me,
as in the "New Here" thread, where I recently asked you about your
schools selection processes and your personal beliefs in Steiner's
relgion.
Instead, you trade humourous asides that don't answer anyone's
questions, making you seem like a nice guy with a great personality.
And you talk about your own church affiliation, instead of answering
my direct questions about your views on the religion that runs your
school and is inculcated by stealth in your children. Nice propaganda
job, David. I can see why the Anthropops love you and your type.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 22:44:39 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)(x-charset iso-8859-1)With apologies to the list's "critics", I
)thought I'd let any Waldorf
)teachers who might be lurking on this list know that we at Meadowbrook
)School (in Rhode Island, USA) are still seeking an early childhood teacher
)and a first grade teacher for the upcoming 2001-2002 school year.
)
)If I speak about my school on this list with great pride, I can confidently
)say you will find a similar amount of pride throughout our faculty and our
)Board of Trustees, and that our parent body is an enormously supportive one.
)
)As with all Waldorf schools, the hours are long and the pay lousy, but we
)just implemented a five year plan to raise salaries by some 40%.
)
)Feel free to contact me off-list for more information.
)
)Back to the regular feature, the critics' list,
)
)David (apologies to Dan for the off-topic post)
David,
You should take your recruiting to the Waldorf School Net list for teachers.
It's really in rather bad taste for you to be so cheeky as to advertise here.
Not that you'd be likely to find much on Waldorf School Net: it's
pretty moribund. SWA teachers don't seem to like talking openly to
each other.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 252
-- Topica Digest --
Re: The real contribution to education
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By TTirrell1 aol.com
Re: Education and false values
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By timmo iprimus.com.au
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By faiman jlc.net
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By canndw netzero.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By canndw netzero.net
Re: curious
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By soma mwt.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: New here
By [name removed by request]
Gnomes & Sports
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: New here
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Education and false values
By pacbay home.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pacbay home.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercise part 4
By pacbay home.com
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By dottie_z yahoo.com
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mdarmody home.com
Re: Education and false values
By snell netshel.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By snell netshel.net
Re: New here
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: GNOMES
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:03:29 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The real contribution to education
Jeff wrote:
)If one engages in an authentic spiritual practice or path (especially )with
)others), commonly shared insights and experiences become a )everyday
)matter of fact.
Or even if one engages in an *inauthentic* spiritual practice.
)And argumentation would cease.
Ditto. Well, actually, argument probably wouldn't cease (in my experience
Waldorf facuulties can argue pretty viciously). But people agreeing with
each other doesn't mean the spiritual path is valid.
)then we would rise to the occasion and support the effort of all to )create
)a better educational system for our kids.
That's a good idea. There's a lot of people on this list doing things like
that in their lives. It's not the purpose of the waldorf critics list.
)I see no movement towards synthesis or collaboration here so far.
The purpose of this list isn't "movement toward synthesis." It's providing
information, and debate, about Waldorf that isn't allowed or available most
other places.
)The real issue for me is: there anything in Waldorf or Steiner's
) )methodologies that have value or are truly insightful in educating )kids.
)If there are, discuss this thoroughly. If not, move on, let go )of the
)discussion group buzz.
Again, Jeff, there are thousands of organizations (or email lists) where you
can go talk to folks with ideas about educating kids.
We don't need to be told to "move on" from the topic under discussion here.
(snip illiteracy, caffeine, junk food, Ritalin, TV)
Agree these are good topics. They're off topic on the waldorf critics list
(with the exception of illiteracy, which clearly relates to Waldorf,
unfortunately).
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:10:30 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff prescribed for Peter F. the famous "review your day backwards"
exercise:
Peter:
)My response to the experiment is first convince me using independently
)verifiable evidence that this worth doing.
Peter, you were politer and friendlier than I feel, and often act, when
someone (unsolicited) prescribes little spiritual exercises for me. It is
especially offensive when you are asking for facts, objective evidence both
can observe, and are instead condescendingly told you need to evolve
spiritually or morally first.
)Read Jeffrey Masson's book "My Father's Guru". Most amusing.
Second the recommendation. It's amusing but also very sad, and very relevant
here!
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:37:18 EDT
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
--part1_8a.57bac2b.28142a7e_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sharon, I loved the "Wake up and smell the Rosicrucians" bit...
--part1_8a.57bac2b.28142a7e_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Bookman Old Style" LANG="0")Sharon, I loved the "Wake up and smell the Rosicrucians" bit...(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_8a.57bac2b.28142a7e_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:49:18 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Education and false values
Jeff, in response to my asking for evidence on the "reading causes eyesight
problems" claim:
)By forcing reading, I obviously mean encouraging.
Thanks for clarifying. I knew what you meant. It would be useful if Waldorf
teachers would point out to prospective parents that when they say
"forcing," they mean "encouraging." All of us agree, I am virtually sure,
that we do not want our children "forced" to read before they are ready, but
"encouraging" is a different story, and to use these terms interchangeably
is a little misleading, don't you think?
This was precisely the point where I realized I was not on board with
Waldorf, and had been given a misleading impression of their approach. I
didn't want my (then preschool age) son "forced" to fill in worksheets, copy
letters, etc. I did not realize that they would not "encourage" any interest
at all in literacy, in fact would stomp on it, and that when they described
other schools "forcing" reading on young children, they meant, as you say,
that any "encouragement" is equivalent to "force."
)The change of teeth issue is more subtle
Pardon me if I have less and less patience for malarkey, but what is
"subtle" about this? Change of teeth has *no* relation to reading, subtle or
otherwise, other than the fact that these developments occur, roughly,
around the same time for a lot of kids, though not all.
)and I would not use this as a criteria unless the connecting link is
)obvious (the interest and ready capacity to read and become more
)intellectually interested). Some kids do as young as three. Do we stop
) )them out of fear?
Yes. Are you not aware of this? Waldorf teachers absolutely would stop a
three year old interested in reading.
Jeff, what's the basis for your interest/understanding of Waldorf? If you've
already told us this, I'm sorry if I've missed it. I'm getting the feeling
you are another new or prospective Waldorf parent with stars in your eyes
about this beautiful and gentle approach, and may not actually be aware of
the fanaticism.
)I don't think so but I as a parent would make sure other types
)of learning capacities are attended to as well to keep the child )balanced.
Very good idea. Waldorf isn't about "balance," however. The goal is to
discourage reading and writing as long as possible, not "balance" them with
other activities.
)Look into the work of Joseph Chilton Pierce on the above. He has )written
)several books leaning in this direction.
Yes, I've read Pierce. I'm not going "look into" Pierce again to find
evidence that change of teeth etc. indicates reading readiness. It isn't in
there, Jeff.
)I can see from a antidotal perspective (when observing kids) how the
) )content, frequency and type of reading materials "form" their outlook )on
)life quickly and decisively.
Well, there's an odd little alarmist undercurrent there so familiar to me
from Waldorf . . . sure what kids are exposed to influences them, though I
don't think if a selection of good childrens' books is provided, that any
particular book will have some kind of "decisive" lifelong effect, as you
seem to be darkly implying. But yes, books influence kids. Parents should
look for lots of good books for their kids to be influenced by.
re: eyesight problems from computers or reading?
)The difference above is general exposure and too much use.
That was my point. Too much of anything is a problem. Waldorf advocates a
complete ban till puberty on computers, and a wary approach toward books -
not avoidance of "too much" use.
)I feel most kids use computers and related media too much but the )opinions
)about how much may not be resolved right now. I would not put )a moratorium
)on all computer use
Waldorf does, for under-puberty. Jeff, again if I have missed it excuse me,
but if you are considering enrolling a child in Waldorf, please, inform
yourself better. They do indeed advocate a moratorium on all computer use
before high school.
)but I also understand the "pure" intent of Waldorf. If one is trying to
)encourage a certain condition of sensitivity and inner development in a
)child then any exposure may be disruptive.
Though I would once have agreed with it, now, to me this is a very alarming
statement. The word "pure" is a clue to fanaticism. This idea adults have a
right to try to induce "conditions of sensitivity and inner development" in
children sets off all kinds of loud alarms for me. Allow your children to
live in the real world. Love them and shield them from violence,
pornography, and knowldge of some of the the ugly things that go on in the
world as long and as well as you can, but leave their "inner development"
alone, please.
)I can only imagine what is going on with the eyes of kids using hand )held
)devices or gameboys for hours at a time. Common sense and eye )physiology
)is clear- frequent long and short focusing is important for )the health and
)development of the eyes.
Quite agree. Everything in moderation. Definitely avoid gameboys for "hours
at a time." Any responsible parent would. Again, Jeff, I am wondering how
you familiar you actually are with what Waldorf advocates and practices.
(snip desensitization from electronic devices, confusing reality with the
virtual world, etc.)
Just running out of time. Quite agree. Again how about moderation? I would
like parents to be aware that moderation, discipline, caution, limits, etc.,
are *not* what Waldorf are about. They insist on a total ban on any form of
electronic stimulation.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:34:04 +1000
From: " Harry" (timmo iprimus.com.au)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)
) As with all Waldorf schools, the hours are long and the pay lousy, but we
) just implemented a five year plan to raise salaries by some 40%.
David,
What is the rate of pay compared to a teacher in a government school ? Here
it is illegal not to pay the award rate to teachers , Waldorf or not. Is
their pay 40% below the state average.
Is that consistent with Waldorf schools in the states?
Cheers
Harry
)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 09:50:38 -0400
From: Neil Faiman (faiman jlc.net)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)) As with all Waldorf schools, the hours are long and the pay lousy, but we
)) just implemented a five year plan to raise salaries by some 40%.
) David,
) What is the rate of pay compared to a teacher in a government school ? Here
) it is illegal not to pay the award rate to teachers , Waldorf or not. Is
) their pay 40% below the state average.
) Is that consistent with Waldorf schools in the states?
) Cheers
) Harry
I can't speak for David's school, but I suspect that the answer isn't
simple. At least in my part of the US, every local school district has its
own salary policy.
Just in absolute numbers, I can think of a couple of school districts near
my home, one of which pays something like a third to a half again as much as
the other for comparable teachers.
But beyond the absolute numbers, salary policies are typically formulae
that specify a base rate of pay plus an increment for experience.
Furthermore, the numbers in the formula may vary depending on the amount of
relevant education the teacher has had. Thus, one teacher may get a higher
salary at school A than at school B, while a second teacher may get a higher
salary at school B than at school A.
Many years ago, I did some analysis for my Waldorf school that revealed that
we were paying slightly better than the cheapest local school districts, and
substantially worse than the most generous ones. We tended to have
reasonably good entry rates, but our experience increments weren't as good
as at most of the public schools.
Then, of course, there is the wild card of tuition waivers for the children
of full-time faculty.
At the time, I came to the conclusion that a teacher was making a sacrifice
by choosing to teach at our Waldorf school, but that the magnitude of the
sacrifice wasn't as great as most people probably assumed.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:08:57 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
snipped David's solicitation for teachers
MK:
) You should take your recruiting to the Waldorf School Net list for
teachers.
)
) It's really in rather bad taste for you to be so cheeky as to advertise
here.
)
) Not that you'd be likely to find much on Waldorf School Net: it's
) pretty moribund. SWA teachers don't seem to like talking openly to
) each other.
David: It just came to me as an idea last week. I figured that waldorf
teachers who read this list might see something special in what I say about
our school.
Anyway, it's over and done with (unless you guys want to keep the subject
alive).
David
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:05:02 -0400
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
MK:
) Maybe that's why you've stopped answering direct questions from me,
) as in the "New Here" thread, where I recently asked you about your
) schools selection processes and your personal beliefs in Steiner's
) relgion.
)
) Instead, you trade humourous asides that don't answer anyone's
) questions, making you seem like a nice guy with a great personality.
) And you talk about your own church affiliation, instead of answering
) my direct questions about your views on the religion that runs your
) school and is inculcated by stealth in your children. Nice propaganda
) job, David. I can see why the Anthropops love you and your type.
I'm not here for you, Michael, I'm here for me, for my reasons. Dan is free
to throw me off anytime he wants.
I actually didn't mean to fail to answer you on our enrollment process.
Just got caught up in another busy week.
For what it's worth, the class teacher decides on new enrollments. In the
case of nursery and kindergarten, the early childhood "director" (our most
experienced, and only fully-certified waldorf teacher) makes the admission
decision.
I am not aware of any core group consideration of individual enrollment
decisions regarding children. I do know that children are interviewed by
our resource teacher (waldorf class teacher trained, special ed certified)
to help identify if the children will require special services and by
administration regarding finances and the like. Newer teachers probably
have to consult with their peer mentor (who is likely a core group member)
on enrollment decisions.
I had intended to ask a core group member this past week to give you a
better answer, but this will have to do for now.
Also, we certainly fit into the "small school that needs students" category
you described a few days ago, which means will likely discount my account as
non-representative. I agree that how a school handles itself when it's full
and has waiting lists is an enormous test of its openness, commitment to
diversity, and integrity; I certainly hope we're up to the challenge when we
reach that point.
Secondly, I believe I did describe my personal beliefs. I do not consider
anthroposophy a religion (but I realize that to some it certainly could be);
I have some (but not much) interest in it other than as it pertains to our
school and its development.
The "inculcation by stealth" statement is something I have seen absolutely
nothing to support.
David
NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:29:28 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: curious
David wrote:
) I'm here for me, for my reasons.
What are your reasons david?
curious bea
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:30:49 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)
)
) David: It just came to me as an idea last week. I figured that waldorf
) teachers who read this list might see something special in what I say about
) our school.
I'm now really curious about how many waldorf teachers read this list?
bea
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:47:39 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
David Cann wrote:
)
) David: Sharon, did you actually *talk* with Pleasant Ridge (visit classes,
) take tours, etc.) before you moved? Or did you decide to send your daughter
) there on the basis of a brochure?
Sharon:
I talked with people at the school, teachers and parents. I spent quite a bit
of time with various people at the school during the summer and during school
time. Remember that I came to the area 7 times. I hung out with some of the
teachers and parents at a local restaurant on several occasions but no one
discussed Anthroposophy. I spent time at their houses. I looked through the
children's books at the school. I looked at their knitting, even at their
wet-on-wets without a whif of understanding. I believed that the school was
more like the "European" schools that I had attended as a child in South
Africa. In South Africa we also drew and wrote in exercise books, knitted in
early grades, had lots of art, etc. The lesson books that I looked through were
from an older grade, and I remember seeing Persia, Egypt, and drawings of
knights. I was told that Waldorf was multicultural which excited me. (Now I
realize that there are many definitions of that word.) I spent time on the
playground. I smelled the lovely bread baking. I only saw and understood the
outer appearance of things.
We were among one of the first few families to move here from another state,
now it is common place, people come in droves. The school in those days only
had 75 kids. I did not have a clue as to the real world view behind Waldorf. I
am not a New Ager (Old Ager). From my initial impressions I was under the
delusion that the school was a progressive, arts based school. I thought that
nature and environmentalism was a theme. The school's values seemed so very
close to my values. I visited the school several times and yet I never
understood or had any reason to believe that the education was a religious one
based on Steiner's hermetic magic. I had no idea that Rudolf Steiner was a
mystic, I had never heard of Anthroposophy, although I began to hear that word
soon after we enrolled my child.
I did not understand that the teachers actually believed that gnomes were real
until I read Nature Studies by Steiner, after I'd left the school. I did ask
the teacher why there was so much emphasis on fairies and gnomes, I thought it
was "pretend time" and wondered why it was "pretend time" even in 8th grade.
The teacher told me she was "making it real and living for the children", I
took this to mean that she was just pretending for the children's sakes. It
never dawned on me that she actually believed such things existed. I'd never
heard of such a "reality" in the modern age. I was floored when I learned this
from Lisa! Couldn't believe it. She sent me "Nature Studies" and sure enough,
along with Steiner's racist ideology he bungs in gnomes and fairies. Then when
I looked at my daughter's lessons, I could see that she had had this
Anthroposophical notion inculcated into her. It spurred me on to study more
lesson books which a fellow Waldorf dissenter lent me. (She had lots of kids
who attended for years and has piles of books.) My daughter's teacher was a
hard-core Anthroposophist. My child's lessons are loaded with Anthroposophy,
but it took study for me to understand and identify it.
I have popped the infamous brochure in the mail to you and you will see that it
is more than vague. Try to read it from a humanist/athiest/artist perspective.
Read it as though you had never entered the world of the occult as I had not.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 07:24:02 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
David Cann says:
)The "inculcation by stealth" statement is something I have seen absolutely
)nothing to support.
Well, I used to say to people who made that silly comment, "Then you
haven't done the work yourself" (reading the Waldorf Critics
archives) because it's all there for about six years' worth of
evidence.
But in your case it's even more ridiculous for you to say it, because
you've been given chapter and verse by the most in-depth Steiner,
Waldorf and Anthroposophy scholar, Sharon, _since you arrived on the
list_, so you don't even have to go and study the archives.
Old saying (and very typical of those so deeply involved in SWA
apologia as you are, whether you recognise it yourself): "There are
none so blind as those who will not see". In SWA apologists' cases,
even when you "do the [SWA] work yourself" -- that is, work from your
"inner I", irrationally, as Steiner prescribed -- you will never see
the wood for the trees, because it's the self-delusional
agreement-with-Steiner path. Nobody who has "done the work
themselves" has ever disagreed with Steiner in any significant,
lasting way, no matter what Jeff Auen et al say.
I'm telling you it happened in my children's Steiner school, and I've
written often about how it's done. You're basically saying I don't
know wrongdoing when I see it, or I'm lying, or I'm "biased".
Darn right I'm biased. I got that way by being defrauded, duped (but
not deluded) by a Steiner school that harmed my kids by their stealth
"spiritual" tinkering.
So your claim that you've seen nothing to support my claim means that
you are either duped, deluded or dissembling (I won't call you a
liar).
By the way, you still didn't answer sufficiently my question about
your enrollment process, in regard to the specific Anthroposophical
techniques practiced on children by staff before they are chosen.
Your answer is a surface answer. And you didn't ask your teachers.
I'll wait till hell freezes over for the answer -- but I doubt you'll
ever ask, or ever tell.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
Michael-
) He was not a not a spiritual seer or reincarnated
) spirit; he was an
) ordinary man. That's a safe assumption, since there
) is NO evidence of
) the existence of anything supernatural.
)
Mr. Kopp,
What would you consider EVIDENCE of something
Supernatural? Would you personally have to see it, or
would it be okay if someone else did? Would you have
to see it to believe it?
seriously,
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:42:55 -0800
From: "[name removed by request]" ([name removed by request])
Subject: Re: New here
Hello to all that have responded. I appreciate your concern.
Reading through some of the posts I am surprised to see how some are so
angry and critical of the Waldorf movement. I am not sure if that is where I
am at right now. Generally, at my son's school teachers have a very heart
felt concern regarding my child's education. I don't find them to be liars
or evil. They are just human teachers with their own strengths and foibles.
I am just a little thrown by their lack of commitment to cholerics. This
meaning that a choleric may not necessarily be a wanted child in a Waldorf
school. This lack of commitment toward a specific temperament is counter to
Waldorf pedagogy it seems to me. This is the burning issue.
My plan is to read the posts on this list in order to see the other side and
to find a balance between the extremes in position on Waldorf education.
As far as the Waldorf schools labeling children, I think public schools do
far more harm with labeling than Waldorf schools do. I am a psychologist in
public schools. I am put in the awful position of being asked to label
children with some sort of diagnosis such as ADHD in order to get active
children out of the classroom so the teacher can teach those who are willing
to sit still. My finding is that teachers in general have a hard time
dealing with the energy and exuberance of a choleric child. Society has
changed so much in the last 100 years. We seem to have no place for the Huck
Finns in our world today. I am very strongly opposed to this. These type of
children have the energy and inquisitiveness to make good things happen in
the world if their energy is properly guided. I think that our society needs
to think in the long term rather the short term. Far too many Huck Finns are
being shamed for a quality we no longer respect but still need.
Now if you will excuse me, I have an energetic little boy wearing a flaming
red bicycle helmet holding a leashed anxious sled dog in one hand and a
psychological test in the other wanting my attention.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22-Apr-2001 21:15:36 GMT
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Gnomes & Sports
Hi,
I have been thinking back to my experiences as a child in school in
sports.
I was always very good and very lucky in my opinion to be picked the
first one on a team. I always felt so sad to watch the same kids year
after year that were always the last to be picked and how they looked
like they felt ashamed. And then again the other kids would judge
whether or not a student was to be a friend depending on if they were
'good' or bad at sports. Nope, never liked it. So I decided to be better
than everyone else, so I could pick the kids who were considered sissys
first before everyone else.
In regards to Waldorf I can see why the teachers would want to help pick
the kids who were constantly left to the side.
Dodgeball at my school wasn't so much fun. The bolder kids or cooler
kids would throw the ball at the kids they considered to be ugly. I was
one of them. However because I was so good at other sports and they
needed me on their team they stopped doing that. And they would also
beem the ball at kids head and really hurt them. Now mostly, I imagine
like myself did not come home and bring our shame to our parents, as it
is home we get to be King and Queen of our own little worlds with our
families.
In regards to Waldorf, yes I can understand why they wouldn't want to
bring this game in also. Kicking the ball and being irreverant, like was
said here on the list, as one of the reasons Waldorf wouldn't allow the
game, may be one of the reasons. The kindness and thoughtfullness seems
to speak to me of the other reason.
As a child I had many visions of things. It was really scary. At night
I could not go to sleep. Mom would come in a few times and then finally
say 'hey enough' get to sleep, now. I would do anything i could to get
her in the room so she could make the visions go away as I didn't
understand them and was afraid they would come back. She'd say hey I'm
gonna come in and smack your behind. And that would be so okay with me
as I just needed to see a human face.
In regards to Gnomes and the teacher at Davids school believing in them:
I think the most important element of that is the fact that they ask
permission of things they cannot see, if they can enter the forest. I
imagine one of the things it helps is that kids will not be afraid of
things they cannot see. It has taken me until I was 36 to realize
through Steiners writings that these things that I have seen since
childhood are happening. It just happens to be that I can see them now.
Not a big deal. Took me a few years to be okay with that, and even now
sometimes I am a little afrightened, but I just remind myself that it is
happening anyway.
To tie the sports together with todays violence is very easy I believe.
Our kids are teasing one another at school and other kids are fed up
with the shame they feel. Just about each and every shooting that has
occurred in the last six years has its root in the kids that are picked
on. So if a school is going to be cutting out some sports that can
result in bad feelings, okay. I would prefer that than what is
happening on a daily basis all across this country.
Now me, whoever has made it this far in the post, I went on to recieve
over 40 mvp for three different sports. I was offered scholarships from
all over the country for soccer and softball. I severly dissapointed my
family in turning them all down. I chose to save my money each summer
and went to Italy. Didn't need to be sticking up for anyone anymore I
guess would be the reason.
dottie
dottie
'anything you do is everything you do'
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22-Apr-2001 21:24:18 GMT
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: New here
We seem to have no place for the Huck
) Finns in our world today. I am very strongly opposed to this. These type
) of
) children have the energy and inquisitiveness to make good things happen
) in
) the world if their energy is properly guided. I think that our society
) needs
) to think in the long term rather the short term. Far too many Huck Finns
) are
) being shamed for a quality we no longer respect but still need.
)
dottie -
I have to say I so agree with you. I love watching the young Huck Finns
of the world grow up. I love watching their eyes light up when they just
discovered something and are deciding whether to tell it now or wait a
little bit for whatever reason.
In regards to your comment about labeling kids. A friend of mine had two
sons labeled as mentally disabled in school around the age of fourteen
and fifteen. It has become a scandel here in Los Angeles how teachers
have labeled children and put them in special ed classes just because
they are having a hard time reading or getting along with others. When I
was growing up the kids that were in those classes were really kids who
had major disabilities and were unable for whatever reason to be in our
class. Today it is an excuse in a sense for social promotion in public
schools in Los Angeles.
The homeless kids I work with tell me upfront "oh I am such and such". I
am so shocked at how these kids and their parents just buy into it. Just
amazingly outrageous.
warm regards,
dottie
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:17:23 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Jeff
This suggestion of yours is not fair game, if you
allow me to say my opinion. Next time, make it
clear where you get your "innocent experiments"
from - this one was designed by no psychologist,
it is a well-known, much discussed, old-news,
Stenier-prescripted exercise. I find it
patronizing and unfair on your part to recommend
it here as if it were not, forgive my frankness.
Clara
----- Original Message -----
From: jeff auen (pacbay home.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 00:48
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
|
| -----
|
| ) Peter Farrell wrote:
| )
| ) I have a serious problem with this view. It
would be easy for me to say as
| a
| ) physicist that you can't understand quantum
mechanics (for example)
| without
| ) years of appropriate and directed study.
However it is not necessary to
| ) personally understand quantum mechanics to
understand that quantum
| mechanics
| ) "works" in some sense because there is any
amount of evidence which can be
| ) personally experienced by people with no
understanding of quantum
| mechanics.
| ) One such example could be the transistor.
| ) If I consider Steiner's work, there are
outcomes of his methods that are
| in
| ) the public domain many of which have been
quoted here which are simply
| ) wrong.
|
|
| I agree some of his ideas appear wacky and in
error but so are there many
| that are right-
|
| be a moral human being;
| be intellectually honest;
| examine yourself daily and strive to become a
better person;
| seek to know something more than oneself and
mundane life (God or Nature,
| take your pick);
| help the world and be of service to others-
| knowledge is not truth- there is much more to
know than we think;
| living off the earth's is not possible without
gravity being present (given
| other life support elements present) without
damaging the body (he
| mentioned this in a Physics Course to Workers,
if I recall )- see bone
| density defects with astronauts
| mysticism and psychism can be dangerous nonsense
and escapist without
| rationalism, peer review and specialize training
and guidance from a mentor;
| the eastern spiritual notion of non-identity or
non-self is an error (which
| may include the Buddha);
| if one learns to control thought process and
imagination for long periods of
| time, one can learn more of thought and
imagination than is normally
| understood
| spiritual wisdom is universal and can be found
in every culture....
| Objective spiritual experience and knowledge can
be achieved if one takes
| the time and effort
|
|
| In fact I think you might be hard pressed to
come up with any
| ) original notions of Steiner's which are
independently testable which have
| ) subsequently been demonstrated to be true. Why
then should I consider
| ) undergoing any form of training to experience
some "truth" when the
| ) independent evidence indicates that the
methods don't work?
|
| Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm
(nearing retirement time) for
| three months without fail (and without falling
asleep in the process),
| intently recreate as vividly as possible the
entire day's events from
| memory in reverse order; pay attention to how
you interacted with others in
| daily life; see each interaction as vividly as
possible with the intention
| of noticing how you felt with them and how they
felt with you during
| interactions; note also whether personal goals
and promises were kept and
| the consequences to oneself and others; did one
perform tasks and work well
| or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some
people and comfortable with
| others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
|
|
| See if this "experiment" produces results. Now
as with any experiment, you
| have to Do It as described. It can be done in
about 10 minutes, but will
| take longer and I guaranteed you will probably
fall asleep (or not be able
| to get through the entire day to the first act
of the day -awakening and
| getting out of bed). In principle, if you miss
a night or fall asleep you
| must start from scratch again. That's okay. Just
continue along.
|
| Why do this?. Just for the challenge and the
zest of it. What will happen? I
| could give clues but I suggest you tell us in
three months if any changes
| occurred in memory, recall, behavior,
visualization ability, the suppression
| of automatic thinking in daily situations and
general self awareness of your
| relationships and maybe some odd things during
sleep and dreaming.
|
| Now is this scientific? Its not a hard science
project but I am not
| physicist or geologist. But psychologists are
scientists too and they do
| have experiments and research to do. You may
not know the hypothesis but
| you have an "innocent" experiment.
|
|
|
| ) Peter Farrell:
| ) Who says you can't see individual atoms? For
about a decade or so this has
| ) not been true. Many people have seen one or
two individual atoms of sodium
| ) not using a microscope. I can obtain
references but it will have to wait
| ) until Monday (Australian time).
|
| Please send details.
| )
| ) Jeff goes on talk about living in the world
and experiencing. How does
| Jeff
| ) know what my experience of the world is like?
Does he think I don't smell
| ) and see and hear and feel and understand?
| )
| Peter,
|
| I don't know what your experience of the world
is but I would guess its
| pretty close to mine and everyone else's. Not
everyone experiences the world
| the same granted but we are all pretty close in
"bandwidth". Schools are
| should be designed to let musical kids play
music, would be biologists pull
| the wings off insects; little gymnasts fly over
a parallel bars; and so.
| Each has a predominant sense of the world. Some
feel it in movement; some in
| thinking and math; some in music; some in color
painting; etc.
|
| If you could hear the thump of a fly landing on
desktop, then we would
| really have something to discuss. (by the way,
Nicola Tesla claimed to have
| had this experience when deathly ill as a 12
year old child in
| Czechoslovakia- see his biography- Tesla- the
Man of Wonders, I believe is
| the title).
|
| It was fun reading your response by the way.
|
| Jeff Auen
|
|
=================
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 16:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
Clara to Jeff -
) This suggestion of yours is not fair game, if you
) allow me to say my opinion. Next time, make it
) clear where you get your "innocent experiments"
) from - this one was designed by no psychologist,
) it is a well-known, much discussed, old-news,
) Stenier-prescripted exercise. I find it
) patronizing and unfair on your part to recommend
) it here as if it were not, forgive my frankness.
)
)
) Peter F.
) | In fact I think you might be hard pressed to
) come up with any
) | ) original notions of Steiner's which are
) independently testable which have
) | ) subsequently been demonstrated to be true.
Jeff -
) | Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm
) (nearing retirement time) for
) | three months without fail (and without falling
) asleep in the process),
) | intently recreate as vividly as possible the
) entire day's events from
) | memory in reverse order; pay attention to how
) you interacted with others in
) | daily life; see each interaction as vividly as
) possible with the intention
) | of noticing how you felt with them and how they
) felt with you during
) | interactions; note also whether personal goals
) and promises were kept and
) | the consequences to oneself and others; did one
) perform tasks and work well
) | or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some
) people and comfortable with
) | others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
) |
) |
dottie-
I thought it was clear this was a Steiner experiment
as Peter said he challenged Jeff to come up with
something that was Steiners that could be
independantly testable and be demonstrated to be
true... This experiment/exercise is something that can
be independantly tested by each person.
I wonder if Jeff meant it as you said, and if Peter
didn't get this was a Steiner exercize/experiment.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:38:08 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
| ((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very
up-front that she believes| in gnomes.))
| | Sharon:
| Tell people that on your brochures and be sure
they understand that *before*| they move across
states for your Athroposophic Initiation.
| | David: Sharon, did you actually *talk* with
Pleasant Ridge (visit classes,| take tours, etc.)
before you moved? Or did you decide to send your
daughter| there on the basis of a brochure?
Clara here:
As I understood it David, your comment above to
Sharon implyes you think she was tottally
uninformed about WE before she enroled her kid,
and that the fact she didnĄt know about teachers
believing in gnomes reveals just that.
I find this inference insidious. This thread
itself started when Marinell expressed her
surprise re teachers believing in gnomes. And
Marinell has told us here, she even took a brief
course in the school before deciding to enrol her
kids. Do you think she was uninformed too?
Please make a small survey - how many W parents
you know, personally or here, that actually
understood, from the beginning, that the whole
gnomes stuff was REAL?
I think ANY person with a BIT of sound judgement
would think, when first introduced to the gnomes
stuff, that it was MAKE BELIEVE. As in, teachers
doing funny little nice things to amuse the kids.
When they knit little coats for the gnomes, who
would seriously think they thought the gnomes will
actually WEAR them?!!!
And this is the attitude of W parents in general.
Normally they will overlook the weirdness and find
some sort of justification for those things,
making it make sense at all in the NORMAL mind.
Like in, the gnomes talk is just a cute fun thing.
But it is NOT is it David - as you admited, the
teachers actually believe in gnomes. This is so
absurd it does not cross many parentsĄminds. When
they find it out, that is when they feel lied to
and betrayed, with reason.
And of course, itĄs not just the gnomes, its the
advent, the lanterns, the morning verse...
Clara
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:13:09 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Education and false values
-----
) )The change of teeth issue is more subtle
)
) Pardon me if I have less and less patience for malarkey, but what is
) "subtle" about this? Change of teeth has *no* relation to reading, subtle
or
) otherwise, other than the fact that these developments occur, roughly,
) around the same time for a lot of kids, though not all.
)
Steiner, I believe made a brilliant observation without much medical
training. We know that every cell in the body changes at different times-
days (eyes and mouth) months ( the liver in less than 40 days) and years
(bone and marrow cells): eventually all the cells are renewed and recreated
by the body.. This eventually takes 6-7 years to reach the bone and marrow.
When the teeth change, it signifies that the organism has renewed itself
entirely and replaced all embryo cells garnered from the mother and thus a
complete organic (and maybe some other type of psychological independence)
shift has occurred. The may or may not be related to reading and
intellectual interests but its interesting in itself as a event in growth
and may have deeper unknown and unconsciousness implications. I do not throw
out things because I only partially understand them.
)
) )and I would not use this as a criteria unless the connecting link is
) )obvious (the interest and ready capacity to read and become more
) )intellectually interested). Some kids do as young as three. Do we stop
) ) )them out of fear?
)
) Yes. Are you not aware of this? Waldorf teachers absolutely would stop a
) three year old interested in reading.
This would be an issue for me.
)
) Jeff, what's the basis for your interest/understanding of Waldorf? If
you've
) already told us this, I'm sorry if I've missed it. I'm getting the feeling
) you are another new or prospective Waldorf parent with stars in your eyes
) about this beautiful and gentle approach, and may not actually be aware of
) the fanaticism.
Sorry. I have a degree from UW Madison is Philosophy with a minor in Ed
Psych. I went on did the Waldorf Training in 1974 but chose not to teach due
to pay and ideological restrictions within the schools. I think there is
some merit in both Steiner's work and Waldorf. I have been in business for
25 years as a retail startup entrepreneur and in real estate. Sorry, I am
not a prospective Waldorf parent but I am interested in education in
general. My eyes are wide open but one "eye" is very grounded and practical
(I also do competitive sports training in racquetball and squash) and the
other "eye" respects intuition.
)
)
) ) Well, there's an odd little alarmist undercurrent there so familiar to
me
) from Waldorf . . . sure what kids are exposed to influences them, though I
) don't think if a selection of good children's books is provided, that any
) particular book will have some kind of "decisive" lifelong effect, as you
) seem to be darkly implying. But yes, books influence kids. Parents should
) look for lots of good books for their kids to be influenced by.
)
) re: eyesight problems from computers or reading?
)
) )The difference above is general exposure and too much use.
)
) That was my point. Too much of anything is a problem. Waldorf advocates a
) complete ban till puberty on computers, and a wary approach toward books -
) not avoidance of "too much" use.
)
) )I feel most kids use computers and related media too much but the
)opinions
) )about how much may not be resolved right now. I would not put )a
moratorium
) )on all computer use
)
) Waldorf does, for under-puberty. Jeff, again if I have missed it excuse
me,
) but if you are considering enrolling a child in Waldorf, please, inform
) yourself better. They do indeed advocate a moratorium on all computer use
) before high school.
)
I would not enroll a child in a pure Waldorf school. I am a revisionist and
think that the good has to extracted from the system and they incorporated
into some new. I will not just toss out everything.
) )but I also understand the "pure" intent of Waldorf. If one is trying to
) )encourage a certain condition of sensitivity and inner development in a
) )child then any exposure may be disruptive.
)
) Though I would once have agreed with it, now, to me this is a very
alarming
) statement. The word "pure" is a clue to fanaticism. This idea adults have
a
) right to try to induce "conditions of sensitivity and inner development"
in
) children sets off all kinds of loud alarms for me. Allow your children to
) live in the real world. Love them and shield them from violence,
) pornography, and knowledge of some of the ugly things that go on in the
) world as long and as well as you can, but leave their "inner development"
) alone, please.
)
"Pure" is not about fanaticism. If I want my kid to learn classical music,
I will not mix in hip hop chords or Eric Clapton for fun and diversity. I
see it now. You are perhaps taking "pure" in the context of spirituality or
race.That's not how I used the term. Pure means undiluted and true to a
source to me.. If a form of music or sport is chosen, there are certain
rules and goals that one follows. Waldorf has these goals and rules but many
do not like them as they stand and they might not fit modern life as we know
it. The goals are designed to nature certain abilities and capacities in
children. Whether it "works" is yet to seen.
)
) )I can only imagine what is going on with the eyes of kids using hand
)held
) )devices or gameboys for hours at a time. Common sense and eye )physiology
) )is clear- frequent long and short focusing is important for )the health
and
) )development of the eyes.
)
) Quite agree. Everything in moderation. Definitely avoid gameboys for
"hours
) at a time." Any responsible parent would. Again, Jeff, I am wondering how
) you familiar you actually are with what Waldorf advocates and practices.
I am very familiar with them as per above and I don't agree with many things
and how it is done them. I just wish parents would become more proactive and
change the system to suit their needs or create new schools.
)
) (snip desensitization from electronic devices, confusing reality with the
) virtual world, etc.)
)
) Just running out of time. Quite agree. Again how about moderation? I would
) like parents to be aware that moderation, discipline, caution, limits,
etc.,
) are *not* what Waldorf are about. They insist on a total ban on any form
of
) electronic stimulation.
)
They may be mistaken and hardheaded on this issue. I fully understand the
metaphysics of it but it may not be possible in this society to control
experiences this way or should be. . I would not like my kids play gameboy
or handheld pong type devices for many reasons- eyesight strain,
mindlessness, mechanical addiction, time wasting, etc. They can learn magic
tricks or drawing or spelling games, etc. As for moderation, this is a catch
phrase. Certain TV programs or video games should not be in moderation like
the Freddy Krueger kill fests or Hellraiser series on video. I don't think
you are suggesting smoking dope in moderation or letting kids sample alcohol
in moderation. Just being extreme here. . Ask Robert Downey what moderation
is and how it impacted his life. He was introduced to pot at age 11 by
permissive parents.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:49:52 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Diana,
I appreciate your watchful and protective concern for others. Unfortunately,
as I see now, some members can misconstrue posts to bring a point home. I am
not a physicist and will not engage in scientific discussion I know nothing
about other than lay knowledge. But if we find a common ground of "research"
we can all do, then we can talk. And cognitive abilities such as memory
recall, focusing, observation of ourselves and others, is a starting point.
My suggestion of this "exercise" was directed as a general recommendation
to Peter and for anyone; and not for Peter to "improve himself" because he
"needs" it. This exercise actually was used by Pythagoras in his school at
Corona and is a long standing teaching method for nearly anyone interested
in self knowledge, cognitive improvement as well as certain spiritual side
benefits- so some claim..
The real point is: if someone is critical of a system of knowledge, then
why not test an element of that system honestly and fairly. Most people
will not and can not because we lack the discipline and constancy to do this
kind of work, myself included. And this is the butt of reasoning for most
spiritual teachers (and martial artists)- students are lazy and not willing
to try something and change if even for a short time. Many people pooh pooh
the Asian and medieval concept of Chi or life force/ etheric energy. I would
bet my bottom dollar that if one took the recommended suggestions of
pre-training (no heavy meals on the day of the training, sufficient sleep,
etc). and did a one to two day workshop in Chi Gung or Tai Chi, they would
not longer doubt that this "something" exists as a force within the body.
They may not accept the theories around it but the phenomena for them would
be evident.
It may be that some do not need any self reflective work and are completely
okay with themselves as they are. I answered his basic question straight- he
didn't see any reason to engage in Steiner's exercises because no one has
given him reason to do so - I gave him some reasons- improved memory, mental
focus, concentration, increased sensitivity to communication with others,
enhanced visualization capacity (even Einstein used this capacity and his
discovery of the General Theory was achieved in visual dream state, as I
recall.)etc. Its up to those who like to experiment or not..
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)
) Jeff prescribed for Peter F. the famous "review your day backwards"
) exercise:
)
) Peter:
) )My response to the experiment is first convince me using independently
) )verifiable evidence that this worth doing.
)
) Peter, you were politer and friendlier than I feel, and often act, when
) someone (unsolicited) prescribes little spiritual exercises for me. It is
) especially offensive when you are asking for facts, objective evidence
both
) can observe, and are instead condescendingly told you need to evolve
) spiritually or morally first.
)
) )Read Jeffrey Masson's book "My Father's Guru". Most amusing.
)
) Second the recommendation. It's amusing but also very sad, and very
relevant
) here!
) Diana
) _________________________________________________________________
) Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:59:00 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercise part 4
As I mentioned earlier this exercise was done in Greek times, in Europe
before the Renaissance, used in transpersonal psychology (Fisher Hoffman
Process, Primal Therapy by Janov and hypnotherapy) and was recommended and
described in great detail by the philosopher Manly Palmer Hall in the
Phoenix and in Steiner. Who cares where it come from. Does it work and
produce results to validate or invalidate some of Steiner claims.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clara Paix" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
) Jeff
)
) This suggestion of yours is not fair game, if you
) allow me to say my opinion. Next time, make it
) clear where you get your "innocent experiments"
) from - this one was designed by no psychologist,
) it is a well-known, much discussed, old-news,
) Stenier-prescripted exercise. I find it
) patronizing and unfair on your part to recommend
) it here as if it were not, forgive my frankness.
)
) Clara
)
)
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: jeff auen (pacbay home.com)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 00:48
) Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)
)
) |
) | -----
) |
) | ) Peter Farrell wrote:
) | )
) | ) I have a serious problem with this view. It
) would be easy for me to say as
) | a
) | ) physicist that you can't understand quantum
) mechanics (for example)
) | without
) | ) years of appropriate and directed study.
) However it is not necessary to
) | ) personally understand quantum mechanics to
) understand that quantum
) | mechanics
) | ) "works" in some sense because there is any
) amount of evidence which can be
) | ) personally experienced by people with no
) understanding of quantum
) | mechanics.
) | ) One such example could be the transistor.
) | ) If I consider Steiner's work, there are
) outcomes of his methods that are
) | in
) | ) the public domain many of which have been
) quoted here which are simply
) | ) wrong.
) |
) |
) | I agree some of his ideas appear wacky and in
) error but so are there many
) | that are right-
) |
) | be a moral human being;
) | be intellectually honest;
) | examine yourself daily and strive to become a
) better person;
) | seek to know something more than oneself and
) mundane life (God or Nature,
) | take your pick);
) | help the world and be of service to others-
) | knowledge is not truth- there is much more to
) know than we think;
) | living off the earth's is not possible without
) gravity being present (given
) | other life support elements present) without
) damaging the body (he
) | mentioned this in a Physics Course to Workers,
) if I recall )- see bone
) | density defects with astronauts
) | mysticism and psychism can be dangerous nonsense
) and escapist without
) | rationalism, peer review and specialize training
) and guidance from a mentor;
) | the eastern spiritual notion of non-identity or
) non-self is an error (which
) | may include the Buddha);
) | if one learns to control thought process and
) imagination for long periods of
) | time, one can learn more of thought and
) imagination than is normally
) | understood
) | spiritual wisdom is universal and can be found
) in every culture....
) | Objective spiritual experience and knowledge can
) be achieved if one takes
) | the time and effort
) |
) |
) | In fact I think you might be hard pressed to
) come up with any
) | ) original notions of Steiner's which are
) independently testable which have
) | ) subsequently been demonstrated to be true. Why
) then should I consider
) | ) undergoing any form of training to experience
) some "truth" when the
) | ) independent evidence indicates that the
) methods don't work?
) |
) | Here is a notion: every night at 11pm or 12 pm
) (nearing retirement time) for
) | three months without fail (and without falling
) asleep in the process),
) | intently recreate as vividly as possible the
) entire day's events from
) | memory in reverse order; pay attention to how
) you interacted with others in
) | daily life; see each interaction as vividly as
) possible with the intention
) | of noticing how you felt with them and how they
) felt with you during
) | interactions; note also whether personal goals
) and promises were kept and
) | the consequences to oneself and others; did one
) perform tasks and work well
) | or not so well; was one uncomfortable with some
) people and comfortable with
) | others-why (quickly not much thinking about it).
) |
) |
) | See if this "experiment" produces results. Now
) as with any experiment, you
) | have to Do It as described. It can be done in
) about 10 minutes, but will
) | take longer and I guaranteed you will probably
) fall asleep (or not be able
) | to get through the entire day to the first act
) of the day -awakening and
) | getting out of bed). In principle, if you miss
) a night or fall asleep you
) | must start from scratch again. That's okay. Just
) continue along.
) |
) | Why do this?. Just for the challenge and the
) zest of it. What will happen? I
) | could give clues but I suggest you tell us in
) three months if any changes
) | occurred in memory, recall, behavior,
) visualization ability, the suppression
) | of automatic thinking in daily situations and
) general self awareness of your
) | relationships and maybe some odd things during
) sleep and dreaming.
) |
) | Now is this scientific? Its not a hard science
) project but I am not
) | physicist or geologist. But psychologists are
) scientists too and they do
) | have experiments and research to do. You may
) not know the hypothesis but
) | you have an "innocent" experiment.
) |
) |
) |
) | ) Peter Farrell:
) | ) Who says you can't see individual atoms? For
) about a decade or so this has
) | ) not been true. Many people have seen one or
) two individual atoms of sodium
) | ) not using a microscope. I can obtain
) references but it will have to wait
) | ) until Monday (Australian time).
) |
) | Please send details.
) | )
) | ) Jeff goes on talk about living in the world
) and experiencing. How does
) | Jeff
) | ) know what my experience of the world is like?
) Does he think I don't smell
) | ) and see and hear and feel and understand?
) | )
) | Peter,
) |
) | I don't know what your experience of the world
) is but I would guess its
) | pretty close to mine and everyone else's. Not
) everyone experiences the world
) | the same granted but we are all pretty close in
) "bandwidth". Schools are
) | should be designed to let musical kids play
) music, would be biologists pull
) | the wings off insects; little gymnasts fly over
) a parallel bars; and so.
) | Each has a predominant sense of the world. Some
) feel it in movement; some in
) | thinking and math; some in music; some in color
) painting; etc.
) |
) | If you could hear the thump of a fly landing on
) desktop, then we would
) | really have something to discuss. (by the way,
) Nicola Tesla claimed to have
) | had this experience when deathly ill as a 12
) year old child in
) | Czechoslovakia- see his biography- Tesla- the
) Man of Wonders, I believe is
) | the title).
) |
) | It was fun reading your response by the way.
) |
) | Jeff Auen
) |
) |
) =================
)
)
) _________________________________________________________
) Do You Yahoo!?
) Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:58:00 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
)Michael-
)) He was not a not a spiritual seer or reincarnated
)) spirit; he was an
)) ordinary man. That's a safe assumption, since there
)) is NO evidence of
)) the existence of anything supernatural.
))
)
)Mr. Kopp,
)
)What would you consider EVIDENCE of something
)Supernatural? Would you personally have to see it, or
)would it be okay if someone else did? Would you have
)to see it to believe it?
)
)seriously,
)dottie
Dottie,
Yes, I agree it's a serious question, and I appreciate your sincerity
in asking it, Dottie.
Ideally, in order to accept the existence of something never before
proved in human history, I would like to experience it, or see direct
evidence of it, before I agree it is supernatural. The fact that
thousands, or millions, of people believe they have had such
supernatural experiences, founded religions on that basis, written
sacred books, and created a belief system, does not convince me. And
none of the "evidence" produced by spiritualists and believers over
the years -- such as the two British girls' fairy pictures that
excited Conan Doyle, but which have just been admitted by the girls,
now old women, to be fakes -- persuades me, either (and I'm also a
professional photographer).
However, since I'm not a practicing professional scientist (but only
a scientist by thought and and science reporter by trade) I will
accept evidence of science as we know it, on the basis that if more
than one scientist is able to show either the thing itself, or
effects that are explainable according to natural laws as being
causable by the thing itself, and that these things are reproducible,
then the liklihood of their being real is close to 100 percent.
Steiner, like all irrationalists, did no such thing. He said, do the
work yourself (intuition -- literally teaching and discovering within
oneself, not from the external world) and (maybe) you'll come to the
same level of insight he claimed through clairvoyance and the alleged
ability to communicate with "higher realms".
It's an impossible situation because Steiner's world view is
irrational: it posits that we all create the reality around us from
within us, rather than perceiving some reality that is common to all
and can be sensed by the normal senses (or instruments of science).
There's never been any evidence of such "higher realms" -- no matter
how Anthroposophical "scientists" (or thousand of other varieties of
spiritualists) try to construct or deduce them.
Reports by people who claim to have experienced something
supernatural are quite common, as I'm sure you know, and there is no
way they can be proved, because they are always totally subjective or
explainable by natural phenomena. Those natural phenomena include the
latest brain research that shows that there is an area of the brain
which creates "spiritual" experience for us. Unless you want to posit
that this area of the brain is somehow in contact with the "higher
realms", then it seems that it's just another example of the
marvelous evolutionary adaptation of nature that must serve some
purpose in our lives according to evolution's choices of perpetuation
and increase of things that prove useful.
Because I, for instance, sometimes FEEL in my mind or "heart" things
which go beyond explainable phenomena does NOT indicate to me that
there MUST BE something greater and supernatural; it just indicates
that being human has some deep emotions and biochemical brain
responses to our experiences.
(I've said before here that if such a thing were ever to occur, and
it was reproducible by others in the same way that scientific
experiments are reproducible, with physical evidence, then that thing
would no longer, by definition, be supernatural, but natural. I'm
willing to think that there a a lot of things undiscovered in nature,
and that some things we now consider supernatural may be proved to be
part of nature's Universe. But I don't believe Steiner or anyone else
has ever discovered these things in the ways they describe -- and
that, if they could indeed discover them, they could not reproduce
them or provide tangible evidence.)
Metaphysics is not physics taken one step further and producing
similar results to physics, but on a higher plane; it's our
imaginations trying to deal with the ultimate questions of origin,
destination and nature between (of ourselves, in a self-absorbed way,
and of the Universe, in a higher way).
The conflation of metaphysics with physics -- from mind/body studies
to religion/science melding to so-called "frontier science) like
parapsychology, light-as-spirit, heart-is-not-a-pump, antigravity
(levity, I kid you not) pseudoscience, is, in my opinion, a bad thing
for both sides.
Hope this answer helps, Dottie.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:23:13 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
)Michael-
)) He was not a not a spiritual seer or reincarnated
)) spirit; he was an
)) ordinary man. That's a safe assumption, since there
)) is NO evidence of
)) the existence of anything supernatural.
))
)
)Mr. Kopp,
)
)What would you consider EVIDENCE of something
)Supernatural? Would you personally have to see it, or
)would it be okay if someone else did? Would you have
)to see it to believe it?
)
)seriously,
)dottie
Dottie,
Yes, I agree it's a serious question, and I appreciate your sincerity
in asking it, Dottie.
Ideally, in order to accept the existence of something never before
proved in human history, I would like to experience it, or see direct
evidence of it, before I agree it is supernatural. The fact that
thousands, or millions, of people believe they have had such
supernatural experiences, founded religions on that basis, written
sacred books, and created a belief system, does not convince me. And
none of the "evidence" produced by spiritualists and believers over
the years -- such as the two British girls' fairy pictures that
excited Conan Doyle, but which were admitted by the girls, as old
women, to be fakes -- persuades me, either (and I'm also a
professional photographer).
However, since I'm not a practicing professional scientist (but only
a scientist by thought and and science reporter by trade) I will
accept evidence of science as we know it, on the basis that if more
than one scientist is able to show either the thing itself, or
effects that are explainable according to natural laws as being
causable by the thing itself, and that these things are reproducible,
then the likelihood of their being real is close to 100 percent.
Steiner, like all irrationalists, did no such thing. He said, do the
work yourself (intuition -- literally teaching and discovering within
oneself, not from the external world) and (maybe) you'll come to the
same level of insight he claimed through clairvoyance and the alleged
ability to communicate with "higher realms".
It's an impossible situation because Steiner's world view is
irrational: it posits that we all create the reality around us from
within us, rather than perceiving some reality that is common to all
and can be sensed by the normal senses (or instruments of science).
There's never been any evidence of such "higher realms" -- no matter
how Anthroposophical "scientists" (or thousand of other varieties of
spiritualists) try to construct or deduce them.
Reports by people who claim to have experienced something
supernatural are quite common, as I'm sure you know, and there is no
way they can be proved, because they are always totally subjective or
explainable by natural phenomena. Those natural phenomena include the
latest brain research that shows that there is an area of the brain
which creates "spiritual" experience for us. Unless you want to posit
that this area of the brain is somehow in contact with the "higher
realms", then it seems that it's just another example of the
marvelous evolutionary adaptation of nature that must serve some
purpose in our lives according to evolution's choices of perpetuation
and increase of things that prove useful.
Because I, for instance, sometimes FEEL in my mind or "heart" things
which go beyond explainable phenomena does NOT indicate to me that
there MUST BE something greater and supernatural; it just indicates
that being human has some deep emotions and biochemical brain
responses to our experiences.
(I've said before here that if such a thing were ever to occur, and
it was reproducible by others in the same way that scientific
experiments are reproducible, with physical evidence, then that thing
would no longer, by definition, be supernatural, but natural. I'm
willing to think that there a a lot of things undiscovered in nature,
and that some things we now consider supernatural may be proved to be
part of nature's Universe. But I don't believe Steiner or anyone else
has ever discovered these things in the ways they describe -- and
that, if they could indeed discover them, they could not reproduce
them or provide tangible evidence.)
Metaphysics is not physics taken one step further and producing
similar results to physics, but on a higher plane; it's our
imaginations trying to deal with the ultimate questions of origin,
destination and nature between (of ourselves, in a self-absorbed way,
and of the Universe, in a higher way).
The conflation of metaphysics with physics -- from mind/body studies
to religion/science melding to so-called "frontier science) like
parapsychology, light-as-spirit, heart-is-not-a-pump, antigravity
(levity, I kid you not) pseudo-science, is, in my opinion, a bad
thing for both sides.
Hope this answer helps, Dottie.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
dottie -
) )Mr. Kopp,
) )
) )What would you consider EVIDENCE of something
) )Supernatural? Would you personally have to see it,
) or
) )would it be okay if someone else did? Would you
) have
) )to see it to believe it?
Michael
) Dottie,
)
) Yes, I agree it's a serious question, and I
) appreciate your sincerity
) in asking it, Dottie.
)
) Ideally, in order to accept the existence of
) something never before
) proved in human history, I would like to experience
) it, or see direct
) evidence of it, before I agree it is supernatural.
) The fact that
) thousands, or millions, of people believe they have
) had such
) supernatural experiences, founded religions on that
) basis, written
) sacred books, and created a belief system, does not
) convince me.
dottie -
I agree with you Michael. I would have to experience
it in order to believe it. I get that. I think that is
why many of my friends were Atheist when I left home
because I could speak with them about questions that
my Christian or other friends who believed in Gd,
would not even consider a possibility.
And I also get why people have a hard time with
Steiner and what he brings to the table regarding his
spiritual research. Absolutely.
However somewhere along the line I discovered
something and it was personal. And there is no way in
hell I would have believed anyone if they had
discovered the same thing before me. I had to discover
it myself.
Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it,
dottie
p.s. I would also like to appologize for a post that
was not very respectful to you and Mr. Dugan. I am sorry.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:22:20 -0700
From: "Marinell Darmody" (mdarmody home.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
((David: Our lead kindergarten teacher is very up-front that she believes
in gnomes.))
Marinell:
) As in little dwarflike people who live in the interior of the earth?
) Wow....
Before their weekly walk in the forest, the kindergarten asks the gnomes
(who, after all, live there) for permission to enter. It was also a common
practice (in my daughter's class) for the children to sew little coats and
hats and mittens for the gnomes.))
Okay, this all sounds fun and harmless. My question is, do the teachers
REALLY believe in gnomes or is it just a fun game for the kids? I don't
mind children believing in fun stuff, such as fairies, Easter bunny, Santa
Claus, etc. but it's a whole different ballgame if TEACHERS actually believe
in gnomes and fairies. I'm all for a full imagination, but some things do
not belong in school, especially being taught as a fact.
Marinell
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:40:06 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Education and false values
Jeff:
)I would not enroll a child in a pure Waldorf school. I am a revisionist and
)think that the good has to extracted from the system and they incorporated
)into some new. I will not just toss out everything.
Debra:
I had that same idea. The fact is, once the porch light is on, the moths
will come. Can't even breathe the word "Waldorf" around here.
The School of the Arts has picked up a few Waldorf things - the teaching in
blocks idea, they even have used the Waldorf main lesson books to
illustrate a history block. But it is mainstream history that is taught.
Derek's main lesson history book is beautiful - but it is individually
illustrated. No other book in the classroom looked like his.
Nothing Waldorf passed muster in the art or dance department. Derek's dance
class did a wonderful modern dance to 'Stray Cats' at the three-time a year
sell out the theatre performance night. (Parents often don't get to see
their own kids perform if they don't buy tickets on the first day.
Performance night is a huge hit in this artist community. VERY
professional.) Ballet, modern, folk dance... Their art work includes all
art medias. All individual paintings. (Self portraits, posed models,
landscape, impressionistic. Oils, pastels, water color... Then there is the
sculpture. Beautiful. Did I mention theatre arts? Wonderful work.
Forget the name Waldorf if you want the school to work.
)
)
)) )but I also understand the "pure" intent of Waldorf. If one is trying to
)) )encourage a certain condition of sensitivity and inner development in a
)) )child then any exposure may be disruptive.
Debra:
Waldorf is completely out-dated at best. There are many effective ways to
do what Waldorf only talks about doing. Parents often fall in love with the
dream that doesn't materialize. They forget that it doesn't have to be a
struggle. Get the right teachers and parents together without religion. It
works.
))
)) Though I would once have agreed with it, now, to me this is a very
)alarming
)) statement. The word "pure" is a clue to fanaticism. This idea adults have
)a
)) right to try to induce "conditions of sensitivity and inner development"
)in
)) children sets off all kinds of loud alarms for me. Allow your children to
)) live in the real world. Love them and shield them from violence,
)) pornography, and knowledge of some of the ugly things that go on in the
)) world as long and as well as you can, but leave their "inner development"
)) alone, please.
Debra:
Here! Hear! Come tour the School of the Arts! See function in action.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:54:21 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
)Okay, this all sounds fun and harmless. My question is, do the teachers
)REALLY believe in gnomes or is it just a fun game for the kids? I don't
)mind children believing in fun stuff, such as fairies, Easter bunny, Santa
)Claus, etc. but it's a whole different ballgame if TEACHERS actually believe
)in gnomes and fairies. I'm all for a full imagination, but some things do
)not belong in school, especially being taught as a fact.
)
)Marinell
Debra;
Err, Steiner taught that if you didn't make spiritual progression over
successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome. I guess the teachers think
of the gnomes in the forest as a kind of special education program for
Waldorf schools.
Trust me, they believe it. It is time to post one of the WC classics to the
list again.
Diana, a former kindergarten aid in a Waldorf school wrote about the gnomes:
***
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The gnomes (was: more about myth)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 02:50:38 GMT
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
[David, on the gnomes]
)Sure. One of my favorite things about Waldorf schooling, the gnomes!
(etc. on the "seat fairy" -- sewing gnomes in parent meeting -- gnomes
whispering tidbits of advice to us -- lucky ten year old savoring the magic
of childhood)
I will try not to snort too cynically here, David, but I gotta tell you, a
little of it goes a long way. I suspect in your role as parent/board member,
a little bit is all you get compared to the children, and it's easy to feel
sentimental about it.
It's probably one thing to hear quaint remarks about the gnomes, and to try
your hand at sewing one at a parent meeting (reminds me of Sune's knitting
one pair of socks in 26 years, making it easy for him to romanticize this
aspect of the curriculum), and of course you see how well they promote the
school when you sell them at craft fairs and open houses. Only a real cynic
would not fall in love with the Waldorf gnomes.
But it's another thing to live and breathe gnome-culture day in-day out. I
had more of a sense of the effect of this, perhaps, being in the classroom
over a prolonged period, than your average parent or board member could
possibly have. The gnomes are blamed for things that people do that people
should take responsibility for (teachers as well as children). The gnomes
can be used to displace emotions and reactions. The gnomes are used to blow
off children's questions about how the world around them works and mystify
children asking about difficult topics like sex or violence or illness. The
gnomes stop rational discussion before it gets started and send common sense
out the window. The gnomes can even be threatening. The children who *don't*
see gnomes are confused.
The gnomes, frankly, get very tiresome after awhile. I've heard children
themselves get cynical about the gnomes.
I'm sure any happy Waldorf parent reading this is disgusted with this wet
blanket attitude and thinks the elementals will be on my case for
disrespecting them. It's hard to argue "against" the gnomes and sound like
anything other than a sourpuss. But it's that old image versus reality thing
again. It's so much nicer to hear children chattering about the gnomes in
the grass than talking about Power Rangers and Pokemon, it's very easy to
look no further, to feel that a "lost world of childhood" has now been
restored, here it was in Waldorf all along. But in that lost world that
Waldorf evokes, children were not always treated very nicely at all. The
gnomes do some rotten things.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:31:55 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: New here
)
)
) Reading through some of the posts I am surprised to see how some are so
) angry and critical of the Waldorf movement.
After I first arrived at the waldorf school, I became aware of the same
thing, the parents in KG/class1 were happy, but in class 6 there was a group
who were aggressive , and in class 10 there was a group who were
*extrememly* aggresive towards the school, I found it very hard to
understand as all I could see were rainbows,arts and rounded corners, I
asked on of the class 6 parents why, He told me I would find out, but it
wasnt for him to tell me.(very wise as I was typically new parent blind at
the time)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:42:40 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: GNOMES
)
) Please make a small survey - how many W parents
) you know, personally or here, that actually
) understood, from the beginning, that the whole
) gnomes stuff was REAL?
Do the teachers actually believe they *see* them?
There was an old anthro at the christmas fair who used to sell knitted
gnomes, and someone told me she *visualised* them in the swiss alps,
they all had different names and colours, she was very serious about it, I
thought it was a clever sales tecnique, to make you buy them all and start a
collection...I had misjudged her, I think?
bea
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 253
-- Topica Digest --
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
By mypostbox.formail virgin.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pmfar hotmail.com
more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
By timmo iprimus.com.au
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:42:53 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
)dottie -
)) )What would you consider EVIDENCE of something
)) )Supernatural? Would you personally have to see it, or
)) )would it be okay if someone else did? Would you have
)) )to see it to believe it?
)
)
)Michael
)) Dottie,
)) Ideally, in order to accept the existence of
)) something never before
)) proved in human history, I would like to experience
)) it, or see direct
)) evidence of it, before I agree it is supernatural.
)) The fact that
)) thousands, or millions, of people believe they have
)) had such
)) supernatural experiences, founded religions on that
)) basis, written
)) sacred books, and created a belief system, does not
)) convince me.
)
)dottie -
)
)I agree with you Michael. I would have to experience
)it in order to believe it. I get that. I think that is
)why many of my friends were Atheist when I left home
)because I could speak with them about questions that
)my Christian or other friends who believed in Gd,
)would not even consider a possibility.
)
)And I also get why people have a hard time with
)Steiner and what he brings to the table regarding his
)spiritual research. Absolutely.
)
)However somewhere along the line I discovered
)something and it was personal. And there is no way in
)hell I would have believed anyone if they had
)discovered the same thing before me. I had to discover
)it myself.
)
)Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it,
)
)dottie
)
)p.s. I would also like to appologize for a post that
)was not very respectful to you and Mr. Dugan. I am sorry.
Not a worry about the disrespect, Dottie.
But, if you'll pardon me, to continue the line of discussion about evidence ...
I respect the fact that you have found something personal. That's
what all religion and spirituality are about. The fact that I think
it's likely a natural evolutionary development of the brain in that
part we call our "mind" does not detract from the realness of the
experience -- for YOU.
But, with respect: you can't describe it, you can't show it, you
can't give evidence to prove it's more than your imagination or
emotion. Yet you say, in effect, that it represents something outside
of yourself that is beyond what science can know, but that other
people can know it by discovering it for themselves.
This is circular reasoning, Dottie, and gets us nowhere in terms of
understanding why huge numbers of people kowtow to gurus like Steiner
and allow those beliefs to have free range over their lives and, more
to the point of this list, over their children's lives.
And Steiner says it's real. And lots of people do lots of very weird
and often harmful things with OTHER PEOPLE'S CHILDREN by stealth in
the name of this belief in Steiner's reality.
Do you begin to see my problem, Dottie? We're not haters here, we're
people who've been harmed by other people's beliefs. And so we want
to deconstruct those beliefs and prevent them from harming other
people. To do that, we have to think rigorously and critically and
skeptically. That's hard on everyone, including the critics
themselves. But we keep trying.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:44:16 +0100
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
Subject: Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
) who
) would seriously think they thought the gnomes will
) actually WEAR them?!!!
Are we saying that the gnomes actually need clothes?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:07:17 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
)dottie-
)
)I thought it was clear this was a Steiner experiment
)as Peter said he challenged Jeff to come up with
)something that was Steiners that could be
)independantly testable and be demonstrated to be
)true... This experiment/exercise is something that can
)be independantly tested by each person.
)
)I wonder if Jeff meant it as you said, and if Peter
)didn't get this was a Steiner exercize/experiment.
)
)dottie
)
Peter:
I assumed it was a Steiner exercise. I think you have misunderstood what I
mean by independently testable. If I go back to the quantum mechanical
example, it is very difficult to deny the existence of the transistor. It is
relatively easy to verify using published documents that the invention came
as a result of quantum mechanical considerations without knowing anything
about the detail of quantum mechanics. In my view the agreement among the
scientific community that this is an historical fact is sufficient. What
Jeff is asking me to do is the equivalent of understanding quantum
mechanics. That's not the same thing at all. Something like the following
would be the same thing. Show me someone who as a result of following these
exercises as suggested by Steiner has become clairvoyant and as a result of
this can predict something not predictable by standard means which can be
tested in the physical domain. Steiner tried it. He made claims about atoms
and relativity and astronomy and so on. He was wrong in every case that I am
aware of. The fact that Jeff tells me try this experiment instead of telling
me some independently verifiable truth indicates that he doesn't know of any
either. The evidence is remarkably clear. You can choose fraud or self
deluded.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:16:15 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
)Jeff:
I answered his basic question straight- he
)didn't see any reason to engage in Steiner's exercises because no one has
)given him reason to do so - I gave him some reasons- improved memory,
)mental
)focus, concentration, increased sensitivity to communication with others,
)enhanced visualization capacity (even Einstein used this capacity and his
)discovery of the General Theory was achieved in visual dream state, as I
)recall.)etc. Its up to those who like to experiment or not..
)
Peter:
I am afraid you gave me no reasons to do so. You made unsubstantiated
claims. Incidentally I have read several bigraphies of Einstein and this
story is new to me. Even if it was true Einstein did not use that as an
argument that it should be accepted by the scientific community.
Independent corroboration, agreement in appropriate limits with existing
tested theories and so on. That's not what is going on here. I have serious
doubts about the Pythagoras story as well. What's the source?
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:38:30 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter Staudenmaier wrote on Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:48:18 -0500:
) There is no support to be found, either in the statutes of the =
Anthroposophical Society or in Steiner's writings, for the notion that =
theorganizational break with theosophy involved an ideological divergence =
regarding the root race theory.=20
Detlef Hardorp comments:=20
This is correct. Steiner's break with the "root race theory" came, in =
fact, much earlier. In 1906, Steiner distanced himself from the =
theosophical root-race concept in writing and never used it again (see =
Luzifer Gnosis No. 32, Summer 1906, p. 627, printed in: "Aus der Akascha =
Chronik", GA 11, Dornach 1969, S. 208 - the English version of this book is =
on many of the shelves of list members, maybe somebody can give the exact =
bibl. reference, as I only have the German original).
It was actually not so easy to date this essay, as the posthumously =
published "Akashic record" book contains a series of essays spanning a =
number of years (including the earlier ones where he had actually borrowed =
the theosophic root-race terminology). So I went to the trouble of looking =
up the original Luzifer-Gnosis periodical. That didn't give an immediate =
answer either, as Steiner (the editor of the journal) stopped printing the =
date of publication when the journal started to appear on an irregular =
basis in 1905. As there was an ad in the issue concerned for a lecture =
taking place in the fall of 1906, it was likely that the publication took =
place in the summer of 1906, which some more research confirmed. In =
previous postings, I had incorrectly stated 1905 as the year of =
publication.
Then there is the lecture held on 4.12.1909, where Steiner looks back on =
the theosophical movement and describes the root-race vocabulary as a =
"Kinderkrankheit der theosophischen Bewegung" (a childhood illness of the =
theosophical movement) and adds: "Aber man mu=DF =FCber die =
Kinderkrankheiten hinauskommen und sich klar sein dar=FCber, da=DF der =
Rassebegriff aufh=F6rt eine jegliche Bedeutung zu haben in unserer Zeit" =
("But we must overcome these childhood illnesses and be clear about the =
fact that the concept of race ceases to retain any meaning in our time") =
(cited from: Die tieferen Geheimnisse des Menschheitswerdens im Lichte der =
Evangelien, GA 117, Dornach 1966, p. 152 - again, somebody else will have =
to look up the English bibl. reference if anybody is interested). That's a =
pretty clear statement. Not only was it a misnomer to use the word "race" =
in describing states of cultural evolution, the concept of race in general =
"ceases to retain any meaning in our time".
At the time of the official split in 1913 between the Anthroposophical and =
Theosophical Society, this divergence regarding the root race theory did =
not play any discernible role: the issue was Steiner's disagreement that =
Krishnamurti was a second coming of Christ. This was a big-time =
disagreement. Steiner had disagreed with a number of theosophical notions =
previously and publicly, not only the root-race concept. He didn't, for =
example, like the spiritist leanings of Theosophy at all. He respected =
Blavatsky's clairvoyant abilities, but found her interpretations ("Isis =
unveiled") to be totally unclear and incomprehensible to anyone without =
similar clairvoyant abilities. He strongly criticized the theosophical =
intellectuality of someone like Sinnett for its "intellectual cookbook =
mentality". Above all, he was of the opinion that spirituality needed to =
be founded within European culture and not just "imported" from the Orient. =
To equate Steiner's vision of the mission of Central Europe (and, in =
particular, of German culture) with a "white-supremacist" attitude, =
however, as PS does, is one of those bubbles of hot words untouched by a =
sober understanding of the facts.
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 07:10:24 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Gomer V. Meschede D.
"A single trapped atom: Light-matter interaction at the microscopic level
Annalen der Physik. 10(1-2):9-18, 2001.
Abstract
For a single trapped atom the fluctuations of resonance fluorescence reveal
its dynamic evolution at all relevant time scales. We review experimental
results, extend interpretations and express expectations for future systems
with fully controlled quantum properties. [References: 34]
This is a recent paper which will refer to the earlier work. Meschede's work
in this area is a bit of a tour de force. Highly recommended but difficult
reading.
One of the papers from Wineland's group at NIST is available on the web at
http://www.bldrdoc.gov/timefreq/ion/qucomp/papers/accts/acr.pdf
This has photographs of on, two and three trapped Be+ ions. I'm not sure if
these are visible.
I'll find some more.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:21:49 +1000
From: " Harry" (timmo iprimus.com.au)
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Any waldorf teachers read this list?
)
) Many years ago, I did some analysis for my Waldorf school that revealed
that
) we were paying slightly better than the cheapest local school districts,
and
) substantially worse than the most generous ones. We tended to have
) reasonably good entry rates, but our experience increments weren't as good
) as at most of the public schools.
)
) Then, of course, there is the wild card of tuition waivers for the
children
) of full-time faculty.
)
) At the time, I came to the conclusion that a teacher was making a
sacrifice
) by choosing to teach at our Waldorf school, but that the magnitude of the
) sacrifice wasn't as great as most people probably assumed.
)
) Regards,
)
) Neil Faiman
This doesn't sound as bad as the stories I have heard. Teachers from
England and US being dramatically under paid.
We have awards that govern wages here but also teachers need to be
registered with the public or private governing body. That means they need
teaching qualifications to teach. eg four years at university.
Thanks for the info
Harry
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 254
-- Topica Digest --
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: GNOMES
By soma mwt.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By soma mwt.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pacbay home.com
Re: GNOMES
By pacbay home.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pacbay home.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By soma mwt.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pacbay home.com
Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
By steve premofine.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By soma mwt.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By soma mwt.net
RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pacbay home.com
Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
By pacbay home.com
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By pacbay home.com
Hard Hitting News
By pacbay home.com
Re: Hard Hitting News
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and empty thinking
By pacbay home.com
Re: Hard Hitting News
By pacbay home.com
Re: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
By asf peakpeak.com
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By mkopp xtra.co.nz
Re: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
By faiman jlc.net
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By soma mwt.net
Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
By faiman jlc.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pmfar hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23-Apr-2001 12:09:24 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
David Cann wrote:
) When Sharon responded to me earlier in this thread with a post that ends
) with "...It disgusts me," I almost cut loose with a really nasty
) rejoinder,
) and I'm glad I didn't. The below post (to Dottie, I think) is very
) helpful
) to me.
)
) Some of what Sharon discusses we do, although not to the exaggerated
) level
) she proposes. We certainly do not promote ourselves as an "art
) school",
) although we do say (correctly, I assert) that we "integrate artistic
) activities and academics" in our curriculum.
)
) I don't agree that an introductory brochure should contain all the
) "disclosure" stuff. Also, I completely disagree with Sharon's argument
) that
) the very fact that she didn't know anything about waldorf education is
) itself evidence of misconduct on the school's part.
)
) On the other hand, if she really received a brochure from a K-8 waldorf
) school showing children working on a computer, I would consider that
) pretty
) damning (Sharon, any chance of xeroxing that and mailing it to me?).
)
) Also, you can count me as another for whom anthroposophy just doesn't
) pass
) the "smell test" as a religion. Believe me, over the years I've read
) this
) list (at least five years for me too, Sarina), I've given the subject
) some
) serious thought, but even among people I know who are very serious about
) it
) (but who aren't Christian Community members) their approach to it does
) not
) amount to what I consider a religious one.
)
) Of course, if your definition of religion is "ANYTHING one believes that
) cannot be proved scientifically or which involves accepting something
) "on
) faith", then perhaps we have a mismatch in defining the word.
)
) I continue to think about this subject, as I learn more about Steiner
) and
) anthroposphy.
)
) David
)
Su: I truly truly wonder how anyone can say that Anthroposophy is not a
religion when at every Anthroposophical gathering I have been to, there
is a reference to the "Mystery at Golgotha".
Golgotha? Mystery? (Head scratching and eyebrows furrowed permanently
until an answer is obtained....)
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:41:45 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: GNOMES
"mypostbox.formail" wrote:
)
) Do the teachers actually believe they *see* them?
)
) There was an old anthro at the christmas fair who used to sell knitted
) gnomes, and someone told me she *visualised* them in the swiss alps,
) they all had different names and colours, she was very serious about it, I
) thought it was a clever sales tecnique, to make you buy them all and start a
) collection...I had misjudged her, I think?
Sharon:
Yes the teachers actually believe that you can see them. The gnome belief is
actually part of the magic tradition, gnomes are elemental spirits and
correspond to earth. I recommend the book "Nature Spirits", by Steiner, it's a
side splitter. Here's a quote from Steiner which helped me understand why my
daughter's lesson books were loaded with images of gnomes in mines. I'm certain
that she was told "all sorts of things" that I would not approve of.:
"Nature Spirits", Rudolf Steiner, p 62-63 from the chapter "Gnomes, Undines,
Sylphs and Salamanders". Berlin, May 16,1908:
Steiner:
"There are beings that can be seen with clairvoyant vision at many spots in the
depths of the earth, especially places little touched by living growths,
places, for instance, in a mine which have always been of a mineral nature. If
you dig into the metallic or stony ground you find beings which manifest at
first in remarkable fashion - it is as if something were to scatter us. They
seem able to crouch close together in vast numbers, and when the earth is laid
open they appear to burst asunder. The important point is that they do not fly
apart into a certain number but that in their own bodily nature they become
larger. Even when they reach their greatest size, they are still always small
creatures in comparison with human beings. The enlightened man knows nothing of
them. People, however, who have preserved a certain nature-sense, i.e. the old
clairvoyant forces which everyone once possessed and which had to be lost with
the acquisition of objective consciousness, could tell you all sorts of things
about such beings. Many names have been given to them, such as goblins, gnomes,
and so forth. "
Sharon:
The gnomes that we typically see as lawn ornaments, with little red hats and
beards are actually remnants of fact. The Persians were used as slaves in
mines. They were small people and wore little frigian caps. I was also very
interested to read in Jennings book on Rosicrucians that the frigian cap was a
very important hieroglyph in ancient Egypt. The cap was worn by the priests who
would make human sacrifices. The hat represented the tip of a penis. The little
red cap evolved into all sorts of funny little hats worn by secret society
members. Just another one of those sun god (patriarchal) things.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:42:02 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
[Jeff wrote:]
)My suggestion of this "exercise" was directed as a general
) )recommendation to Peter and for anyone; and not for Peter to "improve
) )himself" because he "needs" it.
Even if this exercise were a good answer to Peter's challenge (and he
explained why it is not, much better than I can), I don't think this
exercise is even about "memory, mental focus, visualization, concentration,"
etc., as claimed. It is full of little moralisms, and is all about
"improving yourself." (I've often noticed Steiner adherents consider a good
memory a moral virture, sign of a superior person. Not to mention the little
reproaches to oneself, "Did I accomplish my goals?" Like treating yourself
like a naughty child.)
I didn't think you thought Peter himself needed improving, since I assume
you don't know Peter personally. Anthroposphists think everyone who isn't an
anthroposphist needs improving, by definition. (It's like dealing with the
Jehovah's Witnesses at the door; I don't take it personally that they
believe I will go to hell if I don't listen to them, but I still find their
tactics intrusive and annoying.)
)The real point is: if someone is critical of a system of knowledge, )then
)why not test an element of that system honestly and fairly.
Your test is not "honest and fair" because it is subjective. A person who is
inclined positively toward Steiner or similar "spiritual leaders" will
almost certainly enjoy this little exercise and conclude it has "spiritual
benefits." (And, to be fair, those skeptical of Steiner will find it very
irritating and probably can't give it a "fair" test either. It would be very
difficult, I think, to set up experimental conditions for testing the
objective results you claim, like improved memory or concentration, in an
objective scientific manner. First you'd have to find subjects who had no
opinion of Steiner at all; on second thought, I guess that part's not so
hard, since most of the world has never heard of Rudolf Steiner . . .)
It's a form of manipulation/indoctrination of oneself to meditate in this
fashion every night. If you do Steiner's exercises for self-improvement, you
are, at the same time, convincing yourself that you *need* improvement, and
that Steiner's the guy to improve you. You will be increasing your
receptivity to Steiner's views in general, and cementing your bonding to a
group of fellow believers, and I think that is obviously the intention (not
"improved mental focus").
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:19:12 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Diana Winters wrote:
)
) It's a form of manipulation/indoctrination of oneself to meditate in this
) fashion every night. If you do Steiner's exercises for self-improvement, you
) are, at the same time, convincing yourself that you *need* improvement, and
) that Steiner's the guy to improve you. You will be increasing your
) receptivity to Steiner's views in general, and cementing your bonding to a
) group of fellow believers, and I think that is obviously the intention (not
) "improved mental focus").
Sharon:
I believe that this exercise is to help develop memory for life after death. To
recall your daily events backwards is practice for remembering your previous
life on earth when you die and reincarnate. This exercise is another of those
Steiner borrowings from the Renaissance magician's occult memory systems.
Francis Yates wrote quite a bit about this occult system, read her book "The
Art of Memory" for more information. (She also discusses the art of memory in
"The Rosicrucian Enlightenment" as well as in "Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic
Tradition".) Occultists believed they could develop memory through the use of
pictures and clearly one can identify the Waldorf approach as being based on
this approach.
I will, with much embarrassment, admit that I have tried Steiner's little
experiments over the past couple of years. (I tried these experiments because I
wanted to know what the occultists were going on about). I have stared at seeds
on a white background and yes, I could see an aura of "light and a flame". I
have seen the smoky aura of plants on a white background. I have also done many
of Goethe's color exercises which were fun and interesting. I have recounted
the daily events backwards as Steiner instructed.....I have seen all sorts of
marvelous color and light displays in my head from pressing on my eyes as the
Rosicrucians instructed to develop psychic sight, but alas, at the end of the
day, the experiments proved nothing to me regarding a spirit world. The auras
did not look like spirit to me. The colors were not angels or spirit beings. I
have also tried praying as an experiment but am left with the bleak results:
"Nothing Fails Like Prayer".
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:47:18 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
A good summary of the history of a similar exercise but most should not
worry about being blasted with past live pictures and memories. Though this
may or may not be the ultimate intent (in Steiner's meditation primers, past
life memories from this exercise is not emphasized though a connection is
made between it and early spiritual experiences). What I recommended was a
modified version of this classic training technique and it is used primarily
as psychological growth tool not an esoteric catapult. Your dabbling with
various "exercises" is my case in point. Not recommended. One may get
"effects"but they rarely have anything to do with creating consistent
results and repeatable experience to test. Trying this and that for a few
weeks or modifying something by pressing your eyeballs to create
physiological effects will not do much of anything.
And many modern teachers (not writers and authors) write off early
Rosicrucian and alchemical practices as being hopelessly lost, symbolic, and
degraded (though some authors would disagree with this). The point of this
exercise is more psychological and cognitive with spiritual overtones but
since few will ever do it properly and for the time required- several years,
its mostly done for personal growth and self reflection and control of
habitual thought processes. As a final note, its hard to accept that Steiner
"borrowed" materials such as this exercise since he describes the results of
his doing it often in great detail ( how the thought processes and flow of
cognitive activities work and how they can be reversed and made less
automatic and slavish) and I have never seen in any previous description in
the "older" literature of the magical or Rosicrucian traditions as he
presents it.
Some may think he was a visionary delusional. Others may believe he saw and
experienced what he claimed but close reading and study will indicate that
he spoke from his "own experience"- acceptable or not- and not from
someone's else manual or lectures. Now Blavatsky and Alice Bailey are
another story entirely.
jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: (soma mwt.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
)
)
) Diana Winters wrote:
)
) )
) ) It's a form of manipulation/indoctrination of oneself to meditate in
this
) ) fashion every night. If you do Steiner's exercises for self-improvement,
you
) ) are, at the same time, convincing yourself that you *need* improvement,
and
) ) that Steiner's the guy to improve you. You will be increasing your
) ) receptivity to Steiner's views in general, and cementing your bonding to
a
) ) group of fellow believers, and I think that is obviously the intention
(not
) ) "improved mental focus").
)
) Sharon:
) I believe that this exercise is to help develop memory for life after
death. To
) recall your daily events backwards is practice for remembering your
previous
) life on earth when you die and reincarnate. This exercise is another of
those
) Steiner borrowings from the Renaissance magician's occult memory systems.
) Francis Yates wrote quite a bit about this occult system, read her book
"The
) Art of Memory" for more information. (She also discusses the art of memory
in
) "The Rosicrucian Enlightenment" as well as in "Giordano Bruno and the
Hermetic
) Tradition".) Occultists believed they could develop memory through the use
of
) pictures and clearly one can identify the Waldorf approach as being based
on
) this approach.
)
) I will, with much embarrassment, admit that I have tried Steiner's little
) experiments over the past couple of years. (I tried these experiments
because I
) wanted to know what the occultists were going on about). I have stared at
seeds
) on a white background and yes, I could see an aura of "light and a flame".
I
) have seen the smoky aura of plants on a white background. I have also done
many
) of Goethe's color exercises which were fun and interesting. I have
recounted
) the daily events backwards as Steiner instructed.....I have seen all sorts
of
) marvelous color and light displays in my head from pressing on my eyes as
the
) Rosicrucians instructed to develop psychic sight, but alas, at the end of
the
) day, the experiments proved nothing to me regarding a spirit world. The
auras
) did not look like spirit to me. The colors were not angels or spirit
beings. I
) have also tried praying as an experiment but am left with the bleak
results:
) "Nothing Fails Like Prayer".
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:54:54 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: GNOMES
Oh boy, from Steiner gnomes to phallic symbolism. This is entertaining. For
those who may be interested, there are and were others who also made similar
claims, wrote about such creatures and even, god forbid, instructed an
artists to recreat their observations. Kids will laugh and giggle (at least
some adults will) but Geoffrey Hodson's, The Kingdom of the Gods and
Clairvoyant Investigations will at least "illustrate this delusion" of some.
Its better than the daily chronicle comics.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: (soma mwt.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: GNOMES
)
)
) "mypostbox.formail" wrote:
)
) )
) ) Do the teachers actually believe they *see* them?
) )
) ) There was an old anthro at the christmas fair who used to sell knitted
) ) gnomes, and someone told me she *visualised* them in the swiss alps,
) ) they all had different names and colours, she was very serious about it,
I
) ) thought it was a clever sales tecnique, to make you buy them all and
start a
) ) collection...I had misjudged her, I think?
)
) Sharon:
) Yes the teachers actually believe that you can see them. The gnome belief
is
) actually part of the magic tradition, gnomes are elemental spirits and
) correspond to earth. I recommend the book "Nature Spirits", by Steiner,
it's a
) side splitter. Here's a quote from Steiner which helped me understand why
my
) daughter's lesson books were loaded with images of gnomes in mines. I'm
certain
) that she was told "all sorts of things" that I would not approve of.:
)
) "Nature Spirits", Rudolf Steiner, p 62-63 from the chapter "Gnomes,
Undines,
) Sylphs and Salamanders". Berlin, May 16,1908:
)
) Steiner:
)
) "There are beings that can be seen with clairvoyant vision at many spots
in the
) depths of the earth, especially places little touched by living growths,
) places, for instance, in a mine which have always been of a mineral
nature. If
) you dig into the metallic or stony ground you find beings which manifest
at
) first in remarkable fashion - it is as if something were to scatter us.
They
) seem able to crouch close together in vast numbers, and when the earth is
laid
) open they appear to burst asunder. The important point is that they do not
fly
) apart into a certain number but that in their own bodily nature they
become
) larger. Even when they reach their greatest size, they are still always
small
) creatures in comparison with human beings. The enlightened man knows
nothing of
) them. People, however, who have preserved a certain nature-sense, i.e. the
old
) clairvoyant forces which everyone once possessed and which had to be lost
with
) the acquisition of objective consciousness, could tell you all sorts of
things
) about such beings. Many names have been given to them, such as goblins,
gnomes,
) and so forth. "
)
) Sharon:
) The gnomes that we typically see as lawn ornaments, with little red hats
and
) beards are actually remnants of fact. The Persians were used as slaves in
) mines. They were small people and wore little frigian caps. I was also
very
) interested to read in Jennings book on Rosicrucians that the frigian cap
was a
) very important hieroglyph in ancient Egypt. The cap was worn by the
priests who
) would make human sacrifices. The hat represented the tip of a penis. The
little
) red cap evolved into all sorts of funny little hats worn by secret society
) members. Just another one of those sun god (patriarchal) things.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:06:12 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Forgive me. I did not know that you have completed all you need in life as
person and there is no need for improvement.
I am a poor soul who does not accept this and wishes to grow further and
chose methods and instruction which I feel is helpful to myself and others.
I still react with anger towards friends, get cranky, am lazy, say things I
regret, hurt others in speech, and so on.
Self reflection is not a Steiner exclusive and because I framed this
exercise in great detail does not take away from its effectiveness in and of
itself. I sense avoidance and control issues here but who am I to know. If
you object to this simple exercise, lets try something very innocuous. Stand
with knees slightly bent and hold your arms straight out without tension for
10 minutes. (and not in public, need I mention). And notice what happens.
Try this for 14 days straight. I will offer no commentary, moral notations,
or improvement lessons. Its simply an exercise though it has a history and a
purpose. Hint: Its not an occult exercise, a Rosicrucian prayer stance or
gnome detection method.
Jeff
-----
Original Message -----
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
)
) [Jeff wrote:]
)
) )My suggestion of this "exercise" was directed as a general
) ) )recommendation to Peter and for anyone; and not for Peter to "improve
) ) )himself" because he "needs" it.
)
) Even if this exercise were a good answer to Peter's challenge (and he
) explained why it is not, much better than I can), I don't think this
) exercise is even about "memory, mental focus, visualization,
concentration,"
) etc., as claimed. It is full of little moralisms, and is all about
) "improving yourself." (I've often noticed Steiner adherents consider a
good
) memory a moral virture, sign of a superior person. Not to mention the
little
) reproaches to oneself, "Did I accomplish my goals?" Like treating yourself
) like a naughty child.)
)
) I didn't think you thought Peter himself needed improving, since I assume
) you don't know Peter personally. Anthroposphists think everyone who isn't
an
) anthroposphist needs improving, by definition. (It's like dealing with
the
) Jehovah's Witnesses at the door; I don't take it personally that they
) believe I will go to hell if I don't listen to them, but I still find
their
) tactics intrusive and annoying.)
)
) )The real point is: if someone is critical of a system of knowledge,
)then
) )why not test an element of that system honestly and fairly.
)
) Your test is not "honest and fair" because it is subjective. A person who
is
) inclined positively toward Steiner or similar "spiritual leaders" will
) almost certainly enjoy this little exercise and conclude it has "spiritual
) benefits." (And, to be fair, those skeptical of Steiner will find it very
) irritating and probably can't give it a "fair" test either. It would be
very
) difficult, I think, to set up experimental conditions for testing the
) objective results you claim, like improved memory or concentration, in an
) objective scientific manner. First you'd have to find subjects who had no
) opinion of Steiner at all; on second thought, I guess that part's not so
) hard, since most of the world has never heard of Rudolf Steiner . . .)
)
) It's a form of manipulation/indoctrination of oneself to meditate in this
) fashion every night. If you do Steiner's exercises for self-improvement,
you
) are, at the same time, convincing yourself that you *need* improvement,
and
) that Steiner's the guy to improve you. You will be increasing your
) receptivity to Steiner's views in general, and cementing your bonding to a
) group of fellow believers, and I think that is obviously the intention
(not
) "improved mental focus").
)
) Diana
) _________________________________________________________________
) Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:16:31 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Detlef Hardorp wrote:
)
) Detlef Hardorp comments:
)
) Steiner's break with the "root race theory" came, in fact, much earlier. In 1906, Steiner distanced himself from the theosophical root-race concept in writing and never used it again (see Luzifer Gnosis No. 32, Summer 1906, p. 627, printed in: "Aus der Akascha Chronik", GA 11, Dornach 1969, S. 208 - the English version of this book is on many of the shelves of list members, maybe somebody can give the exact bibl. reference, as I only have the German original).
Sharon:
Steiner, Berlin, 16 May *1908*: "Older races only persist because there are people who cannot or will not move forward to a higher racial form. I cannot today speak about the whole series of possibilities, in the course of earthly evolution, for man to become one with the race, to grow together with what is the character of one race or another. Think of the Atlantean race; souls have gone through it, but not all have passed out of it. There are 16 possibilities of becoming merged with race. They are called the '16 paths of perdition.'
On these paths man would merge with the material. By striving forward, however, he is drawn up from race to race to ever higher stages.
We see then that it is actually possible for a person to combine with the one incarnation in such a way that he remains behind in evolution. His other soul-brothers are therefore at a higher stage when he reappears in a new incarnation. He must then content himself with an inferior incarnation which has been left to him in a decadent race. This is something that positively takes place. It need not frighten people, however, for the present phase of evolution. No one is obliged to take all the paths and thereby fall out of evolution. We must only be aware of the possibility.
......For those who have not used the opportunity on earth to develop the fifth principle, there will be no available form. They will appear as nature spirits, and they will appear then with four principles, the fourth being the highest. Whereas the normally advanced man will have the principles 5,4,3,2 at the Jupiter stage, these people will have 4,3,2,1. That would be the destiny of those who have not gradually developed their higher principles by making use of earthly life." [p 69-71 Nature Spirits, Rudolf Steiner.]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:38:18 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
The Pythagorean source is Thomas Taylor and Manly Palmer Hall's essay on
Retrospection and
Concentration in the work The Phoenix and other works by him. (The Taylor
reference may be off since its been
25 years since I read his translations of the Neo-Platonists).
Listen, please, I am not a cranky AP or die hard Walfordian but have a long
history of interest and practice in spirituality and meditation and have
study Steiner for years. Though I respect science, there are many ways to
approach phenomena and human knowledge than form one or two disciplines. You
cannot use a microscope in therapy room just as you cannot expect a
anthropologist to use quantum theory in the field. Education and cognitive
studies cannot be boxed in and examined like a silicon chip. And the same
for meditation and so called paranormal and "spiritual experiences". Each
must be examined fairly within their own domain or we will have constant
cross disciplinary problems. Meditators are often very gullible. Psychics
are notoriously undisciplined (but there is evidence of psychic phenomena
and experience even with our small lives). And there are countless people
who have had similar non-ordinary or "msytically based" experiences after
engaging in serious religious or spiritual practice.
I tend to prefer martial arts or yogic training at times since the BS
buildup is minimal. Either one can do it or not and others can see it. There
is both outer component and inner component (changes in breath, "energy",
flexibility, blood flow, etc). Taken one step further inner exercises which
are part of AP and Waldorf training to an extent, fall within this same
experimental field. We are novices in all this and its easy to stand back
and make whoopee about this or that but the proof is in the pudding and
doing.
40 years ago, speed reading would have seemed like magic to educators but
there are now thousands of people who can read over 2500 words a minute and
have changed conventional "facts" about how we process language and
comprehension and has shifted sub vocalization technique (the only way to
teach reading up to recently) to the visual scan method.
My attempts here are not just to defend what I consider defendable concepts
and practices but also to support time honored principles that form some of
the basis in Steiner and other sources that related to Waldorf. If one's
takes a purely physical and scientific stance about all human experience and
phenomena then were does it lead- nowhere. Legitimate questions about dogma
and incomprehensible claims is fine but slicing and dicing only leads to
piecemeal understanding.
Thanks for the discussion.
jeff
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:36:45 -0700
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
Jeff has made the point (if I understand him correctly) that because many
people have had spiritual experiences which have similar characteristics,
those experiences are likely to reflect something real and external to the
person having the experience. I'm not convinced of that, for several
reasons generally having to do with the difficulty in distinguishing
between imagination and the perception of external events. The usual way
of making sure that you didn't imagine something is to look for some
external verification: did other people see the same thing? Did the event
that you perceived have some effect that can be verified?
Well, the first of these, whether other people saw the same thing, is
problematic with respect to spiritual experiences. Yes, people who have
spiritual experiences do experience similar feelings of awe and bliss, and
the experience is marked by the subject as being incredibly significant.
Beyond that, the specifics of the experience seem to relate largely to the
cultural background of the person having the experience. One person might
be visited by the Virgin Mary, another by Shiva, and a third by an animal
spirit. Another person will see a loved one or a teacher, and yet another
will see no apparition at all. (This leads to some confusion between
those like me, who use the term "spiritual" to refer to an experience of
awe and oneness with a loving universe and those who use it to refer to
the existence of one or more non-corporeal beings, which appears to be the
common usage by Anthroposophists, among others.)
The difficulties in showing that these spirits have an actual, external
existence are considerable, for reasons explained by Michael Kopp and
Peter Farrell. But let's assume for the moment that they are real, and
that there is a big ol' non-material universe out there populated by all
the various types of spooks, saints, gods, fairies, gnomes, angels,
succubi, and so on. And let's assume that Steiner came up with a good,
reliable system for objectively observing the spirit realm.
So what? It's all very interesting if you accept the premise and want to
learn about spirits, but what does that have to do with our everyday
lives, which are, for better or worse, lived out in the material world?
According to Steiner, there are a number of ways that all this "spirit"
stuff is relevant. The Akashic Record may be explored to discover the
truth about history. The true nature of physical matter may be revealed.
Reincarnation, and the path of the soul between incarnations, can be
understood. Child development can be best understood if one understands
the different soul aspects and the ages at which they incarnate. And so
on.
There are a number of problems with this. First, many people have had
spiritual experiences and have explored them deeply, and come to radically
different conclusions about the nature of reality, life after death, the
nature and types of spiritual beings, and so on. If these experiences
related to some sort of objective spiritual reality, one would expect the
leaders of different spiritual paths to agree on, say, what happens to the
soul after death.
Second, if one can get reliable information about the material world from
an objective exploration of the spiritual world, then one would expect
Steiner's conclusions be testable, that is, one could perform experiments
or observations to test whether those conclusions are correct. If Steiner
said that Atlantis actually exists, one would expect to find certain types
of physical evidence. So far, Steiner's predictions about these things
have turned out to be wrong, as far as I know. In any event, Jeff has not
given us anything.
So there are two things to do with this. One may either reject Steiner's
claims, or one may assume that he is correct, and that there is something
wrong with the observations that are inconsistent with Steiner's
predictions. In that case, one might assume that at some time in the
future people will be able to confirm those claims, but we lack the
capacity to do so at this time.
I submit that the latter position is completely irrational. The *only*
basis for believing Steiner's claims that I can see is this. Steiner said
that if you do certain mental exercises, you will experience certain
things. Thus, you can test Steiner's words by doing the exercises. If
his predictions are correct, you will experience what he said you would
experience. And if he was correct about that, then he must be an
extraordinary person who was correct about almost everything.
Again, this is a completely irrational position. Assuming that a
spiritual realm exists, and that Steiner developed an objective method for
observing it, does not logically lead to the conclusion that one can get
reliable information about history, physics, child development, or
biology through Anthroposophy.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:11:02 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Detlef Hardorp wrote:
) Steiner's break with the "root race theory" came, in fact, much earlier. In 1906, Steiner distanced himself from the theosophical root-race concept in writing and never used it again (see Luzifer Gnosis No. 32, Summer 1906, p. 627, printed in: "Aus der Akascha Chronik", GA 11, Dornach 1969, S. 208 - the English version of this book is on many of the shelves of list members, maybe somebody can give the exact bibl. reference, as I only have the German original).
[Rudolf Steiner, The Universal Human, Anthroposophic Press, c 1990] Lecture given on 9 January ***1916***. p 74-76 "Now when we trace the evolution of the earth back into the Atlantean or even the Lemurian epochs, we find that initially impulses and tendencies existed that would have prevented our physical body from developing the physiognomy it now has through the power of the etheric body - that is, the diversities....Thus, the etheric body would have created one form of human being in the fifth period of Atlantis, a second in the sixth period of Atlantis, a third in the seventh, a fourth in the first post-Atlantean period, a fifth in the second post-Atlantean period, a sixth in the third, and a seventh in the fourth post Atlantean period, that is, in the Greco-Roman time.
(Lucifer and Ahriman)...fought against this harmonious tendency of development in the evolution of humanity, and they managed to change the whole process so that various developments were shifted and displaced. While there should have been basically only one form of human being in the fifth Atlantean period that was to develop gradually into another type, Lucifer and Ahriman preserved the form of the fifth Atlantean period into the sixth, and again that of the sixth Atlantean period into the seventh, and even into the time after the Atlantean flood.
Thus, forms that should have disappeared remained. Instead of racial diversities developing consecutively, older racial forms remained unchanged and newer ones began to evolve at the same time. Instead of the intended consecutive development of races, there was a coexistence of races. That is how it came about that physically different races inhabited the earth and are still there in our time although evolution should really have proceeded as I have described it."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:55:00 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
jeff auen wrote:d
)
) Some may think he was a visionary delusional. Others may believe he saw and
) experienced what he claimed but close reading and study will indicate that
) he spoke from his "own experience"- acceptable or not- and not from
) someone's else manual or lectures. Now Blavatsky and Alice Bailey are
) another story entirely.
Sharon:
Give us a break, Steiner sites occultists like Boehme, Bruno, Levi, Agrippa,
Bacon, etc. (Certainly he knew Dee's work).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: interesting screen ID -- OT
Michael)
) But, with respect: you can't describe it, you can't
) show it, you
) can't give evidence to prove it's more than your
) imagination or
) emotion.
dottie -
I absolutely agree with you except for the part that I
can't desribe it. I can do that. Show it, give
evidence to prove, no that I could not do, nor would I
want to prove it to anybody. Just share it with those
that are looking at possibilities and are interested.
Michael-
Yet you say, in effect, that it represents
) something outside
) of yourself
dottie -
No I do not say it is outside myself. It is not. It is
something I am apart of.
Michael
that is beyond what science can know,
) but that other
) people can know it by discovering it for themselves.
dottie -
I think science can know it because who represents
science are human beings looking for the riddle of the
Universe. I mean they are discovering amazing things
all the time that may or may not correlate to
spiritual understandings. And people can discover It
for themselves. Yes they can if they care to.
Michael -
) This is circular reasoning, Dottie, and gets us
) nowhere in terms of
) understanding why huge numbers of people kowtow to
) gurus like Steiner
) and allow those beliefs to have free range over
) their lives and, more
) to the point of this list, over their children's
) lives.
dottie -
I am not for anyone kowtowing to anyone else. I think
that goes against what Steiner brought. I also think
it goes against what Budhha and Jesus taught. Those
men had to know that one has to find it for oneself.
That is what I get when I read these guys. It is
people who then turned their teachings into a religion
or tried to. imo.
Michael
)
) Do you begin to see my problem, Dottie? We're not
) haters here, we're
) people who've been harmed by other people's beliefs.
dottie -
I agree with you in the sense Michael that these
parents and other prospective parents who do not agree
with Steiners Anthroposophy should not have been
enrolled into Waldorf if these Waldorf schools are
based specifically on Steiners methodology. It is
clear that most of the parents on this list would not
have chosen Waldorf if they had known Steiners
spiritual leanings.
And there are many who do want their children to be a
part of this type of teaching. And unfortunately there
is a possibility that other parents might unwillingly
enroll their children into a methodology they know
nothing about.
However with all that said I do not believe in
anihilating his spiritual beliefs because one does not
agree with them. And I do understand the effect
enrolling your child into something you feel was not
told you, might have the averse effect it is having
with the people here at PLANS. Unfortunately it does
go to an extreme which can never be good for anyone
involved.
Michael
) And so we want
) to deconstruct those beliefs and prevent them from
) harming other
) people.
dottie -
Well see that is where the heart of the problem lies I
think. Trying to deconstruct Steiners teachings, if
that is what you mean, will not really work. To bring
awareness that parents need to be told ahead of time
about the methodology WILL work. There are hundreds of
thousand people who appreciate the work that Steiner
has brought to them. That does not take away from
PLANS in that they are right in needing to make sure
parents are aware of the methodology.
Michael -
To do that, we have to think rigorously and
) critically and
) skeptically. That's hard on everyone, including the
) critics
) themselves. But we keep trying.
dottie -
I agree with you that rigorous and critically and
skeptically is a good way to be when trying to get to
the truth and wanting to make something happen. But I
have said it time and time again on this list,
somewhere along the line it these critical, skeptical
and rigorous ways became extreme and not well balanced
with what was the original point of PLANS. And for me
that is sad as I so do understand why Sharon and
others chose to bring awareness of the need for
parents to know the methodology.
)
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Diana -
) It's a form of manipulation/indoctrination of
) oneself to meditate in this
) fashion every night. If you do Steiner's exercises
) for self-improvement, you
) are, at the same time, convincing yourself that you
) *need* improvement, and
) that Steiner's the guy to improve you.
dottie -
I have to say this response here feels so backwards.
How do you come to the conclusion that people looking
to be the best they can be is a bad thing? How do you
justify that kind of negative understanding of wanting
to be the best you can be, whos ever writings they
are? How?
Steiner can't improve anyone. Only you can improve
yourself doesn't everyone know that? Steiners not
living my life, I am.
Getting silent with yourself to take in how you were
in the day and what you would do differently all in
the name of being the best person I can be in this
lifetime. You call that convincing yourself you need
to improve. Self reflection is an amazing tool to
having a great life.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:33:36 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
He may site them as references but not as sources.Often he did this to point
out possible errors in their work or show a historical connections as he did
in origins of Rosicrucianism. He mentioned Swedenborg often but not as a
compatriot and "peer" but as accomplished natural scientist and seer but
also someone who did not purge himself of subjective leanings that colored
his visionary work. Blavaskty was another one he acknowledges and mentions
but not without a sad commentary on her abuse and deception by her "teachers
and others".
jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: (soma mwt.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
)
)
) jeff auen wrote:d
)
) )
) ) Some may think he was a visionary delusional. Others may believe he saw
and
) ) experienced what he claimed but close reading and study will indicate
that
) ) he spoke from his "own experience"- acceptable or not- and not from
) ) someone's else manual or lectures. Now Blavatsky and Alice Bailey are
) ) another story entirely.
)
) Sharon:
) Give us a break, Steiner sites occultists like Boehme, Bruno, Levi,
Agrippa,
) Bacon, etc. (Certainly he knew Dee's work).
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:44:11 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
Some people think so and its not so far fetched to them. Its what they
"see". The basic principle, if even it can be considered, is that these
"creatures" of the ethers are supreme shape shifters and imitators.
Believers says that they do not have to wear clothes but as the imitate
humans and the culture they are in- they enjoy copying things . Now I can
hear someone say, okay, in India gnomes are wearing saris, in Tibet they
wear ritual garb, and in South Bronx, hip hop clothes. Don't ask. I don't
know or really care.
jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "mypostbox.formail" (mypostbox.formail virgin.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: GNOMES/ was interesting screen ID -- OT
)
)
) ) who
) ) would seriously think they thought the gnomes will
) ) actually WEAR them?!!!
)
) Are we saying that the gnomes actually need clothes?
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:55:27 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
Diana,
Please site the reference for this comment below. I have never seen it or
heard it in legit sources. It may be a Waldorf myth but its not to my
understanding in any source coming from Steiner (may another misplaced
Steiner sarcasm snipnit misinterpreted by some.)
Jeff Auen
)
) Err, Steiner taught that if you didn't make spiritual progression over
) successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome. I guess the teachers think
) of the gnomes in the forest as a kind of special education program for
) Waldorf schools.
)
) Trust me, they believe it. It is time to post one of the WC classics to
the
) list again.
)
) Diana, a former kindergarten aid in a Waldorf school wrote about the
gnomes:
)
) ***
)
) From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
) Subject: Re: The gnomes (was: more about myth)
) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 02:50:38 GMT
) BestServHost: lists.best.com
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
) Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)
)
)
) [David, on the gnomes]
) )Sure. One of my favorite things about Waldorf schooling, the gnomes!
)
) (etc. on the "seat fairy" -- sewing gnomes in parent meeting -- gnomes
) whispering tidbits of advice to us -- lucky ten year old savoring the
magic
) of childhood)
)
) I will try not to snort too cynically here, David, but I gotta tell you, a
) little of it goes a long way. I suspect in your role as parent/board
member,
) a little bit is all you get compared to the children, and it's easy to
feel
) sentimental about it.
)
) It's probably one thing to hear quaint remarks about the gnomes, and to
try
) your hand at sewing one at a parent meeting (reminds me of Sune's knitting
) one pair of socks in 26 years, making it easy for him to romanticize this
) aspect of the curriculum), and of course you see how well they promote the
) school when you sell them at craft fairs and open houses. Only a real
cynic
) would not fall in love with the Waldorf gnomes.
)
) But it's another thing to live and breathe gnome-culture day in-day out. I
) had more of a sense of the effect of this, perhaps, being in the classroom
) over a prolonged period, than your average parent or board member could
) possibly have. The gnomes are blamed for things that people do that people
) should take responsibility for (teachers as well as children). The gnomes
) can be used to displace emotions and reactions. The gnomes are used to
blow
) off children's questions about how the world around them works and mystify
) children asking about difficult topics like sex or violence or illness.
The
) gnomes stop rational discussion before it gets started and send common
sense
) out the window. The gnomes can even be threatening. The children who
*don't*
) see gnomes are confused.
)
) The gnomes, frankly, get very tiresome after awhile. I've heard children
) themselves get cynical about the gnomes.
)
) I'm sure any happy Waldorf parent reading this is disgusted with this wet
) blanket attitude and thinks the elementals will be on my case for
) disrespecting them. It's hard to argue "against" the gnomes and sound like
) anything other than a sourpuss. But it's that old image versus reality
thing
) again. It's so much nicer to hear children chattering about the gnomes in
) the grass than talking about Power Rangers and Pokemon, it's very easy to
) look no further, to feel that a "lost world of childhood" has now been
) restored, here it was in Waldorf all along. But in that lost world that
) Waldorf evokes, children were not always treated very nicely at all. The
) gnomes do some rotten things.
)
) Diana
)
)
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:12:27 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Hard Hitting News
Michael,
Chill out, man. We are not talking about a latent Idi Amin or Pol Pot or
Jim Jones (People's Temple suicides) here.
) He was a completely irrational and sociopathic, if not psychopathic,
) political control mono-megalo-maniac. And the cancer he started
) society grows today like a meme of cultural consensus in the
) irrational.
)
You are right, no one may want to hear this kind of talk not because there
may be some
truth in it but because it seems to reflect an over reactionary stand.
) Nobody wants to hear talk like that here, because it just seems so
) far out and un-PC to be slagging off a nice old Austrian guru and his
) current-day cult of nice people like David Cann. But that's the truth.
)
) )But it is good to hear you admitting that you KNOW that your teachers
) believe in Steiner's irrational spiritual Universe.
Irrational universe to some, but working altenative hypothesis with a
mimimum of evidence to others.
And I agree with you to a large extent. Steiner tried the impossible in
educational reform. Did he really think that these schools be able to
function totally free of AP or his teacings. I don't know but the cat is out
and chasing its tail, isn't it.
Admins and teachers should have a straightforward philosophy white paper
explaining clearly the basics including the AP connection. And the golden
rule as taught to me in 1974, don't teach AP. Maybe this just could not be
avoided.
Jeff Auen
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:33:29 -0400
From: Gary Bonhiver (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: Hard Hitting News
on 4/23/01 4:12 PM, jeff auen at pacbay home.com wrote:
) And I agree with you to a large extent. Steiner tried the impossible in
) educational reform. Did he really think that these schools be able to
) function totally free of AP or his teacings. I don't know but the cat is out
) and chasing its tail, isn't it.
GARY...
Oh, he was VERY aware of Anthro being NECESSARY in all lessons, to the
extent that he asked teachers to incorporate it completely, "to become part
of it"...
"There is something we should try hard to do-and it works in a very
enlivening way on the child's whole forces-namely to incorporate
Anthroposophy organically into the lessons, in the sort of way you did, Dr.
von Heydebrand, in Anthropology, and you, Dr. Stein, in History. With some
of you it is there of itself. You cannot do Eurythmy without Anthroposophy.
You must try and bring Anthroposophy into the lesson in such a way that it
becomes part of it, without teaching it theoretically if you can possibly
avoid it."
- Rudolf Steiner, Conferences with the Teachers of the Waldorf School in
Stuttgart 1919 to 1920: Volume One: The First and Second Years of the
Waldorf School, Stuttgart. p90 Forest Row, U.K.: Steiner Schools Fellowship
Publications, 1986
) Admins and teachers should have a straightforward philosophy white paper
) explaining clearly the basics including the AP connection. And the golden
) rule as taught to me in 1974, don't teach AP. Maybe this just could not be
) avoided.
)
)
) Jeff Auen
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:50:28 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and empty thinking
Debra,
Thanks for the analysis. It was less painful than Tony Sopranos.
What can I say in the midst of all this.
Apologetic. No.
Sorry. no.
Patronizing. not intended. I actually like Peter and his sincerity.
Surprised by the constant and powerful emotions about this topic: yes.
Resorting to automatic thinking. no. Talk to the Dali Lama- as with
Steiner, Buddhists who have a different view of the mind and thinking
)
) This is so revealing, Jeff. A prescription right off of Steiner's
) prescription pad. Should be considered controlled medicine. Too much
) Steiner will suck out your brains. This occult exercise is a huge waste of
) time, folks. I'll stick to a good book.
Jeff: Hopefully not more Steiner study and research late at night. .
Jeff:
You will not find this exercise as I described it any occult or esoteric
books.
Its been modified from the original and used in psycho-spiritual work not
necessarily
"esoteric" or Waldorf training. Though teachers are encouraged to "reflect
and review" their students
as I understand it. Nothing sinister about that. I wish my teachers did and
then they would have seen
me differently each week rather than the same disruptive, choleric (public
school).
Jeff: See the second one I recommended today. This may be too generic and
simple though.
) Debra:
)
) "Suppression of automatic thinking?" Is that another word for critical
) thinking skills? Are you trying to teach us how to not think? Wrong
parking
) lot, Jeff, but we can give you directions...
Jeff: No. Critical thinking is fine but so is creative thinking, observing
things with thinking; intuition; allowing a creative process to flow without
paralysis by analysis, etc..Using critical analysis for everything one is
not familiar or comfortable with is not the only way to know and "think".
And this is part of what Steiner and others speak of . Its a mistake and
error to many psychologists, philosophers and educators. Language based
thinking is not the same as: Visual thinking, mathematical thinking, musical
thinking, movement "thinking: (figure skating eg.) etc. they demand and that
one not be "mechanical and automatic" in their thinking process. This is not
a Steinerism but well known in many disciplines. Yet for some, its hard to
try new things.
Try painting or playing tennis while engaged in critical thinking. Clunk
goes the ball into the net and into my parking lot. I bill for ball dents to
my car.
)
) Debra:
)
) This isn't an innocent experiment. It is Anthroposophy!)
Jeff: See exercise number two sent today. Its plain and unadulterated
simplicity.
) And he is patronizing to boot! Who screens these people? Must be an open
) list. We should consider charging some people money to express their
) thoughts here. New members cost money... All those charts to set up -
case
) histories, backgrounds. Time is money, you know... Next PLANS board
) meeting, I'm bringing this up. The high cost of services is astounding. We
) should request insurance cards to join...
Don't worry. The word for contrary in some groups is "this must be an open
list! Help. Call the moderator."
Don't fret though, I simply cannot handle sheer quantity of posts. I have
to return to work. Its back to digest form.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:59:06 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Hard Hitting News
I must admit you guys do great research and pick up things I have either not
seen before or read for some years.
Touche.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Bonhiver" (Gary GoodWinter.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: Hard Hitting News
) on 4/23/01 4:12 PM, jeff auen at pacbay home.com wrote:
)
) ) And I agree with you to a large extent. Steiner tried the impossible in
) ) educational reform. Did he really think that these schools be able to
) ) function totally free of AP or his teacings. I don't know but the cat is
out
) ) and chasing its tail, isn't it.
)
)
) GARY...
)
) Oh, he was VERY aware of Anthro being NECESSARY in all lessons, to the
) extent that he asked teachers to incorporate it completely, "to become
part
) of it"...
)
) "There is something we should try hard to do-and it works in a very
) enlivening way on the child's whole forces-namely to incorporate
) Anthroposophy organically into the lessons, in the sort of way you did,
Dr.
) von Heydebrand, in Anthropology, and you, Dr. Stein, in History. With some
) of you it is there of itself. You cannot do Eurythmy without
Anthroposophy.
) You must try and bring Anthroposophy into the lesson in such a way that it
) becomes part of it, without teaching it theoretically if you can possibly
) avoid it."
) - Rudolf Steiner, Conferences with the Teachers of the Waldorf School in
) Stuttgart 1919 to 1920: Volume One: The First and Second Years of the
) Waldorf School, Stuttgart. p90 Forest Row, U.K.: Steiner Schools
Fellowship
) Publications, 1986
)
)
) ) Admins and teachers should have a straightforward philosophy white paper
) ) explaining clearly the basics including the AP connection. And the
golden
) ) rule as taught to me in 1974, don't teach AP. Maybe this just could not
be
) ) avoided.
) )
) )
) ) Jeff Auen
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:03:57 -0600
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
I have been reviewing "The Karma of Untruthfulness, Volume 2" It is an
incredible example of Steiner's xenophobia, paranoia and Germano-centric
point of view. So much so that the introduction by Rudi Lissau comes as
close to criticizing and outright disagreeing with Steiner as you will
commonly see in Anthroposophic publications. I do not have time to review
it in detail right now. The purpose of this post is to say I don't think
this work reflects the lectures Peter was referring to in his post. These
lectures are all from January 1917, and i don't find the passages on racism
Peter was referring to. Any help here?
Alan Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: Neil Faiman (faiman jlc.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
) Peter Staudenmaier:
) )
) ) My favorite Steiner passage on the coming race war is in his lecture to
) ) the Anthroposophical Society in Stuttgart, February 13, 1915. The
lecture
) ) can be found in GA 174b: Die geistigen Hintergrunde des Ersten
Weltkrieges
) ) (Dornach, 1974) pp. 30-54. I don't know if these lectures on "The
spiritual
) ) background of the First World War" have been translated into English.
They
)
) GA 174 is available in English as _The Karma of Untruthfulness, Volume 2_,
) Rudolf Steiner Press / Anthroposophic Press, 225 pages, RSP Book #1600
) (hardcover) or #1599 (paperback). (Volume 1, GA 173, is also available.)
)
) -Neil Faiman
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:55:53 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
)Diana,
)Please site the reference for this comment below. I have never seen it )or
)heard it in legit sources. It may be a Waldorf myth but its not to )my
)understanding in any source coming from Steiner (may another )misplaced
)Steiner sarcasm snipnit misinterpreted by some.)
in reference (I think) to:
)Err, Steiner taught that if you didn't make spiritual progression over
)successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome.
Debra posted this. (She also posted an old post of mine about the gnomes,
which is the source of the confusion.) However, I'll look around for this
quote, since I think we discussed it not long ago. Something about if you
lie 16 times, you come back as a gnome next time? Anybody remember?
Diana
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:15:26 +1200
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Jeff Auen joins the ranks of the Steiner, Waldorf and Anthroposophical Mafia:
)Forgive me. I did not know that you have completed all you need in life as
)person and there is no need for improvement.
Demeaning others is the first sign of the cult defender.
)I am a poor soul who does not accept this and wishes to grow further and
)chose methods and instruction which I feel is helpful to myself and others.
Presumptuous of you to offer occult ritual to others as "self
improvement", but typical of SWA mafia.
)I still react with anger towards friends, get cranky, am lazy, say things I
)regret, hurt others in speech, and so on.
)
) Self reflection is not a Steiner exclusive and because I framed this
)exercise in great detail does not take away from its effectiveness in and of
)itself. I sense avoidance and control issues here but who am I to know.
Precisely. More pertinent: who do you think you are? Innuendo is the
second sign of the SWA mafia in defence of the cult.
)If
)you object to this simple exercise, lets try something very innocuous.
Nothing is innnocuous when it comes from an SWA Defender of the Faith.
)Stand
)with knees slightly bent and hold your arms straight out without tension for
)10 minutes. (and not in public, need I mention). And notice what happens.
)Try this for 14 days straight. I will offer no commentary, moral notations,
)or improvement lessons. Its simply an exercise though it has a history and a
)purpose. Hint: Its not an occult exercise, a Rosicrucian prayer stance or
)gnome detection method.
Hint: it's a torture technique favoured by the fascist Nazis and
Italians, and communist Soviets, Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese and
sundry others.
It's also used by military organisations in the breaking down of the
individual will and the building up of the group (hive) mind. It's a
brainwashing technique par excellence. Those who survive it become
VERY strong; usually, so strong that they will kill for the group,
whatever it is, because they are now initiates in the cult.
The military example is from personal experience.
But it actually sounds like my kids' eurythmy when they were in a
Steiner school.
They hated eurythmy with a passion.
Sick, sick, sick.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:34:47 -0400
From: Neil Faiman (faiman jlc.net)
Subject: Re: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
) I have been reviewing "The Karma of Untruthfulness, Volume 2" ... I don't
) think
) this work reflects the lectures Peter was referring to in his post. These
) lectures are all from January 1917, and i don't find the passages on racism
) Peter was referring to. Any help here?
)
) Alan Fine
)
)) Peter Staudenmaier:
)))
))) My favorite Steiner passage on the coming race war is in his lecture to
))) the Anthroposophical Society in Stuttgart, February 13, 1915. The
) lecture
))) can be found in GA 174b: Die geistigen Hintergrunde des Ersten
) Weltkrieges
))) (Dornach, 1974) pp. 30-54. I don't know if these lectures on "The
) spiritual
))) background of the First World War" have been translated into English.
) They
))
)) GA 174 is available in English as _The Karma of Untruthfulness, Volume 2_,
)) Rudolf Steiner Press / Anthroposophic Press, 225 pages, RSP Book #1600
)) (hardcover) or #1599 (paperback). (Volume 1, GA 173, is also available.)
))
)) -Neil Faiman
I had guessed that GA174b meant "the second of the lectures which are
collected together as GA174, which made sense, since GA174 is indeed
concerned with the origins of the first World War. I don't really know the
GA cataloging system, though, so I suppose it could be that GA174a, GA174b,
etc, are individual lectures which got inserted into the numbering between
GA174 and GA175.
-Neil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:49:23 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
Diana Winters wrote:
) )Diana,
)
) )Please site the reference for this comment below. I have never seen it )or
) )heard it in legit sources. It may be a Waldorf myth but its not to )my
) )understanding in any source coming from Steiner (may another )misplaced
) )Steiner sarcasm snipnit misinterpreted by some.)
)
) in reference (I think) to:
)
) )Err, Steiner taught that if you didn't make spiritual progression over
) )successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome.
)
) Debra posted this. (She also posted an old post of mine about the gnomes,
) which is the source of the confusion.) However, I'll look around for this
) quote, since I think we discussed it not long ago. Something about if you
) lie 16 times, you come back as a gnome next time? Anybody remember?
Sharon:
I just posted this today, here it is again very quickly:
"Nature Spirits" by Rudolf Steiner, p 69-71
Steiner: "Races would not stay behind and become decadent if there were not
people who wish to stay behind and are obliged to stay behind, since they have
not developed their eternal life-kernal. Older races only persist because
there are people who cannot or will not move forward to a higher racial
form.......Think of the Atlantean race; souls have gone through it, but not
all have passed out of it. There are 16 possibilities of becoming merged with
the race. They are called the '16 paths of perdition'.....By striving forward,
however, he is drawn up from race to race to ever higher stages......It need
not frighten people....No one is obliged to take all the 16 paths and thereby
fall out of evolution.....Let us suppose he reaches what is to be reached in
16 incarnations; he takes the 16 false paths......These people have gone so
far that they have no other opportunity of incarnating in the normal course of
evolution.....They must therefore live a bodiless existence.....Why have they
deserved this? By reason of the fact that they have not made use of
life!....Beings that stay behind at such stages appear in a later epoch with
approximately the character of the earlier age....They appear in a later epoch
as subordinate nature spirits.In fact the human race will furnish a whole
number of such new nature spirits in the second half of the Jupiter
evolution....."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:29:10 -0400
From: Neil Faiman (faiman jlc.net)
Subject: Re: interesting screen ID -- OT
)
)
)
)) Diana,
)
)) Please site the reference for this comment below. I have never seen it )or
)) heard it in legit sources. It may be a Waldorf myth but its not to )my
)) understanding in any source coming from Steiner (may another )misplaced
)) Steiner sarcasm snipnit misinterpreted by some.)
)
) in reference (I think) to:
)
)
)) Err, Steiner taught that if you didn't make spiritual progression over
)) successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome.
)
) Debra posted this. (She also posted an old post of mine about the gnomes,
) which is the source of the confusion.) However, I'll look around for this
) quote, since I think we discussed it not long ago. Something about if you
) lie 16 times, you come back as a gnome next time? Anybody remember?
) Diana
This is from a series of lectures Given in Berlin in 1908, and published in
English under the title _The Influence of Spiritual Beings Upon Man_. The
specific reference is from lecture 8, pp. 133-136.
Basically, the argument is that humans who follow the normal course of
development will develop their spirit self over the remainder of Earth
evolution, reaching the angelic stage of development in Jupiter evolution;
but that humans who identify too closely with their physical bodies and the
physical world, and fail to develop their higher selves, will gradually be
left behind; until "In fact the human race will furnish a whole number of
such new nature-spirits in the second half of Jupiter evolution, for man
will have fully completed the fifth principle [spirit self] at the Jupiter
stage. For those who have not used the opportunity on Earth to develop the
fifth principle there will be no available form. They will appear as
nature-spirits and they will appear then with four principles, the fourth
[ego] being the highest. ... That would be the destiny of those who have
not gradually developed their higher principles by making use of earthly
life. They become nature spirits, so to speak, of future evolutionary
periods, working invisibly."
On the other hand, Steiner states elsewhere that the elemental spirits are
brought forth from the spiritual beings of the third hierarchy "as a plant
brings forth a seed": "The angels, archangels, and spirits of the age in
our spiritual environment have put forth from themselves certain beings who
descend from the human environment into the kingdoms of nature; ... the
nature spirits are detached from the beings of the third hierarchy ..."
(_Spiritual Beings in the Heavenly Bodies and in the Kingdoms of Nature_)
-Neil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:58:39 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Diana Winters wrote:
) Anthroposphists think everyone who isn't an
) anthroposphist needs improving, by definition.
'By definition'; some pure rubbish.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:37:49 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
soma mwt.net wrote:
) Detlef Hardorp wrote:
) ) Steiner's break with the "root race theory" came, in fact, much earlier.
) ) In 1906, Steiner distanced himself from the theosophical root-race concept
) ) in writing and never used it again (see Luzifer Gnosis No. 32, Summer 1906,
) ) p. 627, printed in: "Aus der Akascha Chronik", GA 11, Dornach 1969, S. 208
) ) - the English version of this book is on many of the shelves of list members,
) ) maybe somebody can give the exact bibl. reference, as I only have the
) ) German original).
Sharon quoting Steiner, mentioning and discussing 'races':
) [Rudolf Steiner, The Universal Human, Anthroposophic Press, c 1990]
) Lecture given on 9 January ***1916***. p 74-76 "Now when we trace the
) evolution of the earth back into the Atlantean or even the Lemurian epochs,
) we find that initially impulses and tendencies existed that would have
) prevented our physical body from developing the physiognomy it now has
) through the power of the etheric body - that is, the diversities ...
This discussion seems somewhat unspecific.
I don't know exactly what Steiner expressed in 1906 in the context that
Detlef refers to.
What Steiner expressed in 1909 (below) explains in more detail in what
sense he in general abandoned the root race concept of evolution from at
least 1909, in connection with the beginning organizational break with
the Theosophical Society.
The theosophical concept of 'root races' had a mechanical character,
describing evolution as taking place in repeatedly for ever the same
way, through ever repeatedly new 'root races' and 'sub races'.
Steiner, viewing evolution from a more basically organic perspective,
opposed this mechanical concept of evolution and the validity of
describing it from a static ever repeating 'race formation' perspective.
He saw 'races' as coming into being, evolving and disappearing. What is
the present basic sense of 'races' he saw as something coming into being
with the transition Crataegus-Tertiary and developing in a partly
regular way up to the end of the last glacial ages.
For that period he described it from two main perspectives; one being
the what Theosophy called the seven 'sub races' of Atlantis, the other
being the formation of what we still today experience as the fading
remains of as what during Steiner's time were understood to be five
'main, basic races' of mankind.
The term that was used in the theosophical tradition to describe human
evolution during the closest period following the last glacial ages was
the 'Aryan root race', born out of what the theosophical tradition
describes as the basic Semitic peoples constituting the central 'fifth
sub race' of the seven 'Atlantic sub-races'.
On separating from the theosophical tradition c 1909-12, Steiner pointed
to the inadequacy of the 'root race' and 'sub-race' concept in doing
justice to human evolution from the last glacial ages up to our time and
into the future, as evolution during this time primarily consists in the
development of a number of cultures, not races, over the formation of
nations ever more leaving place for the development of the individual,
ever more leaving everything that is bound to race, specific culture and
nation behind, in individualizing developing what is universally human
in wo/man, not bound to anything external.
For a more full description, se the lectures on 'Folk souls' at
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/Steiner/Folkspirits/Folkspirits.htm
'Occult science - an outline' from 1909, that constitutes the basic
description by Steiner of the origin and evolution of humanity from an
anthroposophical perspective, describes it completely from the
perspective of the way the spiritual world has been involved in the
formation and development of the human being, not once mentioning
neither 'root race' nor - as far as I remember - 'race' or 'races'.
The description is characteristic for the way Steiner gave Earthly life
to anthroposophy as something living and not only dead concepts and
schemata.
In the quote by Steiner from 1916, mentioned by Sharon, he discusses
potential formation of human forms that and the way it developed
instead. That does not change the fact that it was Steiner's view that
the basic development of humanity since the first post-glacial cultures
consists in the development of the development of human cultures, not
races. As can be seen from the quote from 1916, the central perspective
in the quote is on form, not 'race'.
***********************************************************
Rudolf Steiner 1909:
'The concept of race in a proper sense was only useful at the old
Atlantis. Therefore we have, as we count with a real evolution of
humanity, not used the concept of race for the post-Atlantean time. We
don't speak of an Indian race and so on, as it isn't proper any more. We
speak of an Old Indian cultural epoch, of an Old Persian cultural epoch
and so on.
It would have completely no sense if we were to speak of that we in our
time were preparing for a sixth 'race'. If we in our time still see
remains of the old Atlantean differences, remaining old group
soulishness, so that you still can speak of a differentiation into races
- what is preparing itself for the sixth epoch consists specifically in
getting rid of and leaving behind that which is 'racial character'. That
is the important thing.
Therefore it is necessary, that that movement that is called the
anthroposophical movement, that prepares for the sixth epoch in its
basic character takes up especially this task of getting rid of that
which related to 'racial character' and to unite people of all races, of
all nations and in this way bridging this differentiation, these
differences, this abyss, that exists between different groups of people.
Because that which are old racial points of view has a physical
character, and that which will develop into the future has a spiritual
character.
That is the reason it is so urgently necessary that our anthroposophical
movement is a spiritual movement, that looks at that which is spiritual
and overcomes specifically that which is based on physical differences
out of the force of this spirituality. It is completely understandable
that every movement has its child diseases and that one at the beginning
of the theosophical movement described what it is about as if the
evolution of the Earth so to speak was differentiated into seven epochs
- they were called 'main races' (root races My comment. S.N.) - and that
every 'root race' was differentiated into seven 'sub-races', and that
everything would repeat itself that way for ever, so that you for ever
could speak of seven 'races' and seven 'sub-races'. But one has to
overcome this child disease and become clear about that the concept of
race ceases to have any meaning/importance specifically in our time.
Something else is preparing itself - something that in the most eminent
sense has to do with the human individuality - the ever more increasing
individualization of man. What it is about is that this development of
the individuality is supported in the right way, and the
anthroposophical movement has to support this development of
individuality in man in the right way.'
Rudolf Steiner: 4 December 1909, in: The deeper secrets of the
development of humanity in the light of the gospels (GA 117)
***********************************************************
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:33:57 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Jeff:
)The Pythagorean source is Thomas Taylor and Manly Palmer Hall's essay on
)Retrospection and
)Concentration in the work The Phoenix and other works by him. (The Taylor
)reference may be off since its been
)25 years since I read his translations of the Neo-Platonists).
)
Peter:
Thanks for the reference. I'll check it out.
Jeff:
)Though I respect science, there are many ways to
)approach phenomena and human knowledge than form one or two disciplines.
)You
)cannot use a microscope in therapy room just as you cannot expect a
)anthropologist to use quantum theory in the field.
Peter:
Of course you can use a microscope in a therapy room and it is regularly
done. I am the beneficiary of such treatment myself. I can also expect an
antrhopologist to use quantum mechanics in the field where appropriate. Some
do. They use GPS for location for example.
Jeff:
)Education and cognitive
)studies cannot be boxed in and examined like a silicon chip. And the same
)for meditation and so called paranormal and "spiritual experiences". Each
)must be examined fairly within their own domain or we will have constant
)cross disciplinary problems. Meditators are often very gullible.
Peter:
Absolutely fundamental difference of opinion. Education, cognitive studies,
paranormal phenomena can all be studied using well understood statistical
tools and the claims of the proponents of the hypotheses and theories. This
is not a problem. In many circumstances it is not even difficult. The
unwillingness by proponents of these can only be interprested in my view as
ignorance or a desire to hide something.
Jeff:
)are notoriously undisciplined (but there is evidence of psychic phenomena
)and experience even with our small lives). And there are countless people
)who have had similar non-ordinary or "msytically based" experiences after
)engaging in serious religious or spiritual practice.
Peter:
There remains no independently substantiated evidence for any psychic
phenomena. Incidentally do you think I have had no spiritual experiences?
Jeff:
)
) I tend to prefer martial arts or yogic training at times since the BS
)buildup is minimal. Either one can do it or not and others can see it.
)There
)is both outer component and inner component (changes in breath, "energy",
)flexibility, blood flow, etc). Taken one step further inner exercises which
)are part of AP and Waldorf training to an extent, fall within this same
)experimental field. We are novices in all this and its easy to stand back
)and make whoopee about this or that but the proof is in the pudding and
)doing.
Peter:
Another part of this falls into the experimental field. This part includes
the claims made by people who have done the sort of training you are
suggesting as a result of that training. Those claims fail independent
scrutiny.
Jeff:
)
)40 years ago, speed reading would have seemed like magic to educators but
)there are now thousands of people who can read over 2500 words a minute and
)have changed conventional "facts" about how we process language and
)comprehension and has shifted sub vocalization technique (the only way to
)teach reading up to recently) to the visual scan method.
Peter:
So what? These claims can be independently verified. I am not saying that
anything in particular is impossible. What I am saying is if you make claims
show me independently verified evidence.
Jeff:
)
)My attempts here are not just to defend what I consider defendable concepts
)and practices but also to support time honored principles that form some of
)the basis in Steiner and other sources that related to Waldorf. If one's
)takes a purely physical and scientific stance about all human experience
)and
)phenomena then were does it lead- nowhere.
Peter:
Wrong. It leads to the enormous body of knowledge and understanding obtained
by those techniques. The fact that we are having this conversation is only
possible as a result of this.
Jeff:
)Legitimate questions about dogma
)and incomprehensible claims is fine but slicing and dicing only leads to
)piecemeal understanding.
Peter:
I don't know what this means.
Jeff:
)Thanks for the discussion.
Likewise.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 255
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Education and false values
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pmfar hotmail.com
RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Sports
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
By pacbay home.com
RE: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
list of questions
By momof2gals mindspring.com
for [name removed by request] -- temperments
By momof2gals mindspring.com
RE: New here
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: New here
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
By snell netshel.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By pmfar hotmail.com
Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
By pmfar hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:45:34 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Education and false values
[Jeff, on Steiner's change-of-teeth-equals-reading-readiness theory:]
)Steiner, I believe made a brilliant observation without much medical
)training.
Whoops: without *any* medical training.
)We know that every cell in the body changes at different times-
)days (eyes and mouth) months ( the liver in less than 40 days) and )years
)(bone and marrow cells): eventually all the cells are renewed )and
)recreated by the body.. This eventually takes 6-7 years to reach )the bone
)and marrow. When the teeth change, it signifies that the )organism has
)renewed itself entirely and replaced all embryo cells )garnered from the
)mother and thus a complete organic (and maybe some )other type of
)psychological independence) shift has occurred. The may )or may not be
)related to reading
You know, no matter how much I hear of this stuff, I still really, really
hate to come off so cynical. It's so poetic and it's even implied there's
biology behind it. But it is total nonsense: The cells have all been
replaced in seven years . . . even the bone cells . . . and this relates to
a child being ready to read because . . . how was it again that it relates?
[I wrote:]
)Waldorf teachers absolutely would stop a three year old interested in
) )reading.
[Jeff:]
)This would be an issue for me.
Well, then I am very glad to hear you do not have a three year old who is
interested in reading whom you are onsidering enrolling in Waldorf, because
that child would be having a hell of a time fitting into a Waldorf
classroom.
Now, three year olds who want to read are rare (before someone shrieks
"Straw man!"), but Waldorf teachers feel the same way about four- or five
year olds who want to read (or who even are proud of knowing the alphabet,
or writing their names), and also not a small number of six year olds. "Not
ready."
Nor do they seem much concerned about a seven-, eight-, nine-, or even
ten-year old who isn't making progress reading.
[I explained:]
)They insist on a total ban on any form of electronic stimulation.
[Jeff:]
)They may be mistaken and hardheaded on this issue. I fully understand )the
)metaphysics of it but it may not be possible in this society to )control
)experiences this way or should be. .
So if I've got this straight, you do not have a child in Waldorf and never
did, and do not teach in Waldorf and never did, though you are Waldorf
trained. It is much easier, not having had any actual experiences with
Waldorf, to admire the ideals from afar. Holding the views you hold, if you
were a Waldorf parent, you would very likely clash with your child's
teacher, but I can see that perhaps you really did not know that.
"Revisionists" clash with purists in Waldorf in a very ugly way, it seems.
[Jeff:]
)As for moderation, this is a catch phrase.
Jeff, are you a parent? Moderation is not a catch phrase. Moderation,
compromise, balance - that's parenting, every day, all day.
[Jeff:]
)Certain TV programs or video games should not be in moderation like
)the Freddy Krueger kill fests or Hellraiser series on video.
and
)I don't think you are suggesting smoking dope in moderation or letting
) )kids sample alcohol in moderation.
Please. I was talking about moderation in use of electronic media in
general, not implying I think it is all right for children to watch hideous
gore (or smoke dope) "in moderation." Moderation, to me, means sifting
through what is out there, discarding the huge amounts of junk, finding a
few things that are appropriate or at least harmless, and allowing them in
limited time frames, rather than turning them into forbidden fruit.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:54:00 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Sune:
)Steiner, viewing evolution from a more basically organic perspective,
)opposed this mechanical concept of evolution and the validity of
)describing it from a static ever repeating 'race formation' )perspective.
WHat does "organic" mean?
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:01:39 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Answering both Jeff and Dottie, who like Steiner's self-improvement
exercises (at least now we are acknowledging they are for self-improvement,
not for "memory, "mental focus," and "visualization"), and who are hurt or
offended that not everyone acts grateful when offered moralistic spiritual
exercises:
)Forgive me. I did not know that you have completed all you need in )life as
)person and there is no need for improvement.
)I sense avoidance and control issues here but who am I to know.
Well, I guess I could start psychoanalyzing your presumptuousness and
condescension, but I'll refrain. It isn't "avoidance," however; the reason
I'm skeptical of such "self-improvement," and I guess I do come off pretty
cynical, is exactly the opposite: long experience (studying anthroposophy
being the latest for me and hopefully the last). "Control issues," well,
probably, but who the heck do you think you are telling me about my control
issues?
Not all, but certainly most "self-improvement" schemes are dreamed up by
someone on a power trip or looking to make a buck. Most are harmless but a
few (and I think some of Steiner's) are downright dangerous.
)If you object to this simple exercise, lets try something very )innocuous.
)Stand with knees slightly bent and hold your arms straight )out without
)tension for 10 minutes.
This would be funny if it weren't so amazingly presumptuous to offer
something even more manipulative and intrusive after it's been pointed out
that the first offering was manipulative and intrusive. Only someone fairly
naive *would* do something this mentally manipulative without even any
understanding of the purpose - for 10 minutes a day for 14 days straight, no
less. Did you say you are a psychologist? Good grief.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:05:55 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
Steve Premo in the midst of an argument which is elegant and clear
understated the case in my view.
Steve:
)But let's assume for the moment that they are real, and
)that there is a big ol' non-material universe out there populated by all
)the various types of spooks, saints, gods, fairies, gnomes, angels,
)succubi, and so on. And let's assume that Steiner came up with a good,
)reliable system for objectively observing the spirit realm.
)
OK. Let's add to this assumption. Steiner was honest, and trained in science
and philosophy. I think these assumption will be readily agreed to by
Anthroposophists. Now having access to this "big ol' non-material universe"
he makes various statements. These statements subsequently turn out to be
wrong. What alternatives do we have. Let's examine the assumptions. Honest,
we are in big trouble here if all the other assumptions are correct. Trained
in science and philosophy. There seems to be independent evidence that this
is true. So it must be that either the non-material universe doesn't exist,
or the spirits in the non material univers told the good Dr Steiner some
fibs and no doubt had a bit of a chuckle, and/or Steiner was dishonest.
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:07:31 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Dottie:
)How do you come to the conclusion that people looking
)to be the best they can be is a bad thing? How do you
)justify that kind of negative understanding of wanting
)to be the best you can be, whos ever writings they
)are? How?
Dottie, I don't feel there is anything wrong with people trying to "be the
best they can be," improve themselves, etc. I think when you start reading
the writings of a "master" and start on a program to do his exercises, you
should realize you are putting yourself potentially under this person's
influence, especially if you're in a group of others who are already fervent
about the "master's" teachings. The influence could be good or bad, but it's
naive to think you're just doing it all yourself.
In your case, I think you've said you have studied a lot of different
spiritual paths and don't exclusively follow Steiner. That seems a lot
healthier to me, at least, than the folks who see no need to ever read or
study anyone *but* Steiner.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:29:06 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
My brief check on Manly P Hall did not fill me with confidence in his
writings as a source on Pythagoras. Others might like to check out
http://www.prs.org to obtain an idea of how likely independently verifiable
evidence about the life of Pythagoras is available through this source.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:30:58 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Detlef wrote:
) This is correct. Steiner's break with the "root race theory"
) came, in fact, much earlier. In 1906, Steiner distanced himself
) from the theosophical root-race concept in writing and never used
) it again (see Luzifer Gnosis No. 32, Summer 1906, p. 627, printed
) in: "Aus der Akascha Chronik", GA 11, Dornach 1969, S. 208 - the
) English version of this book is on many of the shelves of list
) members, maybe somebody can give the exact bibl. reference, as I
) only have the German original).
I believe it's called Cosmic Memory in English; Sune pointed to an on-line
version a few weeks back. The book is the most comprehehnsive presentation
of Steiner's version of the root race doctrine. As Sharon's several recent
posts make clear, it is hardly the case that Steiner disassociated himself
from racial thinking in 1906 (or at any other time). There are literally
dozens of similar passages in Steiner's post-1906 writings and speeches.
The passage Detlef refers to above is by no means a rejection of the root
race doctrine. Here Steiner merely points out that the term "race" isn't
helpful in describing the first two root races of humankind and the first
several sub-races of the third root race, since those beings did not have a
fully physical form in the contemporary sense. He also makes his usual
prediction that the term "race" will not accurately describe the different
sections of humanity after the fifth sub-race of the fifth root-race, namely
in about 1500 years from now. But for the present, as well as for thousands
of years in the past and many, many generations to come, race is very much
an applicable category, indeed a central one, according to Steiner. In the
passage Detlef refers to, Steiner explicitly says that "racial character"
will remain a salient factor until "the end of our fifth era".
) Then there is the lecture held on 4.12.1909, where Steiner looks
) back on the theosophical movement and describes the root-race
) vocabulary as a "Kinderkrankheit der theosophischen Bewegung" (a
) childhood illness of the theosophical movement) and adds: "Aber
) man muţ ¸ber die Kinderkrankheiten hinauskommen und sich klar
) sein dar¸ber, daţ der Rassebegriff aufh–rt eine jegliche
) Bedeutung zu haben in unserer Zeit" ("But we must overcome these
) childhood illnesses and be clear about the fact that the concept
) of race ceases to retain any meaning in our time") (cited from:
) Die tieferen Geheimnisse des Menschheitswerdens im Lichte der
) Evangelien, GA 117, Dornach 1966, p. 152 - again, somebody else
) will have to look up the English bibl. reference if anybody is
) interested). That's a pretty clear statement.
No, it isn't a clear statement. Detlef seems to think Steiner is saying that
the concept of race is becoming obsolete *now* (i.e. in 1909). Applying
Sune's eminently sensible advice that one read the entire lecture in order
to understand its full meaning, it is easy to see that Detlef is mistaken:
the lecture ends by emphasizing that "the sixth cultural epoch is the first
overcoming,
the full overcoming of the race concept" (GA 117, p. 165). That meaning is
indicated in the above passage quoted by Detlef, which can also be
translated thus: "the concept of race is losing its meaning in our era";
that is, during the current era, which will as noted last another 1500
years. The rest of the lecture clarifies that this propitious
transformation, whereby race will lose its meaning, will not take place
until the *end* of the fifth era and the beginning of the sixth. There are
several obsevations we might make about this stance: 1) it is racist, since
it expressly holds that for now and for the forseeable future racial
categories will remain decisive within the anthroposophical worldview; 2) it
is a refinement, not a rejection, of the root race doctrine inherited from
classical theosophy.
) Not only was it a
) misnomer to use the word "race" in describing states of cultural
) evolution, the concept of race in general "ceases to retain any
) meaning in our time".
Great, except that "our time" lasts until the year three thousand and
something or other, and this welcome "cessation" won't set in until the end
of "our time". A bit long to wait, if you ask me.
) At the time of the official split in 1913 between the
) Anthroposophical and Theosophical Society, this divergence
) regarding the root race theory did not play any discernible role:
) the issue was Steiner's disagreement that Krishnamurti was a
) second coming of Christ. This was a big-time disagreement.
) Steiner had disagreed with a number of theosophical notions
) previously and publicly, not only the root-race concept. He
) didn't, for example, like the spiritist leanings of Theosophy at
) all. He respected Blavatsky's clairvoyant abilities, but found
) her interpretations ("Isis unveiled") to be totally unclear and
) incomprehensible to anyone without similar clairvoyant abilities.
) He strongly criticized the theosophical intellectuality of
) someone like Sinnett for its "intellectual cookbook mentality".
) Above all, he was of the opinion that spirituality needed to be
) founded within European culture and not just "imported" from the
) Orient. To equate Steiner's vision of the mission of Central
) Europe (and, in particular, of German culture) with a
) "white-supremacist" attitude, however, as PS does, is one of
) those bubbles of hot words untouched by a sober understanding of
) the facts.
I agree with this paragraph, with the obvious exception of the last
sentence. For those of you who are new to this, Detlef also believes that
Steiner was never a pan-German nationalist, which gives a good sense of his
familiarity with Steiner's biography and published writings. It is certainly
true that one could argue passionately for a special role for German culture
without being a white supremacist, and a number of Steiner's contemporaries
did just that. But Steiner himself, of course, insisted upon identifying the
unique and superior virtues of German spirituality with "the mission of
white humanity", as the 1915 Stuttgart lecture I excerpted last week makes
clear. It isn't accidental that Steiner routinely said things, well after
1906, like "the white race is the race of the future, the spiritually
creative race"; these statements flow directly out of his root race
teachings. The remarkable thing is that anthroposophists who otherwise cling
to every word their founder said become strangely silent when confronted
with Steiner's own explications of his racist theories. I hereby invite any
and all anthroposophists to make use of their sober understanding of the
facts and offer the rest of us an alternative interpretation of the
Stuttgart lecture or of the several passages Sharon posted this afternoon.
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:35:26 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
I suggested to Jeff that he read Jeffrey Masson's book "My Father's Guru".
Those who have read it might be delighted to find that no amount of
debunking can keep a good guru down. He is well represented on the web. See
for example http://www.lightlink.com/larson/Pbpage.shtml where of course
Jeffrey Masson's book is not recommended reading.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:39:21 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Sports
Sarina wrote:
)Dodgeball was where one or several kids were "it," and they tried to
)tag the others with the ball (by either throwing it at you or touching
)you with it). If you got tagged by a ball you were "frozen", and the
)only way out was to make a bridge with your body so someone else could
)squiggle underneath to "release" you. Kind of like freeze tag or TV
)tag...
Ok, that makes 5 completely different versions I've heard. (A neighbor
contributed one too.) I vaguely remember TV tag, but can't remember how we
did that exactly. (Now, dodgeball may be controversial, but we *know* "TV
tag" isn't allowed in Waldorf.) :)
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:45:14 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
Peter,
Thanks for the physics summary. My point is also your point.
Models may be useful to scientists but when accepted blindly by
the common man or teachers as gospel, then scientists take on the role of
gods and they know all.
Thus the guidelines to curriculum development are set up with no room for
alternatives ( I am not suggesting
Steiner here but there may be other models to consider). This carries over
into other areas of schooling
where independence of thought and creativity is contained or controlled
because it upsets the apple cart.
(Sounds like some Waldorf environments and admin meetings! from what I have
heard)
I found this in university constantly and could not wait to get away from
constipated philosophy profs and historians who
found their safe holes. So I went on to religious studies where teachers
are slightly more humble.
----- ) Let me come back to Steiner. He was clairvoyant. He could see the
future and
) the past. Show me something that he suggested that has led to some new
) understanding with independent evidence. There's none in Zajonc's books.
) Why not? Because it doesn't exist. Because Steiner wasn't clairvoyant.
) Because he could not see the past or the future. He was either simply a
) fraud, or self deluded. I can't find and alternative.
) Peter
)
As for Steiner not being a seer or clairvoyant, that is what you are
convinced of, so be it.
Being a clairvoyant or msytically endowed does not make one infallable or
allow for the masterful translation of
metaphsyical experiences into common language. Most frauds and self deluded
imposters are more concerned with ego
aggrandizement, money, power and influence- none of which Steiner achieved
or his detractors claimed he wanted.
I did not buy his perspective right off and still question many issues but
after 30 years of cross cultural religous and spiritual study and
experience, I just recognize too many similarities with other teachers and
mystics to say he was a fruad or self deluded. One may disagree strongly
with him; see his perspective as flawed or poorly communicated but for me to
be honest, I must say: it seems that there is "something" he experienced
which matches with reports of others making similar claims. Of course, they
may be deluded too! I don't think so. (Aurobindo, Gopi Krisha, Jay Allan
Woolf, Phsycist, Melvin Morse, MD., Colin Wilson, Ouspensky, Carolyn Myss,
Deapak Chopra, Barbara Brenden, healer, Saul Bellow, author and writer and
Steiner admirer, Swedenborg, Geoffrey Hodson, Yogananda, Emerson, to mention
just a handful )
Unless one is drawn to spiritual (or paranormal) experimentation and
research and is willing to get wet, there is no way to other than ancedotal
reports to "prove" any of this. Well, there is actually. There are a number
of clips now available from the KGB showing psychotelekenetic effects by
Russian healers and psychics from the 40's,50's and 60's. The flim footage
was shoot in 8 and 16 mm with no computer technology and manipulation
available at the time, obviously . It clearly shows many incidents of at
distance manipulation of different objects under glass or on a table with no
touching. This is one claim of metaphycians- mind can control and impact
"matter" and the body. Many of the experiments were done in secret as part
of project to learn more of this ability and use it in warfare and some
think it has. Look what happened in our last election. clearly we we duped!
The Great Randi must be on plane now. (he offers a million bucks to anyone
who can demonstrate to him psychic powers). He has put on many miles in the
last few years.
Jeff Auen
_____________________________________________________________________
) Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:45:55 -0500
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: RE: nations, cultures, skin color, and race war
Thanks for the heads up on this Alan, and thanks Neil for trying to sort it
out. There are a couple of kinks in the GA (Steiner Collected Works)
numbering system, and this is one of them. The book I excerpted last week is
GA 174b, whose title would translate to "The Spiritual Background of the
First World War"; its subtitle is "Cosmic and Human History, seventh
volume". The book Alan's reading, GA 174, is indeed a different book, though
with similar content. Just to confuse matters more, there is also a GA 174a
which is distinct from both GA 174 and GA 174b... I still don't know whether
174b, the one I excerpted, has been translated into English. I think that
Dan looked into it and didn't come up with anything. Any Steiner translators
out there with time on their hands?
Peter S.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
--- Diana Winters (winters_diana hotmail.com) wrote:
)
) Answering both Jeff and Dottie, who like Steiner's
) self-improvement
) exercises (at least now we are acknowledging they
) are for self-improvement,
) not for "memory, "mental focus," and
) "visualization"), and who are hurt or
) offended that not everyone acts grateful when
) offered moralistic spiritual
) exercises:
dottie -
Give me a break Diana. Am I offended or hurt? Nobody
offered you a spiritual excercise in the first place.
It was an answer to Peter F's challenge to Jeff about
Steiner.
Although I must say your arrogance is amazing.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
) Rudolf Steiner 1909:
) Therefore it is necessary, that that movement that
) is called the
) anthroposophical movement, that prepares for the
) sixth epoch in its
) basic character takes up especially this task of
) getting rid of that
) which related to 'racial character' and to unite
) people of all races, of
) all nations and in this way bridging this
) differentiation, these
) differences, this abyss, that exists between
) different groups of people.
) Because that which are old racial points of view has
) a physical
) character, and that which will develop into the
) future has a spiritual
) character.
)
dottie -
Now PLANS asks Anthroposophists and others who support
Steiners teaching to read their quotes regarding
racism and Steiner. So here is a quote by Steiner
regarding how race is not to be brought into the
future.
For me this is the bottom line of why I read all of
Steiners words from a spiritual point of view and not
a physical. I believe it is the basis of his
understanding and foundation for Anthroposophy.
How does anyone who believes undeniably that Steiner
was a racist read this quote?
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:12:11 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: list of questions
Here is a list of questions that was put together primarily by fellow list
member Michael Kopp with some additions/changes made by me!
I highly recommend that anyone even considering enrolling a child/ren in a
Waldorf school read the list thoroughly, print them out and take them along
when you interview the admissions folks and teachers at the school you are
considering.
Here goes:
* Ask to see mainlesson books from several grades, and from several
children within the same class (on the same subject.) This way, it will
become obvious that if the mainlesson books are almost identical (which the=
y
often are!), that the children are merely copying whatever the teacher
writes or draws from the blackboard.
* Make sure to read the PLANS web site and all it contains. Pay particular
attention to the articles.
* Do you believe in reincarnation? Does you want your child taught by a
system that is based -- pedagogically, as well as spiritually -- on a belie=
f
in reincarnation?
* Do you understand Steiner's 7-year cycles of child development (in which
children below the age of 14 are not allowed to think abstractly -- even if
they do so naturally?) Children below the age of 14, according to Steiner,
should not form independent thoughts or theories, but should instead learn
to trust the authority of the teacher and to think as he/she thinks.
* Do you believe that ALL technology is bad for kids? Sure, we all think
kids watch too much garbage on TV, and little kids shouldn't spend their
time staring at computers.
But if you ask, Waldorf teachers will tell you that computers are not
good for children because children cannot understand how computers work.
They will tell you that in the Waldorf high school, the students are then
old enough to learn to build a computer and to use one.
What they do NOT tell you is that they believe that the computer is
``AHRIMANIC=B9=B9 -- connected with the Anthroposophic ``god of darkness=B9=B9 --
and can sap the child=B9s will and actually ``suck out the child=B9s soul.=B9=B9
* Do you want your child will be strongly influenced by the same adult for
eight years? Do you understand that if your child develops a dislike for th=
e
teacher, Steiner says it's the child's karma, and it will take curative
eurythmy to work it out, and no, the child can't change teachers because th=
e
karma has to be worked out with the first teacher? (And besides, at most
Waldorf schools, there is only one class for each grade.)
* Do you know that the creation story your child will learn isn't even in
the same ballpark with the creationist one of the Christian fundamentalists=
,
despite the school saying it's "Christian-something-or-other"? Are you awar=
e
that they will be taught that the creators of the world/universe are 11 or
12 spirits, a pantheistic "Elohim," and not a monotheistic "God?"
* Do you know that -- eventually -- your child will be taught some scienc=
e
that is NOT the accepted science of the 21st century? Students in Waldorf
schools learn Steiner science -- which flies in the face of facts proven
again and again by numerous other famous scientists and thinkers, including
Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton.
At a Waldorf school, children learn, for instance that color comes fro=
m
the clash of darkness with light (a erroneous idea of Steiner=B9s based on
Goethe.) Are you aware that the foundation of this Steiner science is occul=
t
spiritualism, not real science?
At Waldorf, students studying chemistry are taught that the four
elements are: earth, air, fire and water, which they learn correspond with
various signs of the Zodiac.
* Do you understand that Steiner's curriculum hasn't changed in 75 years,
doesn't take account of the earlier maturation of kids and that it's almost
all based on spiritual science premises that Steiner made up ?
* Ask the school for a complete _written_ explanation of the
curriculum, for all the grades at the school. It should be
as detailed as your state's curriculum. Even if it's legally
allowably different, it should show the same rigor and depth.
* Ask the school for a complete _written_ explanation of how
Anthroposophy fits into the curriculum, and what things in the
curriculum -- such as late reading, no black crayons in the early years, no
stimulation of the intellect until post-puberty, Goethean science, etc. --
are based on Anthroposophy or spiritual science. Ask if there is any
modern educational research to back Steiner's specific educational theories
up. (There isn't.)
* Ask the school for a complete _written_ explanation of
Steiner's child development model, in plain language, and for modern
scientific educational research to back this up. (There isn't any.) Ask for
an explanation of "The Four Temperments" and how each temperment relates to
physical characteristics ("melancholid" children are usually tall and pale;
"cholerics" have a square jaw, etc.) Ask what modern research supports the
use of this "tool" that dates from before the Middle Ages. (There isn't
any.)
* Ask the school for a complete _written_ policy statement on
parent/school relationships, and the school=B9s contractual agreement on
it: for instance, what happens if a parent or parents disagree with
something the school or teacher or curriculum does, and wants it changed or
wants his child not to partake in it? If you withdraw your child before the
end of the year, will you have to continue to pay tuition? (Check into
tuition insurance.)
* Ask for a _written_ statement regarding the use of Anthroposophical "chil=
d
studies" (or any other type of assessment of the child), requiring that it
divulge if speculation on the child's former life or lives is included,
either privately or formally; requiring that there be an agreed-to,
complete, written record of any assessments; requiring that parents have
the right to be present during such sessions, whether they involve the chil=
d
or not.
* Ask for a faculty list that contains information about the credentials an=
d
degrees obtained by each teacher. Pay attention to the wording of the
listings (if, indeed, there is such a list -- not all schools have them!) A
statement that a teacher "attended" a particular university or college does
not mean the teacher earned a degree. Carefully check out what the Waldorf
school teacher training programs involve -- which is mostly study of Steine=
r
and Anthroposophy. (Some teachers -- more than a few! -- attend a basic 13
week crash course before taking on a class ... Ask about this.)
* Are you aware that your child will be taught that fairies and gnomes
actually exist, and that many of the teachers (at least those who are
Anthroposophists) believe that these elemental beings are real, and even
more, are very important?
* Are you aware that the famous Waldorf 'wet-on-wet" watercolor painting is
actually a spiritual science exercise, aimed at cultivating the child's
soul/spirit? Are you aware that the amorphous quality of the images created
by this wet technique is intended to frustrate the child's ability to draw
with LINES -- which Steiner purported were remnants of "past lives" and thu=
s
should be done away with (except in form drawing, another spiritual science
exercise)?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:32:32 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: for [name removed by request] -- temperments
In a recent post, newcomer [name removed by request] says:
((As far as the Waldorf schools labeling children, I think public schools do
far more harm with labeling than Waldorf schools do. I am a psychologist in
public schools ....))
Lisa here: [name removed by request], you have an excellent point regarding the way *all*
schools, Steiner or not, "label" children in various ways.
You can speak from the point of view of a mental health professional
working in a public school system about how children are labelled, or
tracked, in such a system, and the harm you see coming from it.
I can speak only as a parent who has had children in Waldorf school,
public school and an independent, non-Waldorf private school.
And all I can say is: it is NOT the same thing, the labelling done in
Waldorf and the labelling done elsewhere.
A couple of differences come to my mind, particularly the fact that the
so-called "labelling" done in public school and non-Waldorf private schools
(gifted and talented versus challenged, ADD, ADHD, etc.) is presumably based
on some kind of science based testing, medical examinations, standardized
educational tests with controls, and so on.
You can fairly argue that too many children nowadays are unfairly
labeled as "hyperactive" or "attention deficit," and I would have to agree
with you.
But that is the result of lazy physicians who are willing to just write
a script to make what seems to be a problem go away.
Good physicians who actually practice sound medicine are not willing to
simply diagnose a child that way ... even when parents ask for medications
to control a child. (These are the same physicians who refuse to give out
antibiotics to parents whose children have a simple cold or stuffy nose. I
know those good doctors are out there; we go to one.)
The labelling at Waldorf is not based on any sound or proven practice.
It is based on the same medieval, superstition-filled dogma that makes up
the Anthroposophy as a whole. Sometime back, someone on this list said that
he had not heard of someone being "choleric" or "phlegmatic" since reading
Geoffrey Chaucer in college ... indeed, that is how far back such tenets
reach, and farther than that, even.
Worse yet, the teachers who do the labelling not only use those tags as
simple ways to metaphorically describe a child; they actually consider the
child's physical characteristics when making the determination between
melancholic and choleric, and sanguine and phlegmatic! (Melancholics are
slim and walk stooped over, have a pallid complexion ... phlegmatics tend to
be chubby and clumsy and red in the face ... etc.)
Such utter and complete nonsense, and they base SO much of how they
treat your child on what "temperment" that child is!
[name removed by request], you mentioned in an earlier post that your son has been labelled
"choleric" and that "cholerics" are not valued (or a similar word) at your
school. I asked in a responding post how you learned what your son's label
was, and how your learned the school's preference for the "sanguine" boys
and girls.
If you answered, pardon me for asking again. But I would really be
interested in hearing about your experience.
-- Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24-Apr-2001 03:40:53 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: New here
Diana Winters wrote:
)
)
) [Dan wrote:]
)
) )Kindergartners are supposed to be protected from seeing print at all.
) )Elementary students are introduced to it through their own )writing.
) )Books
) )are the outside world, not the magical fantasy world )that Waldorf
) )wants.
)
) In Waldorf there is a specified sequence in which the child is supposed
) to
) encounter the world, and only one very specific lens (anthroposophy)
) through
) which they are supposed to view the world. The teacher is supposed to
) mediate everything, and the child is supposed to revere the teacher as
) authority.
)
) Once a child reads well, you can forget all that. The world opens up.
) The
) child learns there are many ways of looking at the world, many people
) who've
) had experiences the teacher doesn't know about and that the teacher
) thinks
) they shouldn't know about either.
)
) Recently I read a book to my son that had some parts I wanted to edit
) out (I
) just skipped them, artfully enough that he didn't notice anything
) missing).
) After we read the book together, he picked it up and started through it
) on
) his own (it was a bit higher reading level than I would have thought he
) could manage; I was wrong), and of course he read all the stuff I hoped
) to
) spare him. Well duh, can't shield him nearly so much now that he can
) read
) practically whatever he wants to read. (He didn't ask me why I had
) skipped
) those parts, guess he knows me pretty well.)
)
) Anyway, in most other educational philosophies, the whole point is
) freeing
) the child to learn, to want to know more and have the tools to find out
) more
) on their own. Waldorf's a little off kilter there.
)
) )One with a skeptical view might also imagine that by avoiding
) )reading, books and recorded media, children are able to be
) )indoctrinated into the Anthroposophical world-view without
) )interference from outside society or their parents' world-view.
)
) Parents often do not realize that to some Waldorf teachers, books are
) *almost* as big a threat as TV, movies, and popular culture and media.
)
) Ok, I could go on, but the rest of you have heard it (Marinell's new so
) I
) have an excuse to rant). :)
) Diana
Su: Diana, brilliant post!!!Especially :
)Parents often do not realize that to some Waldorf teachers, books are
) *almost* as big a threat as TV, movies, and popular culture and )media.
I would suspect that the reason Steiner himself was so easily sucked
into Blavatsky's mumbo-jumbo was because he learned to read so late that
he didn't develop a critical mind, probably because he was too busy
learning German grammar! Imagine the critical reading skills he might
have developed if he had started earlier. Perfect cult fodder!!
(I will get my Anthroposophy shield up now to protect me from the
incoming barbs...)
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24-Apr-2001 03:42:52 GMT
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: New here
[name removed by request] wrote:
) Hello,
)
) I am new to this list. My son is currently enrolled in a Waldorf school
) in
) Alaska. He has been profiled as a choleric and as I have recently found
) out,
) this type of child is not appreciated in this school. Currently our son
) and
) family are operating in a mode of utter devastation. I hope the list
) will
) help me come to some sort of understanding on how a school can be
) allowed to
) operate in such a discriminatory manner.
)
)
) Proud mother of a innocent five-year-old choleric boy.
)
)
Get him out as soon as possible before more damage is done!!! He's
probably not choleric, just not pacific!!!
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 05:04:37 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dear Dottie,
I'll do it. This quotation simply says that the distinction between races
will vanish. It does not repudiate other statements that one race or other
is more spiritually developed than some others.
Let me come back to Steiner's criticism of Einstein. Recall that Steiner
claimed to be able to "see" the future. Why did he not make it clear that
his criticism of Einstein was purely on scientific grounds, given the
problem that he lived to see in Germany? Why did he not clarify his
criticism of Einstein given the antisemitic attacks on Einstein?
Peter Farrell
)From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
)Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
)
)
)
) ) Rudolf Steiner 1909:
)
) ) Therefore it is necessary, that that movement that
) ) is called the
) ) anthroposophical movement, that prepares for the
) ) sixth epoch in its
) ) basic character takes up especially this task of
) ) getting rid of that
) ) which related to 'racial character' and to unite
) ) people of all races, of
) ) all nations and in this way bridging this
) ) differentiation, these
) ) differences, this abyss, that exists between
) ) different groups of people.
) ) Because that which are old racial points of view has
) ) a physical
) ) character, and that which will develop into the
) ) future has a spiritual
) ) character.
) )
)dottie -
)
)Now PLANS asks Anthroposophists and others who support
)Steiners teaching to read their quotes regarding
)racism and Steiner. So here is a quote by Steiner
)regarding how race is not to be brought into the
)future.
)
)For me this is the bottom line of why I read all of
)Steiners words from a spiritual point of view and not
)a physical. I believe it is the basis of his
)understanding and foundation for Anthroposophy.
)
)How does anyone who believes undeniably that Steiner
)was a racist read this quote?
)
)dottie
)
)__________________________________________________
)Do You Yahoo!?
)Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
)http://auctions.yahoo.com/
)
)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 22:43:18 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
) The Great Randi must be on plane now. (he offers a million bucks to anyone
)who can demonstrate to him psychic powers). He has put on many miles in the
)last few years.
)
)Jeff Auen
Debra:
Yes, Randi is on PLANS advisory board. He has toured Waldorf schools and
witnessed Waldorf teachers asking permission (in front of the students)
from the gnomes to enter the forest...
There is bucks to be had, Jeff. I hope you are planning something big.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
--- Peter Farrell
) Dear Dottie,
) I'll do it. This quotation simply says that the
) distinction between races
) will vanish. It does not repudiate other statements
) that one race or other
) is more spiritually developed than some others.
) Let me come back to Steiner's criticism of Einstein.
) Recall that Steiner
) claimed to be able to "see" the future. Why did he
) not make it clear that
) his criticism of Einstein was purely on scientific
) grounds, given the
) problem that he lived to see in Germany? Why did he
) not clarify his
) criticism of Einstein given the antisemitic attacks
) on Einstein?
) Peter Farrell
)
dottie -
Well Peter that reminds me of the people who claim
that Steiner was above reproach. He is not. Did you
and others expect him to be perfect? I surely don't.
However racism and greed are not two of the qualities
that I would give to this man, not by a long shot.
Thankyou for your reply,
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:56:28 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Thanks Dottie,
The difficulty is how do you discuss the qualites of Steiner with someone
who does believe he is beyond reproach, and who will not interpret statement
of Steiner's in any way that threatens this view. Over several years I have
seen a lot of this. It has coloured the way I argue on this list.
Having said that I really do believe Steiner was either dishonest or crazy.
I don't think it is possible to interpret his scientific statements in any
other way given his education.
Sincerely, Peter
)From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
)Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
)
)
)--- Peter Farrell
) ) Dear Dottie,
) ) I'll do it. This quotation simply says that the
) ) distinction between races
) ) will vanish. It does not repudiate other statements
) ) that one race or other
) ) is more spiritually developed than some others.
) ) Let me come back to Steiner's criticism of Einstein.
) ) Recall that Steiner
) ) claimed to be able to "see" the future. Why did he
) ) not make it clear that
) ) his criticism of Einstein was purely on scientific
) ) grounds, given the
) ) problem that he lived to see in Germany? Why did he
) ) not clarify his
) ) criticism of Einstein given the antisemitic attacks
) ) on Einstein?
) ) Peter Farrell
) )
)dottie -
)
)Well Peter that reminds me of the people who claim
)that Steiner was above reproach. He is not. Did you
)and others expect him to be perfect? I surely don't.
)However racism and greed are not two of the qualities
)that I would give to this man, not by a long shot.
)
)Thankyou for your reply,
)
)dottie
)
)__________________________________________________
)Do You Yahoo!?
)Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
)http://auctions.yahoo.com/
)
)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:39:08 -0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (pmfar hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and atoms and God
Jeff:
)Thanks for the physics summary. My point is also your point.
)Models may be useful to scientists but when accepted blindly by
)the common man or teachers as gospel, then scientists take on the )role of
)gods and they know all.
Peter:
Certainly much of science is poorly understood in the wider community. I
don't think it should be accepted blindly and it certainly means that
scientists need to act responsibly. I rarely take on the role of God. Not at
all this week :) I attend about three or four scientific conferences a year
on average. This means I get to hear many scientists give presentations
about their current work. Almost without fail there is discussion about the
limits of this work, how certain are some bits, what don't we know as a
result of this. It is how I work.
Jeff:
)Thus the guidelines to curriculum development are set up with no )room for
)alternatives ( I am not suggesting Steiner here but there )may be other
)models to consider). This carries over into other areas )of schooling where
)independence of thought and creativity is )contained or controlled because
)it upsets the apple cart.
)(Sounds like some Waldorf environments and admin meetings! from what )I
)have heard)
)I found this in university constantly and could not wait to get away )from
)constipated philosophy profs and historians who found their safe )holes. So
)I went on to religious studies where teachers are slightly )more humble.
Peter:
Strangely enough lots of education gets criticised here. Don't get Dan
started. A check of the archives will find criticism by various critics of
all sorts of educational practices.
I am currently a physics prof, and I think you must have gone to the wrong
university. I and most of my colleagues struggle to get students to display
independence of thought and creativity.
Jeff:
)As for Steiner not being a seer or clairvoyant, that is what you are
)convinced of, so be it. Being a clairvoyant or msytically endowed )does not
)make one infallable or allow for the masterful translation )of metaphsyical
)experiences into common language. Most frauds and )self deluded imposters
)are more concerned with ego aggrandizement, )money, power and influence-
)none of which Steiner achieved
)or his detractors claimed he wanted.
Peter:
I think your point is incorrect. It doesn' matter whether Steiner was
infallible or not. What matters is that he made claims with the air of
infallibility. Read the quote about Einstein again on the plans website. He
says over and over again that the listener can verify the truth of his
assertions by undertaking the appropriate training. He doesn't say "I read
the Akasha chronicle and I couldn't quite make it out, either Einstein is
wrong of it might be something about Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise having a
very public marital split in 2001". He is very clear. On the other hand
scientists describe experiments which others can do and describe the
outcomes with uncertainties. They make predictions which are open to
rebuttal.
Of course Steiner achieved ego aggrandizement, money, power and influence.
Or are you telling me he stacked supermarket shelves of an evening to fund
his activities, and he had to offer free beer to get people to come to his
talks?
Jeff:
)I just recognize too many similarities with other teachers and )mystics to
)say he was a fruad or self deluded.
Peter:
There is of course the possibility that many or all of these were also
frauds or self deluded. Read Masson's book. It's about a fraud. Funny how
similar a lot of his crap was to many others.
Jeff:
)There are a number
)of clips now available from the KGB showing psychotelekenetic )effects by
)Russian healers and psychics from the 40's,50's and 60's. )The flim footage
)was shoot in 8 and 16 mm with no computer technology )and manipulation
)available at the time, obviously . It clearly )shows )many incidents of at
)distance manipulation of different objects under )glass or on a table with
)no touching. This is one claim of )metaphycians- mind can control and
)impact "matter" and the body. Many )of the experiments were done in secret
)as part of project to learn )more of this ability and use it in warfare and
)some think it has.
Peter:
You might well ask yourself why none of this has been able to duplicated in
the west after several decades of attempts. The reasons are that closed
societies like the Soviet Union were absolute playgrounds for frauds and
villains who had access to the few in the inner circle.
Jeff:
)The Great Randi must be on plane now. (he offers a million bucks to )anyone
)who can demonstrate to him psychic powers). He has put on many )miles in
)the last few years.
Peter:
The fact that his money is still earning interest is pretty good evidence.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 256
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: for [name removed by request] -- temperments
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Sports
By soma mwt.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Hard Hitting News
By soma mwt.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By soma mwt.net
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
By steve premofine.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: Sports
By snell netshel.net
Re: Religion and Mysticism and science ?
By pacbay home.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By dottie_z yahoo.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By steve premofine.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By steve premofine.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
List of Questions
By dingman mindspring.com
Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
By paixs yahoo.com.br
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:04:56 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and exercises
Peter F. wrote:
)My brief check on Manly P Hall did not fill me with confidence in his
)writings as a source on Pythagoras. Others might like to check out
)http://www.prs.org to obtain an idea of how likely independently verifiable
)evidence about the life of Pythagoras is available through )this source.
Thanks, Peter, that was an interesting diversion. This guy sounds like he
could have rivaled Steiner - according to the website he wrote more than 200
volumes and delivered more than 8000 lectures over six decades. "Secret
Teachings of All Ages," "Twenty-Five Centuries of Wisdom," etc. Thank God he
didn't found schools.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:06:39 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter Farrell wrote:
) Dear Dottie,
) I'll do it. This quotation simply says that the distinction between races
) will vanish. It does not repudiate other statements that one race or other
) is more spiritually developed than some others.
It has been pointed out earlier on this list how simplified the concept
of 'more' or 'less' 'spiritually developed' is in relation to races,
when fished out of some printed lecture by Steiner.
In a number of postings Peter Staudenmaier has tried to make the curved
geographical figure in lecture 4 on 'Folk Souls'
(http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/Steiner/Folkspirits/Folkspirits-4.htm),
being the first part of a more complex geographical pattern, stand out
as a simple linear hierarchical figure in describing the relation
between Africans, Asians and Europeans, with Africans at the bottom and
Europeans at the top.
Lecture six of the lecture series on 'Folk Souls' at
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/Steiner/Folkspirits/Folkspirits-6.htm
(that is difficult to understand if not seen in the context of at least
all the other lectures in the series) that adds several more aspects to
a picture of the very complex relations between the continuously fading
racial-bodily characteristics of different 'races', as they were formed
long before the end of the last glacial ages.
In the lecture, Steiner points to what he understood as the spiritual
character of what abnormal spiritual beings turned into
'race'-formation. What was the spiritual character of what was turned
into the formation of the Ethiopian-African 'race'? In Steiner's view it
was 'the quintessence of the all-human; the universal human'.
Peter's clear admiration for 'brightness' makes him view Steiner's
description of the development of more limited 'head based' observation
and -thinking as more dominant in caucasians, as a description of
something more 'advanced' and the description by Steiner in the lectures
as 'hierarchical'.
)From an anthroposophical perspective, being universal or all-human
stands out as more centrally human than being simply 'bright', the last
being one of the filtering colours in the mental glasses though which
Peter views the world.
Noting that, the description by Steiner stands out as more the opposite
than the congruent view in relation to Peter's and being 'African', to
the extent that it is dependent on the fading racial characteristic of
the physical body as being human in a more encompassing universal sense
than more to the head limited and by the head dominated 'Europeans'.
Understanding Ethiopia from this perspective and what Steiner points
to as the importance of (if abnormal) 'Mercury' spirits in the context,
also puts the central importance of Mercury as Thot-Hermes in the birth
and development of Egyptian culture along the Nile, with its sources in
Ethiopia and Sudan, in a new light, in relation to the view of
Jupiter-Zeus as the central godhead in Greek culture.
My closest friend in class, when retraining as a computer technician
some years ago, was a former head of the Zoological Garden in Addis
Abeba, now living in Sweden. It made me deeply appreciate what Steiner
described as the universal human characteristic as the element out of
which the now fading 'Ethiopian-African race' was born long ago.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:31:58 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: for [name removed by request] -- temperments
Hi [name removed by request]
IĄd like to add something to what Lisa wrote: even
if it were agreed that US public schools also
label students (I canĄt comment on that, IĄm not
from the US), this does not excuse WSs from doing
it. I mean: when you take your child to WS, it
must be because you donĄt agree with the
traditional options. The problem is, many of us
end up finding WE to be *worse* than traditional
forms of education in some aspects[as in: stiff;
repressive; mind-controlling; judgemental]; other
parents end up discovering WE does not live up to
the promise of an "education towards freedom" (or
at least - we understand "freedom" differently).
I can tell you my experience; I am a former WS and
my son goes to a constructivist pre-school
(Piaget-based). It struck me as amazing, from day
one, the way the school acted towards all
students: ACCEPTINGLY.
Whatever comes from the children is accepted;
eventual "problems" are identifyed in childrenĄs
*behaviour*, not their *characters*. I mean; they
donĄt come to you and say: "Your son is too XXX
(ex.: choleric; innatentive; (fill in the gap))" ;
theyĄll say "X has been acting very disperse
lately; I wonder what heĄs feeling/how we can
help/should we discuss it/etc".
I donĄt think IĄm explainig it well... What I
wanted to tell you is, as a former WS, it was
incredible to me to realize the *respect* they
showed for each individual child in my sonĄs
school, and the lack of the judgemental attitude
towards children (and parents...) that I had been
used to and considered to be normal. It was a big
eye-opener for me.
So, in short - there are pedagogical endeavours
that show the respect towards children that many
of us imagined W would follow - and it does NOT. I
had to live it to feel the difference. And as a
parent of (TWO- lol) boys who could be called
"choleric" by waldorf standards, but who tankfully
go to a school where their spirited personalities
are not considered a *fault* to be *endured* and
*corrected*, I can tell you - it is a totally
different world.
As a fellow parent, then, I would advise you
heartily, if you asked me, to beware of what WE
can do to your "cholerics"! Of course, you are
profesisonally involved in education, you must
know this far better than I, but I just wanted to
share my experience as a parent. I found great
options!
All the best
Clara
----- Original Message -----
From: Lisa Ercolano (momof2gals mindspring.com)
To: waldorf-critics (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 00:32
Subject: for [name removed by request] -- temperments
| In a recent post, newcomer [name removed by request] says:
|
| ((As far as the Waldorf schools labeling
children, I think public schools do| far more harm
with labeling than Waldorf schools do. I am a
psychologist in| public schools ....))
|
| Lisa here: [name removed by request], you have an excellent point
regarding the way *all*
| schools, Steiner or not, "label" children in
various ways.
| You can speak from the point of view of a
mental health professional
| working in a public school system about how
children are labelled, or
| tracked, in such a system, and the harm you see
coming from it.
| I can speak only as a parent who has had
children in Waldorf school,
| public school and an independent, non-Waldorf
private school.
| And all I can say is: it is NOT the same
thing, the labelling done in
| Waldorf and the labelling done elsewhere.
| A couple of differences come to my mind,
particularly the fact that the
| so-called "labelling" done in public school and
non-Waldorf private schools
| (gifted and talented versus challenged, ADD,
ADHD, etc.) is presumably based
| on some kind of science based testing, medical
examinations, standardized
| educational tests with controls, and so on.
| You can fairly argue that too many children
nowadays are unfairly
| labeled as "hyperactive" or "attention deficit,"
and I would have to agree
| with you.
| But that is the result of lazy physicians
who are willing to just write
| a script to make what seems to be a problem go
away.
| Good physicians who actually practice sound
medicine are not willing to
| simply diagnose a child that way ... even when
parents ask for medications
| to control a child. (These are the same
physicians who refuse to give out
| antibiotics to parents whose children have a
simple cold or stuffy nose. I
| know those good doctors are out there; we go to
one.)
| The labelling at Waldorf is not based on any
sound or proven practice.
| It is based on the same medieval,
superstition-filled dogma that makes up
| the Anthroposophy as a whole. Sometime back,
someone on this list said that
| he had not heard of someone being "choleric" or
"phlegmatic" since reading
| Geoffrey Chaucer in college ... indeed, that is
how far back such tenets
| reach, and farther than that, even.
| Worse yet, the teachers who do the labelling
not only use those tags as
| simple ways to metaphorically describe a child;
they actually consider the
| child's physical characteristics when making the
determination between
| melancholic and choleric, and sanguine and
phlegmatic! (Melancholics are
| slim and walk stooped over, have a pallid
complexion ... phlegmatics tend to
| be chubby and clumsy and red in the face ...
etc.)
| Such utter and complete nonsense, and they
base SO much of how they
| treat your child on what "temperment" that child
is!
| [name removed by request], you mentioned in an earlier post
that your son has been labelled
| "choleric" and that "cholerics" are not valued
(or a similar word) at your
| school. I asked in a responding post how you
learned what your son's label
| was, and how your learned the school's
preference for the "sanguine" boys
| and girls.
| If you answered, pardon me for asking again.
But I would really be
| interested in hearing about your experience.
| -- Lisa
|
|
=================
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:38:12 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter is so right...
We must remember too, always, that claims of
SteinerĄs racism do not equal claims to SteinerĄs
encouragement to racist *hatred*.
What he says about racial differences developing
into spiritual unity may sound wholesome for some,
but it is racist nevertheless. Just like when
someone says - "IĄve got a lot of
Jewish/Black/Asian friends and I love them" - this
person may be expressing "love", but it is a
racist statement all the same.
BTW - donĄt take it personally, IĄve got a lot of
white friends and I love them (sarcasm). ;)
Clara
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Farrell (pmfar hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 02:04
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
| Dear Dottie,
| I'll do it. This quotation simply says that the
distinction between races
| will vanish. It does not repudiate other
statements that one race or other | is more
spiritually developed than some others.
| Let me come back to Steiner's criticism of
Einstein. Recall that Steiner | claimed to be able
to "see" the future. Why did he not make it clear
that | his criticism of Einstein was purely on
scientific grounds, given the | problem that he
lived to see in Germany? Why did he not clarify
his | criticism of Einstein given the antisemitic
attacks on Einstein?
| Peter Farrell
|
|
| )From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
| )Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
| )To: waldorf-critics topica.com
| )Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and
theosophy
| )Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
| )
| )
| )
| ) ) Rudolf Steiner 1909:
| )
| ) ) Therefore it is necessary, that that
movement that
| ) ) is called the
| ) ) anthroposophical movement, that prepares for
the
| ) ) sixth epoch in its
| ) ) basic character takes up especially this
task of
| ) ) getting rid of that
| ) ) which related to 'racial character' and to
unite
| ) ) people of all races, of
| ) ) all nations and in this way bridging this
| ) ) differentiation, these
| ) ) differences, this abyss, that exists between
| ) ) different groups of people.
| ) ) Because that which are old racial points of
view has
| ) ) a physical
| ) ) character, and that which will develop into
the
| ) ) future has a spiritual
| ) ) character.
| ) )
| )dottie -
| )
| )Now PLANS asks Anthroposophists and others who
support
| )Steiners teaching to read their quotes
regarding
| )racism and Steiner. So here is a quote by
Steiner
| )regarding how race is not to be brought into
the
| )future.
| )
| )For me this is the bottom line of why I read
all of
| )Steiners words from a spiritual point of view
and not
| )a physical. I believe it is the basis of his
| )understanding and foundation for Anthroposophy.
| )
| )How does anyone who believes undeniably that
Steiner
| )was a racist read this quote?
| )
| )dottie
| )
|
)_________________________________________________
_
| )Do You Yahoo!?
| )Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at
great prices
| )http://auctions.yahoo.com/
| )
| )
|
|
__________________________________________________
_______________________
| Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail
at http://www.hotmail.com.
|
|
=================
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:06:18 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Clara wrote:
)We must remember too, always, that claims of
)SteinerĄs racism do not equal claims to SteinerĄs
)encouragement to racist *hatred*.
It is do-gooder racism, help the natives improve themselves, etc.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:30:35 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
Diana Winters wrote:
) Sarina wrote:
)
) )Dodgeball was where one or several kids were "it," and they tried to
) )tag the others with the ball (by either throwing it at you or touching
) )you with it). If you got tagged by a ball you were "frozen", and the
) )only way out was to make a bridge with your body so someone else could
) )squiggle underneath to "release" you. Kind of like freeze tag or TV
) )tag...
)
) Ok, that makes 5 completely different versions I've heard. (A neighbor
) contributed one too.) I vaguely remember TV tag, but can't remember how we
) did that exactly. (Now, dodgeball may be controversial, but we *know* "TV
) tag" isn't allowed in Waldorf.) :)
Sharon:
Just a quick interjection here. Since what is already prepared in a child
from a previous life is transferred to his limbs, which are the part of him
in which life after death is being shaped in advance...I wonder if this has
anything to do with the sport issue, i.e. kicking? I remember hearing that a
human skull was once kicked around, in the distance past which is why soccer
was not allowed. A bit sacrilegious for the holy limbs I suppose. I'm not
very sporty so I never worried too much about this ban. I know that the head
and the limbs play a vital role in Anthro reincarnation dogma. Eurythmy
movement is a direct external connection to the supersensible world. Just
thinking....
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:28:05 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
I don't have any illusion that I or anyone else will ever change Sune's
perceptions here, but would like to try to boil some of this down for anyone
new who may be trying to figure out what the h*** Sune is talking about
here.
)It has been pointed out earlier on this list how simplified the concept
)of 'more' or 'less' 'spiritually developed' is in relation to races,
)when fished out of some printed lecture by Steiner.
Sune, though I know you will never see it, it doesn't matter how "complex"
the "more or less spiritually developed" stuff gets. Considering one race
more or less spiritually developed than another, whether in a "complex" way
or a "simple" way, is racist.
)In a number of postings Peter Staudenmaier has tried to make the curved
)geographical figure in lecture 4 on 'Folk Souls'
)(http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/Steiner/Folkspirits/Folkspirits-4.htm),
)being the first part of a more complex geographical pattern, stand out
)as a simple linear hierarchical figure in describing the relation
)between Africans, Asians and Europeans, with Africans at the bottom and
)Europeans at the top.
No matter how you finesse it, or how many details you give explaining the
thought process by which Steiner arrived at this configuation, Africans are
on the bottom of the diagram and Europeans are on the top.
(snip many more long tortured sentences explaining that it is all very
"complex")
(snip how Steiner thought Ethiopians were universal humans, or some such)
)Peter's clear admiration for 'brightness' makes him view Steiner's
)description of the development of more limited 'head based' observation
)and -thinking as more dominant in caucasians, as a description of
)something more 'advanced' and the description by Steiner in the )lectures
)as 'hierarchical'.
)From an anthroposophical perspective, being universal or all-human
)stands out as more centrally human than being simply 'bright'
Inside this attempt to make Peter sound like the one who is biased, Sune is
explaining that Steiner actually admired the Africans for not being
"head-dominated." (The old "noble savage" idea; they may not be as bright or
as capable of advanced thought as whites, but they have so many nice
qualities that make up for this: purity, simplicity, untaintedness.)
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:55:33 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: Hard Hitting News
jeff auen wrote:
) Michael,
)
) Chill out, man. We are not talking about a latent Idi Amin or Pol Pot or
) Jim Jones (People's Temple suicides) here.
Sharon:
We have every right to be furious, it is not ok to take children and
indoctrinate them without parental understanding. It is not ok to be deceptive.
People's lives are being irreversibly altered because of the Waldorf deception
and it needs to stop at once. The deception is hurting people.
) Jeff:
) Admins and teachers should have a straightforward philosophy white paper
) explaining clearly the basics including the AP connection. And the golden
) rule as taught to me in 1974, don't teach AP. Maybe this just could not be
) avoided.
)
Sharon:
Yes, thank you Jeff, they should have a white paper policy. Unfortunately, the
curriculum *is Anthroposophy in action* so it would be pointless to say "don't
teach it" as a golden rule......By the way.... 500 years before Christ,
Confucius wrote: *Don't* do to others what you would not have them do to you".
I prefer this to Christ's Golden Rule because it avoids the harm altogether
with the words "DON'T do".
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:14:29 -0700
From: soma (soma mwt.net)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
) )From an anthroposophical perspective, being universal or all-human
) stands out as more centrally human than being simply 'bright', the last
) being one of the filtering colours in the mental glasses though which
) Peter views the world.
Steiner: "Let us at least accept as reasonable in the domain of spirit what
seems to us to be right in the domain of nature! Is the perfect spirit to have
the same antecedents as the imperfect one? Does a Goethe have the same
antecedents as any hottentot? The antecedents of an ape are as unlike those of
a fish as are the antecedents of Goethe's spirit unlike those of a savage. The
spiritual ancestry of Goethe's spirit is a different one from that of a savage.
The spirit has evolved as has the body. The spirit in Goethe has more
progenitors than the one in a savage. Let us take the doctrine of reincarnation
in this sense and we shall no longer find it unscientific". [P 44, Christianity
as Mystical Fact, Rudolf Steiner]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:49:52 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Looking at my own earlier post and realizing Sune's nonsense needs to be
boiled down further, to this:
)Steiner's description of the development of more limited 'head based'
)observation and -thinking as more dominant in caucasians
The base of the problem is that this isn't true. It is amazing to be
debating among educated people in 2001 whether Caucasians are more naturally
inclined to "head-based thinking" than, say, Ethiopians.
If you believe something like "whites are better at head-based thinking,"
then it makes sense you will be impressed by elaborate theories that purport
to explain these differences. "Spiritual" differences make as good sense as
any other, I suppose.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:38:20 -0700
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: Objective Validity of Steiner's observations
On 24 Apr 2001, at 2:05, Peter Farrell wrote:
) Steve:
) )But let's assume for the moment that they are real, and
) )that there is a big ol' non-material universe out there populated by all
) )the various types of spooks, saints, gods, fairies, gnomes, angels,
) )succubi, and so on. And let's assume that Steiner came up with a good,
) )reliable system for objectively observing the spirit realm.
)
) OK. Let's add to this assumption. Steiner was honest, and trained in
) science and philosophy. I think these assumption will be readily agreed to
) by Anthroposophists. Now having access to this "big ol' non-material
) universe" he makes various statements. These statements subsequently turn
) out to be wrong. What alternatives do we have.
If we're assuming that spirits are real, that Steiner was able to observe
them objectively, that he was honest, and that he was trained in science
and philosophy, then we might also assume that his observations of the
spirit realm were accurate. As there is no way to refute one's statements
about the spirit realm, we might as well assume that.
But he made statements about material reality that turned out to be wrong.
If our other assumptions are accurate, then the only reasonable
conclusion is that observing the spirit realm is not an accurate or
reliable way to get information about the material world.
This does not necessarily mean that the spirits lied to Steiner, because I
don't know if his "knowledge" of the material world came from statements
made by spirits, or from assumptions that he made about how the spirit
realm correlates with the physical realm. If the former, then the spirits
lied. If the latter, then Steiner's assumptions about how the spirit
realm relates to the material realm were faulty.
) Let's examine the assumptions. Honest, we are in big trouble here if all
) the other assumptions are correct.
Yes, it is likely that some of our underlying assumptions are wrong:
) Trained in science and philosophy. There seems to be independent
) evidence that this is true.
Right. But our other assumptions are not testable:
That the non-material universe exists;
That Anthroposophy is a reliable method for observing that universe;
That Steiner was honest.
) So it must be that either the non-material universe doesn't exist, or
) the spirits in the non material univers told the good Dr Steiner some
) fibs and no doubt had a bit of a chuckle, and/or Steiner was dishonest.
Either that, or Steiner's observations were not objective and reliable,
i.e., Anthroposophy is not a valuable or reliable method for observing the
spirit world. Merely being trained in science and philosophy is no
guarantee that one's observations are correct, particularly where the
object being observed is ambiguous in some way. If a spirit world exists,
it would have to be quite ambiguous to account for the wide variety in the
descriptions that various mystics have produced over the centuries.
The other possibility is that Steiner was correct, and so-called
"materialist science" is a faulty method for studying the physical world.
But as I said, this is an irrational position. Nevertheless, it is
extremely common. It may well be that the majority of the people think
that religion and/or metaphysics are more accurate sources of information
about the physical world than science is.
Personally, I get most of my information about the latest scientific
findings from the Weekly World News. Do you get that in Australia?
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Peter wrote -
) Thanks Dottie,
) The difficulty is how do you discuss the qualites of
) Steiner with someone
) who does believe he is beyond reproach, and who will
) not interpret statement
) of Steiner's in any way that threatens this view.
) Over several years I have
) seen a lot of this. It has coloured the way I argue
) on this list.
) Having said that I really do believe Steiner was
) either dishonest or crazy.
) I don't think it is possible to interpret his
) scientific statements in any
) other way given his education.
) Sincerely, Peter
)
) dottie -
Okay, I can respect that. Obviously it is different
than how I see it but to a certain point I can
understand people thinking of him as crazy. These
things that he said were pretty far out for many
people. And then for many others they were right on.
thanks Peter,
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
--- Clara Paix (paixs yahoo.com.br) wrote:
) ) What he says about racial differences developing
) into spiritual unity may sound wholesome for some,
) but it is racist nevertheless. Just like when
) someone says - "IĄve got a lot of
) Jewish/Black/Asian friends and I love them" - this
) person may be expressing "love", but it is a
) racist statement all the same.
)
dottie -
Then that would mean when someone from the list says
"I helped a friends child who is of mixed race"?, is
racist also? That was said on this list by a PLANS
person? (no disrespect meant towards the person who
said this, btw)
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
--- Diana Winters (winters_diana hotmail.com) wrote:
)
) Clara wrote:
) )We must remember too, always, that claims of
) )SteinerĄs racism do not equal claims to SteinerĄs
) )encouragement to racist *hatred*.
)
Diana -
) It is do-gooder racism, help the natives improve
) themselves, etc.
)
dottie -
Oh how ugly!
dottie
_________________________________________________________________
) Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
) http://explorer.msn.com
)
)
)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: dottie zold (dottie_z yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Diana -
) Sune, though I know you will never see it, it
) doesn't matter how "complex"
) the "more or less spiritually developed" stuff gets.
)
dottie -
Another thing that PLANS has in common with what they
say they do not like about Anthroposophists.
: Let me judge you because you do not see it my way.
Hello, is anyone home? Talk about unconscious
behavior. Let me do what I berate you for
doing...jeez! Oh I get it , its a debate so you get to
be that way. Oh okay.
dottie
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:31:19 -0700
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Sports
)Sharon:
)Just a quick interjection here. Since what is already prepared in a child
)from a previous life is transferred to his limbs, which are the part of him
)in which life after death is being shaped in advance...I wonder if this has
)anything to do with the sport issue, i.e. kicking? I remember hearing that a
)human skull was once kicked around, in the distance past which is why soccer
)was not allowed. A bit sacrilegious for the holy limbs I suppose. I'm not
)very sporty so I never worried too much about this ban. I know that the head
)and the limbs play a vital role in Anthro reincarnation dogma. Eurythmy
)movement is a direct external connection to the supersensible world. Just
)thinking....
)
Debra:
Awhile back, Dan posted this from the SJU list. It may be well timed to
re-post this now.
***
[From Albert Magnusen, April 19, 1999]
Steiner did have quite a bit to say about sports. One of the most
poinant things that he said was that " the excessive pursuit of sport is
Darwinism in action." By that he meant that when sport becomes an
obsession, which it is today, especially in most Western countries, and,
frankly nearly in all "3rd World" countries, too, it leads to the
beastialization of the human being. It emphasizes the physical
aspects--strength, reaction, muscle-mass, agility, etc.--and leaves the
effect on the soul entirely out of the picture. Steiner was emphatic
about the effect of movement upon the developing soul. That is why
movement is so important in the lower grades in Waldorf Schools. It is
the basis of all learning--but it is ensouled, rhythmic movement,
permeated with the imagination and ideals that are fitting to the
nobility of the human spirit.
[Got that? The way -we- do it is -holy-, the way others do it is
"bestialization".]
In fact he was so concerned about it that he indicated that sports
would, given the increasing devotion of its adherents, take the place of
religion. That in as much as people had lost sight of the spiritual
world, that is to say, of their own spirits and souls, of their earthly
destinies and tasks and, ultimately, the source of their Beings , and
had become thoroughly enmeshed in the delusion of the exclusivity of the
material world in life, they would replace it with a caricature or many
caricatures in their shadow existence. The heroes that are held up for
children today by adults are a far cry from the mythic heroes of past
cultures.
[The mythic heroes of past cultures were often genocidal maniacs.
Magnusen has a very Romantic view of the past.]
The ideals that are vaunted before youth in the images on TV
and the screen as well as those on the playing field denigrate the high
destiny and heritage of humanity. One could say that there is no moral,
no spiritual ideaI. Ultimately, repeated by player after player, coach
after coach, it is survival of the fittest. Such is a symptom of the
materialistic delusion and attendant egotism of our times.
[He ignores the American cultural convention that sports heroes are
supposed to act as role models for youth, the hard work that most do
to be just that, and the valuable moral lessons when sports heroes
fall from public grace because of personal failings.]
Still and all, Steiner did express that sports had their place,
especially for those who experienced the soul-killing drudgery of factory
work, but he warned against mere physical activity for its own sake,
hence the development of Bothmer gymnastics versus mechanical
calesthenics, hence the development of Eurythmy which brings to bear in
human movement, life-forces and soul-gestures, so that the mechanics are
motivated and permeated by the spirit.
[Bothmer gymnastics is a system used only in Waldorf. I'd like to
know more about it.]
People need to realize that Waldorf Education is not simply a warm,
loving, caring, artsy alternative to modern pedagogy. It is the midwife
to higher consciousness, to the embryonic Imaginative Clairvoyance that
is beginning to bud in human beings after a long, agonizing (but
necessary) dark night of the soul that hidden the face of the Divine for
centuries.
[Priceless! Thank you for revealing the true religious nature of
Waldorf education. "The midwife to higher consciousness" goes into my
quotations database.]
There is nothing in human life that does not have spiritual
import and consequences, that either leads the soul heavenward or
earthward, and thus all things, including sports and games, must be
scrutinized in that regard.
[Ignoring the "heavenward or earthward" part, I agree with this. "We
have no art, we do everything as well as we can."]
Rudolf Kischnic, Jamin McMillan, and more recently, Kim
Brooking-Payne, have taught and/or written on the subject. I highly
recommend their books to any serious student or concerned parent.
They variously address the nature of games, martial arts, ballet and
so forth from the point of view of its expression of and effect upon
the human soul.
[Anybody familiar with these authors, can you summarize?]
Every single thing that we do--in work, sport, play, even fashion,
etc.--is a symptom of the soul's condition and longing. Think
esoterically.
Warmly,
Albert
[posted by Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:48:22 -0700
From: "jeff auen" (pacbay home.com)
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism and science ?
Steve:Would you please post examples of scientific errors made by Steiner
that
) at least some Anthroposophists have acknowledged to be erroneous?
Here are some:
Atoms don't exist and are a materialistic and perceptual fantasy.
The sun is empty space not a semi-solid gaseous body.
The heart is not a pump but a "large value"- the forces of the etheric and
astral body pump the blood not the heart.
The change of teeth has great significance for intellectual development (but
not all kids show this)
Hair and eye color indicate evolutionary intelligence
There are organs in brain and heart that will have future evolutionary
function but are not detectable now
Sexual procreation as we know it know will end in several thousands of years
and procreation will take place in a different manner?
Mankind will control the magnetic fields of the earth in several hundred
years/or thousand years and create a new energy sources, control the
weather, etc.
Man has the forces within to heal or correct the onset or contnuation of
serious illnesses like cancer
These and other statements seem unscientific or fantastic but as I have seen
from discussions there may be a different vantage point to evaluate them, if
someone is open and willing to. Some AP who are scientists have a hard time
with several of the first ones.
If these statements are taken out of context, they may seem ridiculous and
actually untrue in some cases. Some fly in the face of evidence and all
must be presented not as fact but as an assertion to be proved or researched
further. Nevertheless, I have seen too much in life and I try hard not to
make closed ended judgements about anything unless it is really crazy like
tomorrow all gravity on earth will cease for 1 hour; or if I stick a
screwdriver through my hand it will not hurt but .................. there
are ecstatics in India who ritually poke all sorts of instruments, knives,
metal sticks, etc. through their necks, rib and side flesh, cheeks, etc.
feel no pain and little or no blood flow from wounds. See what I mean, Not
everything is false or not possible on face value. For those skeptics out
there, I have seen this phenomena from three feet away with no pain or blood
present as 6 inch thick needle like a chopstick was pushed through a
friend's hand as he demonstrated the power of hypnosis and mind control over
the autonomic functions of the body. I have also seen film footage of the
Indian ritualists as they were filmed pushing a variety of instruments
through parts of their body without wincing or backing off. I have also seen
many martial art demonstrations (no breaking soft wood chunks) where great
injury should have occurred eg. as a spear with sharp point was pressed full
force into the soft tissue of the throat with no penetration or blood or
enormous weight was applied to the chest with no collapse or injury.
Not something to introduce to our kids as a class experiment, I would say.
Jeff
Original Message -----
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Religion and Mysticism
) On 20 Apr 2001, at 10:08, jeff auen wrote:
)
) ) On many occasions we have seen where [Steiner] made scientific errors
)
) Jeff,
)
) )
) Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
) "There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
) that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
) http://www.premofine.com
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:12:26 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Dottie wrote:
| --- Clara Paix (paixs yahoo.com.br) wrote:
| ) ) What he says about racial differences
developing
| ) into spiritual unity may sound wholesome for
some,
| ) but it is racist nevertheless. Just like when
| ) someone says - "IĄve got a lot of
| ) Jewish/Black/Asian friends and I love them" -
this
| ) person may be expressing "love", but it is a
| ) racist statement all the same.
| )
| dottie:
|
| Then that would mean when someone from the list
says
| "I helped a friends child who is of mixed
race"?, is
| racist also? That was said on this list by a
PLANS
| person? (no disrespect meant towards the person
who
| said this, btw)
|
Clara here:
I canĄt answer that - this is so out of the blue.
I think maybe if you sent the original quote?
However, straight on - no it does not sound
necessarily racist. It might have been that, for
example, the person helped a child of mixed race
in a situation in which being of mixed race was a
relevant information, so this is why it was
referred to.
Whereas in my example - if you are saying you love
your friends, the information re: their race would
seem to me to be irrelevant. See what I mean.
So - no, the mere mention of the word 'race' in a
given statement is not the issue here.
Same as in: if I say
"Imagine this! My friend X, who is black, had a
great time vacationing in South Africa in the
80Ąs."
-- doesnĄt sound racist; what is implyed is, the
speaker would expect the friend to experience
difficult situations in that country at that time.
Perfectly logical.
whereas:
"Imagine this! My friend X, who is black, is great
at mathematics".
--- sounds racist to me; what is implyed is, the
speaker would expect the friend to experience
difficulty with mathmatics due to being black.
Perfectly ilogical.
I donĄt even know why IĄm taking the trouble to
write this. It is so OBVIOUS.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:14:52 -0300
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
| --- Diana Winters (winters_diana hotmail.com)
wrote:
| )
| ) Clara wrote:
| ) )We must remember too, always, that claims of
| ) )SteinerĄs racism do not equal claims to
SteinerĄs
| ) )encouragement to racist *hatred*.
| )
| Diana -
| ) It is do-gooder racism, help the natives
improve
| ) themselves, etc.
|
| dottie:
|
| Oh how ugly!
|
Clara:
I think you were trying to be ironical there
Dottie?
If so - YES, IT IS, VERY UGLY !!!
Tell me why you think it is not. Please do. I
canĄt even believe IĄve read this, on a list like
this, in the year 2001.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:42:03 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: more on anthroposophy and theosophy
Diana Winters wrote:
Me [Sune]:
) )In a number of postings Peter Staudenmaier has tried to make the curved
) )geographical figure in lecture 4 on 'Folk Souls'
) )(http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/Steiner/Folkspirits/Folkspirits-4.htm),
) )being the first part of a more complex geographical pattern, stand out
) )as a simple linear hierarchical figure in describing the relation
) )between Africans, Asians and Europeans, with Africans at the bottom and
) )Europeans at the top.
Diana:
) No matter how you finesse it, or how many details you give explaining the
) thought process by which Steiner arrived at this configuation, Africans are
) on the bottom of the diagram and Europeans are on the top.
Your - I think - very simple unthinking comment quoted above points to
your not having read the lecture or tried to understand what he is
talking about.
In general, Steiner's lectures or lecture series are not built like
Lego-houses. They are developed like paintings, slowly building a
picture by painting parts of it; some basic features in general outline,
some details here, some there, layer by layer building the picture, only
possible to see in full if you follow its build-up in its totality.
What Peter repeatedly has depicted as a *principal* 'hierarchical'
picture of the relation between 'Africans', 'Asians' and 'Europeans'
*is* not a principal hierarchical picture. It is the beginning of a
*geographical* picture as clearly can be seen from the actual figure.
Your comment that Africans are 'on the bottom' of the diagram and
Europeans 'on the top', simply repeating what Peter has written, as an
implied argument of Steiner's 'racism' implicitly makes mainly all the
map constructors of the worl