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 w