return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Charlie...?
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
More to Charlie et al.
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Charlie...?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Membership of Association for Bio-Dynamic Agriculture
incompatible with racist
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:55:10 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C2B0AA.5317E900
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
A late response to Charlie.
Charlie said (on the Jews):
)Any people that haven't had a homeland for nearly two thousand
years yet still remain a distinct group must )have very strong
cultural bonds, they must have strong blood ties, to put it in
Steiner's terms.
But Steiner's terms are racist, Charlie - they're not just
descriptive or neutral. Steiner here equates "strong cultural bonds"
with "strong blood ties" and you don't remark on this but merely
repeat it. It's not correct, Charlie; our cultural ties are not based
on our blood.
)I think he meant the term "Jewry" to be a way of thinking that
is looking backwards, back to the ancestors, )back to the land of
ones fathers.
Okay, #1) is this "looking back" a blood phenomenon, or do Jews
"look back" at various experiences that are worth looking back on?
And #2) what is wrong with "looking back" that it would be a thing to
be rooted out? Some would argue that a lot more, not less, looking
back is called for.
)And it isn't totally inconceivable that he wasn't just speaking
of Jews in this quote.
This works if you think you can interpret words to have any
meaning you like. Normally the term "Jews" does not include non-Jews.
)I certainly don't think that he meant that Jews had no right to exist.
Not Jews, but Jewry. (Well, Peter has argued that Steiner did
indeed mean Jews should not exist; but I would like to point out that
even if one takes "Jewry" to mean a cultural/religious phenomenon
rather than persons to be eliminated, this is still an appalling
statement.) Though I don't think Steiner thought Jews should be
killed, it's hard to say what he thought Jews actually ought to do
about their own obsoleteness, or (a more dangerous line of thought)
what anyone else ought to do about it. I recall a Steiner defender
here once saying that Steiner didn't think anything should be done,
the Jews would have to "want to change" on their own. I suppose they
could renounce their beliefs and cultural heritage, not call
themselves Jews anymore. Or would it be enough if they would just
stop "looking back"? Would you be comfortable, Charlie, with that
interpretion of what Jews ought to do to rid the world of "Jewry" -
giving you the benefit of the doubt that I'm sure you don't !
think anyone *else* should try to rid the world of Jewry? Perhaps you
feel that to simply exhort them to stop "looking back" is an
innocuous thing, yet what we are really talking about, when we ask a
people to stop "looking back," or we advise them that they are
"looking back" more than the rest of us do or should, is scary.
)According to Steiner, we have paid the price of "head thinking"
by forfeiting a broader consciousness.
This is *always* where anthroposophists go with this one. The
issue is not about "head thinking" and whether it is good or bad.
(Aside from what a ridiculous idea that is.) The issue is ascribing a
particular talent or preference for head thinking *or any quality or
talent* to a *particular* group on the basis of their race or skin
color. This issue doesn't often take off here. You can't get
anthroposophists to discuss it. It is either self-evident to them
that such racial categorizations are accurate or plausible, and
because it is as obvious to them as any natural phenomenon, like the
sun is hot and snow is cold, they can't address challenges to this
idea. Or they (I suspect) often do realize this is fallacious, and
the basis of racism, and they can't defend it so they deflect in this
manner, so the discussion turns to a non-topic like what is good or
bad about "head thinking." (Anthroposophists even, sometimes, seem to
feel they have turned the tables and revealed preju!
dice on the part of the critics, who are accused triumphantly of
having an indefensible preference - and perhaps it is even a sort of
reverse racism! - for such dubious things as "head thinking.")
)Such a relationship with the outside world is possible because
the Europeans have a narrow, sense bound )intellect.
Charlie, what complete hide-bound nonsense. There is hardly a way
to respond to such inanity. Do you believe it is true, that Europeans
have a "narrow sense bound intellect"?
)It can only be said that this proves he thought of Europeans as
superior if he thought of this attribute as superior )to a broader
clairvoyant vision.
See fallacy pointed out above. It is not about which type of
intellect is superior (a childish notion in itself; always the
obsession with *ranking* things), it is about this ridiculous and
pathetic notion that *based on race* you or an African or an
aborigine have, inherently, different kinds of intellectual
capacities or inclinations. Educate yourself! This is incorrect.
These are simply old racial prejudices that education is supposed to
have helped us all outgrow in this global day and age.
)I would agree that the culture of the native American is dying,
just as I would say the Scottish clans are dead.
It is not about whether a culture is dying. It is about whether a
spiritual world above or beyond this one dictates these events.
Historical realities or karmic ones? So much is made of the karmic
necessities, anthroposophists read Steiner and say, "Yes! Yes!" to
each other, yet then the bedrock philosophy of karmic necessity is
denied, anthroposophists pretend not even to understand the
distinction, and say mildly, "But the culture of the native American
*is* dying," as if we are arguing about what anyone can see looking
out their window as world events go by - as if Steiner had merely
been making descriptive, historical statements about various
cultures, rather than preaching about spiritual cause and effects.
The distinction is the very basis of anthroposophy.
The only way you get out of the "necessity," the "karmic" thing,
is then to say that sometimes there are mistakes in karma, wrinkles
in the fabric of karma perhaps, abnormal spirits and such, people or
races who aren't with the karmic program (and then, these deserve
rebuke for not getting out of the way fast enough when their mission
is supposed to be over, like the Jews).
)I think that it's a fact that the modern world is, now and in
the foreseeable future, the way it is because of the )creativity of
whites.
Come on Charlie. The *innate* creativity of whites? Creativity
handed down as their task and role by the Spirits of Whatever (the
Age, the Times or whatever it is) - or whites' creativity has
flourished because we subjugated people who got in our way by force?
(Not to mention sometimes taking credit for ideas or inventions that
weren't ours.) Charlie, Steiner's point is to *explain* such facts of
the modern world - and the answer is always spiritual or karmic
necessity - you can't defendthese ideas simply by pointing out that
whites are, in fact, largely in control.
This is my central frustration in arguing with anthroposophists -
they deny the basis of their own philosophy, which is that a
spiritual reality determines and directs human affairs; karma
determines everything. Then we ask, "So karma determines that, for
instance, Native Americans should die out?" and they reply, "But
Native American culture *is* dying out - haven't you noticed?" as if
it were purely descriptive after all, and not a theory of spiritual
causes.
)And thus, through the mixing of blood, is born the Western sense
bound intellect, lacking in clairvoyance.
So you buy that "mixing of blood" has caused what Steiner calls
the "evolution of consciousness"? I debunked this recently. Not that
it requires debunking, being flagrantly idiotic.
)I notice from the quote that he mentions history and he mentions
the present, there is no mention of the future.
Oh yes, the future we are supposedly moving toward where Steiner
says race will no longer matter. I recently looked at the Rosicrucian
Wisdom lectures - a footnote states that while Steiner says we are
evolving past racial distinctions in the next epoch, and this has
normally been translated as being "thousands" or years in the future,
Steiner's "extant notes" actually say that it is "millions" of years
in the future! (And this is Steiner's translators; not critics.)
)He is not talking here about the individual spiritual element
(which he views as now becoming the most )important element). To
understand all that is spiritual (i.e. racial, national, family and
individual spirit) we need to )understand how the individual spirit
develops out of the group spirit. This is what I take him to mean
here.
Yes, I agree that's what he means. And it's preposterous,
Charlie. Individuals' spirits don't develop out of their "group
spirits" from Lemuria or wherever.
)So the races get their different attributes as a gift from the
higher worlds.
Yes, that's Steiner racial theory in a nutshell, and it is
repulsive. Please take this "gift" and mark it "Return to sender."
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:59:14 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: More to Charlie et al.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C2B0AA.E4AF0740
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I wrote to Charlie:
)This is my central frustration in arguing with anthroposophists -
they deny the basis of their own philosophy, which is that )a
spiritual reality determines and directs human affairs; karma
determines everything. Then we ask, "So karma )determines that, for
instance, Native Americans should die out?" and they reply, "But
Native American culture *is* dying )out - haven't you noticed?" as if
it were purely descriptive after all, and not a theory of spiritual
causes.
Later it dawned on me - if you believe things happen because they are
meant to happen, then whatever did happen, is seen as proof of what
is meant to happen. It's a tautology yet with its own simple and
unassailable internal logic. There will never be any arguing with it.
When they point to historical events as proof of karma, they *are*
defending their theory, because they believe historical events are
karma.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:26:11 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3124178772_724640_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Charlie wrote:
)I think that it's a fact that the modern world is, now and in the foreseeable
future, the way it is because of the )creativity of whites.
Sharon: The only way that statement could be considered accurate is if you
count colonialism and slavery as "creativity of whites". Here's another book
recommendation for you Charlie-- "The Africa That Never Was: Four Centuries
of British Writing about Africa". Dorothy Hammond and Alta Jablo will show
you how the content of British writing changed drastically during the slave
trade in the 18th century. How we've all been taught to think racist
nonsense because people were trying to defend the slave trade and
colonization. In order to get away with this brutality, a steady stream of
degrading stereotypes of Africa and Africans have trickled into our minds
through journalism, cinema, anthropology, missionary work, humanitarian
activities, novels, pro-slavery pamphlets, jokes, etc. Enslavement of people
with dark complexions, (from eons in a hot climate), became not only
justifiable, but desirable. In many Europeans' minds, slavery became
African's salvation. Our perception problem was a deliberate *invention*
devised to facilitate the Atlantic slave trade and colonization of Africa by
Europe from around *1500 CE*. (See Chinua Achebe's poems and essay in
"Another Africa").
A guy called Joseph Conrad went to the Congo and wrote a book called "Heart
of Darkness". Steiner and Conrad virtually quote each other because they
were drawing from the same stereotypes. Conrad devised a hierarchical order
of souls for the characters in his book. Africans are of course at the
bottom with "rudimentary souls". At the top are Europeans. And you Charlie
virtually quote Conrad when you say Africans are "full of rhythm". I'm
going to quote a bit of Conrad's poisonous writing from 1917:
Conrad: And between whiles I had to look after the savage who was fireman.
He was an improved specimen; he could fire up a vertical boiler. He was
there below me and, upon my word, to look at him was as edifying as seeing a
dog in a parody of breeches and a feather hat walking on his hind legs. A
few months of training had done for that really fine chap. He squinted at
the steam-gauge and at the water-gauge with an evident effort of
intrepidity--and he had filed teeth too, the poor devil, and the wool of his
pate shaved into queer patterns, and three ornamental scars on each of his
cheeks. He ought to have been clapping his hands and stamping his feet on
the bank, instead of which he was hard at work, a thrall to strange
witchcraft, full of improving knowledge" (38-39).
Sharon: When you think of Africa Charlie, always remember that the ancient
Greeks appreciated Africa. They would journey there to study. The ancient
Egyptians also appreciated their fellow African neighbors. Your perception
of Africa is a false invention because you have been brainwashed by
literature (including Steiner's work) designed to make you think that Africa
has not been discovered yet, and that nothing good has ever happened there,
that you are superior because your complexion is light.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:13:24 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Membership of Association for Bio-Dynamic Agriculture
incompatible with racist organisations
Copyright 2002 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved.
The following material may be republished without the prior consent
of News Network Anthroposophy. News Network Anthroposophy does,
however, require acknowledgement of the source and, if provided, the
author of the material.
+ + + + +
NNA-N E W S
Membership of Association for Bio-Dynamic Agriculture incompatible
with racist organisations
Olten, 31 December (NNA) - Membership of or cooperation with racist
organisations is incompatible with membership of the Swiss
Association for Bio-Dynamic Agriculture (Demeter). This was confirmed
by the members' meeting on 4 December in Olten, Switzerland.
According to a report by the Swiss Anthroposophical Media Centre, the
Demeter farmers attending the meeting adopted amendments to the
statutes of the organisation following a lecture on right-wing
extremism and its history in National Socialism by the historian and
archivist at the Goetheanum, Uwe Werner.
The amendments define bio-dynamic agriculture as a "worldwide
movement" which is open to all people guided by the ideals of
"freedom and human dignity". Membership of the Association expressly
requires acceptance of the "purpose and objectives" of the
Association.
The contract between the Association and bio-dynamic farmers was also
amended by a large majority to reflect the principle that
"cooperation with or membership of racist organisations" is not
compatible with membership of the Association. This amendment, which
lays down new rules for membership, is the result of events on 1
August, the Swiss national day, when the Swiss right-wing extremist
party PNOS organised an event on a bio-dynamic farm near Basle.
This led to the expulsion of the acting PNOS treasurer, Hans
Krattiger, from the General Anthroposophical Society (GAS) and the
Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland in October when the GAS
executive council became aware of Krattiger's membership of PNOS as
well as of the anthroposophical societies through media reports.
ENDS
+ + + + +
Item reference number: N021231-01EN
Date: 31 December 2002
More NNA reports at: http://www.nna-news.org/content/
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 928
-- Topica Digest --
Re: religion and mental illness - was Re: revisionism and Schizophrenia
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: religion and mental illness - was Re: revisionism and
Schizophrenia
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Charlie?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Myths
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Re: Charlie...?
By willow.firesong creative-interweb.com
Re: Myths
By dan dandugan.com
Re: the pain of facing up to the abuse of children - was re: hurtful
tone
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 08:54:50 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: religion and mental illness - was Re: revisionism and
Schizophrenia
Willow and I were talking, a week or so ago, about whether a person can be
determined sane or not based on religious views . . . I don't think we were
disagreeing, Willow, I was kind of thinking aloud about the "metaphysical"
basis of this. From the mental health perspective, I've agreed with you that
these distinctions are the only practical basis for deciding whether a
person suffers some sort of delusion, or is simply one of millions sharing
beliefs about "unprovable" happenings. It seems to me that mental health
practitioners do not make the distinction on the metaphysical basis, but on
socially constructed agreements about when and where it is okay to dispense
with the metaphysics.
II f you consider *merely* the metaphysical basis, there are no better
grounds for believing wild impossible stuff happened "long ago in an
irretrievable past" than believing it happened yesterday (and most religions
assert that miraculous events will also occur in the - usually distant -
future, like the Second Coming - or reproduction via the larynx per
Steiner). Most people don't have trouble with the metaphysics of this, as
long as it is at a comfortable distance from daily reality. It becomes
largely a matter of social consensus or social role - the pastor can preach
from the pulpit on Sunday morning about miraculous and amazing events in a
distant past or future, but the rest of us can't start claiming God gave us,
directly, personal knowledge of such things - or that the miraculous event
is actually next Tuesday - or people start to question our sanity.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 09:42:59 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: religion and mental illness - was Re: revisionism and
Schizophrenia
on 1/1/03 5:54 AM, Diana Winters at Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net wrote:
)
) II f you consider *merely* the metaphysical basis, there are no better
) grounds for believing wild impossible stuff happened "long ago in an
) irretrievable past" than believing it happened yesterday (and most religions
) assert that miraculous events will also occur in the - usually distant -
) future, like the Second Coming - or reproduction via the larynx per
) Steiner). Most people don't have trouble with the metaphysics of this, as
) long as it is at a comfortable distance from daily reality. It becomes
) largely a matter of social consensus or social role - the pastor can preach
) from the pulpit on Sunday morning about miraculous and amazing events in a
) distant past or future, but the rest of us can't start claiming God gave us,
) directly, personal knowledge of such things - or that the miraculous event
) is actually next Tuesday - or people start to question our sanity.
Sharon: I suppose it depends on the mental health practitioner's worldview.
Most religions allow for miracles to happen in the present as well. I love
to watch TV evangelists on telly get up to some pretty wild stuff, like
laying hands on people to heal them. I bet many people would not think the
evangelists are insane. Most people would just think, "oh it's their
beliefs."
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 12:03:40 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Charlie?
) Charlie: I think that it's a fact that the modern world is, now and in the
) foreseeable future, the way it is because of the creativity of whites.
Sharon: Three individuals--a child and two adults--walked across the East
African pan 3 million years ago towards the Serengeti plains, leaving a
trail of footprints petrified in mud. By the 1970s they were walking on the
moon.
The modern world is the way that it is now because groups of modern humans
left Africa 100,000 years ago, emigrating to the rest of the world. Humanity
evolved in Africa, and we owe everything to our early ancestors there. We
have everything in common with Africans--they got to Europe 30,000 years
ago.
Unless of course you are an Anthroposophist and believe that "savages" are
devolving toward apes because Ahriman thwarted the cosmic plan to have
humans develop "beautiful" bodies and become white-skinned; and that Manu
led a group of "spiritually advanced" humans (the ancient Aryans) out of the
Atlantis flood which occurred somewhere in the region of present day
Ireland.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 19:36:30 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: Myths
mysplum wrote:
) By the 1970s they were walking on the
) moon.
); and that Manu
) led a group of "spiritually advanced" humans (the ancient Aryans) out of
) the
) Atlantis flood which occurred somewhere in the region of present day
) Ireland.
Klaudia:
What's similar with US-people and arabs? Neither has never walked on the
moon.
It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
landed the moon, it is still there.
Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
believable, I prefer Atlantis.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 14:33:13 +1030
From: Willow Firesong (Willow.Firesong creative-interweb.com)
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
)on 12/18/02 6:55 PM, charles morrison at charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk
)wrote:
)Charlie:
)I do think that Steiner's words, as quoted, are by definition racist. But
)I suppose if I'm honest, some of my views are also by definition racist.
)In my mind blacks of African descent conjure up words like athletic, full
)of rhythm; I associate native Americans with wisdom, Chinese with humility
)and happy natures. I know that I am making generalisations and I wouldn't
)use this as a basis for judging individuals, but I still can't help
)feeling that there is some truth behind it.
)
)Sharon: Now you're being refreshingly honest. So many people in our
)society (and yours) have this kind of thinking engrained in them. We must
)fight against this kind of thinking Charlie.
Willow:
After all, this *is* itself *racist* thinking. You are thinking "in terms
of race", which is basically what racist means. You are treating the race
as a characteristic innate to the individual, and saying that they would
have the characteristics that you ascribe to the race *regardless of where
they were born and raised and in what way and culture they were
raised*. To believe in these stereotypes and ascribe them to race is to be
racist. You may not see it that way, as you don't see yourself as treating
one race better than another - but you *discriminate* between them. It's a
revealing word, "discrimination" - it means "the act of, or capacity for,
distinguishing between". In other words, you are categorizing on the basis
of race - and that is what discrimination means, using a characteristic to
tell the difference between two things.
The well-trained palate may be able, for instance, to "discriminate"
between two fine wines - the owner of that palate may believe the wines to
be of equal quality, but they can tell the difference between them, and
they might serve one with dessert and the other with red meat, according to
the stereotypes associated with the category in which that discriminating
palate has placed them. In such a context, our capacity for discrimination
serves a purpose.
But in the process, the individual grape's identity has been lost, subsumed
into group membership in the vintage. To treat human beings as if they
were as easily categorized by their "vintage" is a very different
thing. We do not develop as individuals if we mire ourselves in thinking
that individuals are fully defined by the groups in which they are members
by accident of birth. To choose to do so is to ignore and devalue our
capacity for individual growth and development, and with it our individual
worth. Furthermore, in a very real way, to discriminate on the basis of
race is to be unable to tell apart the individuals within that race, for
one's perception of them does not extend to their individuality, only to
the race by which one has categorized them. This is the source of the
mindset to which "they" *really do* "all look alike" - because the person
is unable to perceive the individuals in front of their face, seeing only
their races.
)Charlie: On the TV recently I watched a choir of black African children
)performing. I loved the way that each of them were moving beautifully with
)the music. Every child seemed oblivious to those around them as they each
)moved naturally to the music in their own individual way, but the total
)effect was what I can only describe as harmonious chaos. I've watched
)choirs of Scottish children singing haunting Gaelic airs and they have
)sounded wonderful, but I couldn't describe them as moving naturally to the
)music. It may be put down to ethnic or cultural differences, but the
)difference I see I can't help associating with racial characteristics.
)Making generalisations is not so much of a sin, in my estimation, as
)treating individuals as though they will and must conform to thoses
)generalisations.
)
)Sharon: Now what you need to see and hear is a choir of African children
)singing haunting Gaelic airs and a Scottish choir singing and moving to
)the music that the Africans were singing and dancing to. Then see a group
)of Scottish Africans singing African songs....
Willow:
And while you're at it, how about some rousing Scottish dance music? Why
are you comparing dance music with non-dance music and being surprised when
the latter does not immediately conjure images of dancing to your
mind? I've done Scottish dancing, and I can tell you that the music is
just as lively and just as rhythmic and just as dance-impelling as any
African or Latin American beat. I've also watched people playing Scottish
music, or even listening to it, and suddenly their whole body is moving to
the music and their fingers itching for a bodhran and accepting whatever
flat surface may be handy in its place.
Different *cultures* find different ways of expressing themselves in music
and dance, partly because of the way that musical development tends to
reflect the sounds and materials available in nature, which are naturally
going to differ with changes in the environment. A people with no reeds
are unlikely to develop the reed flute in all of its variations, and one
without wood is unlikely to develop the marimba. Our instruments then
reflect themselves in the music written for them, and by these means, our
differing environments influence the musical development of each culture.
BUT - it is the human element, the human "spirit" if you will, that drives
us to create music at all, to dance, and to sing - and these are found in
*every* human culture, to the best of my knowledge. I have never heard of
any human culture that does not have a form of dance, or which completely
lacks music.
In fact, most cultures have several kinds of music - religious music,
secular music, music for celebrations, music for mourning... and it is
*utterly ridiculous* to compare music for mourning to music from one
culture to music for dancing from another culture, and then say that the
latter culture lacks rhythm and the spirit of dance.
)Sharon: See Charlie, there is no such thing as race, there is only one
)race--the human race.
Willow:
I thought we had established this once before, Charlie. After all, you
quoted that line from one of my songs in response to a post from me on this
subject several months ago:
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)From: charlie morrison (charliemorrison btinternet.com)
)Subject: Re: 911
)Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 07:09:37 +0100
)Message-ID: (0.1700032592.1602609176-1463747838-1032847801 topica.com)
)Errors-To: (list-errors.1700032592.0.1724929593.007.0.0 boing.topica.com)
)
)Hi Willow. Yes I realised after I'd sent the message that, in my haste, I
)hadn't phrased it very well at all. It's just that I was thinking that it
)was such a concentrated attack, but the painful effects rippled round the
)whole of the planet. I know that native New Yorkers bore the brunt of it,
)but people from all over the globe have been directly affected and have had
)their lives changed by these events.
)
)Thank you for the inspirational poem. I'm with you on the
)unity of the human race. It's a pity that the people who
)carry out these atrocities don't see things this way.
)
)warm regards,
)Charlie.
)
)----- Original Message -----
)From: "Willow Firesong" (willow.firesong creative-interweb.com)
)To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
)Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 2:37 AM
)Subject: Re: 911
)
) ) At 11-09-02 10:51 PM Wednesday, Charlie wrote:
) ) )looking at the surnames of those who died reminds me
) ) )that the victims belonged to the whole of humanity.
) )
) ) Willow: We all do, Charlie. Each and every one of us,
) ) each and every day of the year. There is no race to
) ) which each of us belongs, other than the human race.
) )
) ) "For when you see the globe from space
) ) You see no borderline or race
) ) The world and we are one, so we must share.
) ) As long as we live on one Earth,
) ) We must live as the one race we are..."
Remember, Charlie, it's a lot easier to carry out atrocities when you think
of others as being somehow different from yourself. That has been one of
the most reliable results of the mental division of humanity into races,
throughout history. Isn't it time we stopped indulging in this damaging
and faulty view of humanity? Isn't it time *you* stopped indulging in it?
Willow Firesong
---
A belief is a conclusion to which one subscribes strongly: "Our belief in
any particular natural law cannot have a safer basis than our unsuccessful
critical attempts to refute it" (Karl Popper).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:29:55 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Myths
)Klaudia:
)What's similar with US-people and arabs? Neither has never walked on the
)moon.
)It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
)someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
)landed the moon, it is still there.
)Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
)believable, I prefer Atlantis.
Regarding walking on the moon, there were six separate expeditions
that succeeded in putting explorers down on the moon and getting them
back. There's a beautiful book that came out recently, "Full Moon" by
Michael Light, that shows a lot of pictures from the NASA archives
that haven't been published before.
About Atlantis, I highly recommend "Imagining Atlantis" by Richard
Ellis. It traces the Atlantis myth from Plato through its
19th-century revival by Ignatius Donnelly up to the present.
All stories are not equally credible!
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 23:04:04 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: the pain of facing up to the abuse of children - was re: hurtful
tone
Life keeps me busy. Too busy at times. I forgot to do something a while
back. Better late than never. Thank-you, Willow - especially for the poem.
-Walden
Willow wrote: (snip)
) This is for you, Walden - I wrote it a while back, in dealing with my own
) experience in leaving the cult-like group I mentioned. They too have a
) patent on a Dream - or think that they do...
)
) Dreamers Awake!
)
) O! To walk the paths of yesteryear,
) In a never-was time of childhood safety
) And an uncountable wealth of friendships
) Old and new, near and far;
) A trustworthy kinship with each soul bedecked
) In the customary costume of our chosen clan,
) Each face beneath the proud-born badge
) Of fantasy made real enough to walk through,
) As if one could vacation there, on holiday.
) Souls spun into fantasy made real within the mind,
) Joined together in a web of illusions, made of
) Threads frayed and ravelled from the humdrum fabric of mundane reality,
) Interwoven into seeming seamless unity, by knots:
) Not history, not fantasy, not family, not friends.
) Strangers with a common setting, bound together by a dream.
) Bonds that seem as real as heartache, and as tangible as the words within
a
) book,
) Binding as tightly as belief in their reality.
) 'Til the dreamer, upon waking, finds the bonds are melting mist,
) An illusory linkage among sleepwalkers
) Managed by mesmerists revelling in their Dream-fed power to control,
) Ever-fearful, lest some jarring note
) Should shatter the deception,
) Wake the Dreamers,
) And leave all lost and lorn,
) Washed up on the Limbo they have made of their own lives.
)
) ---
)
) That patent, the one that these groups claim to have upon the dreams that
) bring people to them, isn't real - your life now is, and so too, from your
) description, are the bonds and relationships you form now. One sign of
) that is that a person leaves a hole if they go away. I would miss you if
) you went away, Walden - and I think a big part of the reason for that is
) that you are uncompromisingly real, even when that reality is not in
) accordance with the dreams you have for it.
)
) Not all dreams take reality into account. Only those that do can be made
) to manifest as real, no matter what you sacrifice to them.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 929
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Myths
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Myths
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
re: man on the moon/was "Myths"
By momof2gals mindspring.com
RE: man on the moon/was "Myths"
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
I meant: 60 years ago
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Re: man on the moon/was "Myths"
By momof2gals mindspring.com
re: man walking on the moon/was "Myth"
By momof2gals mindspring.com
RE: Myths
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Myths
By david.kehoe mcguire.af.mil
Admin: web counter 103,866
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 08:50:42 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Myths
on 1/1/03 11:36 AM, Klaudia at klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com wrote:
) Klaudia:
) What's similar with US-people and arabs?
Sharon: Our humanity.
Klaudia: Neither has never walked on the moon.
Sharon: LOL slapping my leg. So you don't believe man has been to the moon?
I've heard there are people who believe it was a trick by the US government,
but I'd never met such a believer before. There was a movie about this a
couple years ago, wasn't there?
) It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
) someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
) landed the moon, it is still there.
) Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
) believable, I prefer Atlantis.
Sharon: I'm shocked, speechless. Maybe you are an Anthro double agent? I'm
very surprised Klaudia.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:54:40 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Myths
mysplum wrote:
) ) It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
) ) someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
) ) landed the moon, it is still there.
) ) Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
) ) believable, I prefer Atlantis.
)
) Sharon: I'm shocked, speechless. Maybe you are an Anthro double agent?
) I'm
) very surprised Klaudia.
I've never heard that some anthro has believed that man has not walked
on the moon. I think that according to their belief we go to the moon
and even more far away each night.
I tried to find at www, if there is some anthro is sharing my doubt, but
I could not find any.
But many others are have strong doubt. Here is one:
http://www.moonmovie.com/10things.html
I have discussed about the item face to face with US-people twice
earlier. On the first time I was called as a communist. At second time I
was called as lesbian.
And now at third time the top one: I'm called as an Anthro-agent.
God Bless the Americans!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 18:01:19 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: man on the moon/was "Myths"
Klaudia says, in regard to her belief that human beings did NOT land on the
moon:
I have discussed about the item face to face with US-people twice
earlier. On the first time I was called as a communist. At second time I
was called as lesbian.
And now at third time the top one: I'm called as an Anthro-agent.
God Bless the Americans!
Lisa: Thanks for the blessing, Klaudia! I can always use an extra. And while
I wouldn't accuse you of being an Anthro-agent or a communist or anything
else, I would very much like to know why you believe that the moon landing
was a hoax. Why is it so hard for you to believe that human beings landed on
the moon and even walked there?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 23:29:45 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: man on the moon/was "Myths"
Lisa D. Ercolano wrote:
)
) Lisa: Thanks for the blessing, Klaudia! I can always use an extra. And
) while
) I wouldn't accuse you of being an Anthro-agent or a communist or
) anything
) else, I would very much like to know why you believe that the moon
) landing
) was a hoax. Why is it so hard for you to believe that human beings
) landed on
) the moon and even walked there?
Klaudia:
As I earlier told:
34 years ago technology was not so advanced that space ship could carry
people alive to moon and bring them alive back. I suppose that it is
still in the year 2003 same, even there has been huge improvements on
technology.
If the module ever landed the moon, I strongly doubt that it could ever
rise back to orbit. It needs huge amount of fuel (even there is less
gravity in the moon).
For me it is no problem if abroad citizens believe what their rulers are
telling them.
In Germany 60 years rulers told the citizens that there is not any
concentration camps for Jews and that Jews are not killed there. Some
German people still believe that.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 23:33:54 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: I meant: 60 years ago
One word was missing, I meant:
For me it is no problem if abroad citizens believe what their rulers are
telling them.
In Germany 60 years ago rulers told the citizens that there is not any
concentration camps for Jews and that Jews are not killed there. Some
German people still believe that.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 20:16:25 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: man on the moon/was "Myths"
)
) Lisa D. Ercolano wrote:
)
))
)) Lisa: Thanks for the blessing, Klaudia! I can always use an extra. And
)) while
)) I wouldn't accuse you of being an Anthro-agent or a communist or
)) anything
)) else, I would very much like to know why you believe that the moon
)) landing
)) was a hoax. Why is it so hard for you to believe that human beings
)) landed on
)) the moon and even walked there?
)
) Klaudia:
)
) As I earlier told:
) 34 years ago technology was not so advanced that space ship could carry
) people alive to moon and bring them alive back. I suppose that it is
) still in the year 2003 same, even there has been huge improvements on
) technology.
) If the module ever landed the moon, I strongly doubt that it could ever
) rise back to orbit. It needs huge amount of fuel (even there is less
) gravity in the moon).
)
) For me it is no problem if abroad citizens believe what their rulers are
) telling them.
) In Germany 60 years rulers told the citizens that there is not any
) concentration camps for Jews and that Jews are not killed there. Some
) German people still believe that.
)
Lisa: Oh come on, Klaudia! Tell me why technology was not advanced enough,
as you say, to carry human beings to the moon and then bring them back
alive. Are you an aeronautical engineer? Have you any special expertise in
engineering, and in space flight and travel?
What makes you think that the leaders of us "citizens abroad" -- as you
call us -- are lying to the public about man's trip to the moon? What would
be their motivation for doing so, pray tell?
To compare the fact that I and other Americans (and Europeans, Africans,
Chinese, etc.) believe that humans did travel to and walk upon the moon to
believing there were no death camps in Nazi Germany is just plain
ridiculous.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 20:30:53 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: man walking on the moon/was "Myth"
We all know we can't simply believe everything we hear, read, etc.
However, for anyone interested in a brief, but intelligent, discussion of
the "controvery" surrounding the Apollo 11 mission to the moon and what, if
any, proof exists that American astronaut Neil Armstrong (and crew) landed
on the Moon, try this:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmoonhoax.html
Warning: this brief article is not gentle on those disbelievers, such as
Klaudia, whom it likens to those who refuse to believe the Earth is round
.....
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:51:19 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Myths
Klaudia, you wrote,
)I've never heard that some anthro has believed that man has not walked
)on the moon. I think that according to their belief we go to the moon
)and even more far away each night.
)
)I tried to find at www, if there is some anthro is sharing my doubt, but
)I could not find any.
The Australian master teacher Whitehead wrote in one of his teaching
guides that the moon trips might have been a hoax.
)But many others are have strong doubt. Here is one:
)http://www.moonmovie.com/10things.html
For more credible sources, see:
http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/News/2001/News-MoonLanding.asp
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:39:33 -0600
From: "Kehoe David N SrA 605AMXS/MXAB" (david.kehoe mcguire.af.mil)
Subject: RE: Myths
I normally lurk on this list but I have to but in on this one. I am
an aeronautical engineer for the U.S.AF. The technology did exist and
we did go to the moonand back. You need wake up and take a look at
what is going on in this world around you, try for starters by
looking out your window. Do you have still any windows or were they
all boarded up back in the 20' by your parents. The technology that
you are saying could not have been around 34 years ago was actually
around long before that, look at the SR-71, now officially retired.
It was built in the early 50's. The plans to build it were done in
1948 and 1949. That air craft was 60 years ahead in technology
compared to what was available to the general public, so yes the
government had the technology to send a man to the moon and back 34
years ago.
SSgT Kehoe
McGuire AFB NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Dugan [mailto:dan dandugan.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 7:51 PM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: RE: Myths
Klaudia, you wrote,
)I've never heard that some anthro has believed that man has not walked
)on the moon. I think that according to their belief we go to the moon
)and even more far away each night.
)
)I tried to find at www, if there is some anthro is sharing my doubt, but
)I could not find any.
The Australian master teacher Whitehead wrote in one of his teaching
guides that the moon trips might have been a hoax.
)But many others are have strong doubt. Here is one:
)http://www.moonmovie.com/10things.html
For more credible sources, see:
http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/News/2001/News-MoonLanding.asp
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:11:24 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: web counter 103,866
On January 1, 2003, the PLANS web site had registered 103,866
visitors since August 12, 1996. (Visitors, not hits, repeats on the
same day are not counted. Thanks, Web-Counter: http://www.digits.com.)
We had 1940 visitors in the last 30 days, averaging 65 per day.
Hit counters give much higher but less meaningful numbers, because
they count every page and image viewed. The hits on our site in the
month of December totaled 132,609, averaging 4420 per day.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 930
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Digest for waldorf-critics topica.com, issue 930
By lisa chamsoft.com.au
Re: Myths
By mysplum earthlink.net
SR-71, Windows (was RE: Myths)
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Back in the Doctor Steiner (was RE: Myths)
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Back in the Doctor Steiner (was RE: Myths)
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Jan 2003 12:06:17 -0000
From: lisa chamsoft.com.au (Lisa Holley)
Subject: Re: Digest for waldorf-critics topica.com, issue 930
This email is an auto reply to your recent email to Lisa Holley at
Chameleon Software.
I am on leave until the 16th January 2003 and will not be able to
collect my email until I return.
If you have an urgent request regarding Case Manager, please contact
Integral IT on 02 9264 9606 or by email at support integral-it.com.au.
For all other matters I will respond as soon as possible when I
return on the 16th.
Regards
Lisa Holley
Chameleon Software
lisa chamsoft.com.au
http://www.chamsoft.com.au
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 08:51:14 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Myths
Sharon: Just to clarify, I did not write this directly below, Klaudia did (I
*know* that people walked on the moon in the sixties and seventies):
)
) mysplum wrote: (This is not me speaking).
)
))) It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
))) someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
))) landed the moon, it is still there.
))) Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
))) believable, I prefer Atlantis.
))
)) Sharon: I'm shocked, speechless. Maybe you are an Anthro double agent?
)) I'm
)) very surprised Klaudia.
)
)
) I've never heard that some anthro has believed that man has not walked
) on the moon. I think that according to their belief we go to the moon
) and even more far away each night.
Sharon: Well, yes Anthroposophists do believe their astral and I bodies take
cosmic journeys while they sleep and frolic with spiritual beings in the
cosmos. These bodies of man journey far beyond the moon, past Saturn and Sun
even, but frankly I've never heard much on moon walking in the sixties and
seventies from Anthroposophists, so I can't say.
Steiner often spoke of "moon men", but mostly he was referring to his moon
period of Earth. He said the Earth has evolved through periods he called--
Saturn, Sun, Moon, Earth and his future periods of Earth are dubbed Jupiter,
Venus and Vulcan. He taught that our moon of today is the discarded remnant
of his Old Moon incarnation of the Earth. Here's what he says:
Steiner: "Occultists know that a fixed star need not always have been a
fixed star; the Sun only became a fixed star after having been a planet.
The Sun we see to-day was once united with the Earth and took with it many
beings who were at a higher stage of development than the beings of the
Earth; just as with the Moon that we see went the inferior portions and the
Moon is therefore a body of discarded dross. The Moon is a planet that has
degenerated; the Sun is a body that has ascended" (p 79 Theosophy of a
Rosicrucian, Steiner, Rudolf Steiner Press London. Lectures from 1907,
reprint 1981).
) I have discussed about the item face to face with US-people twice
) earlier. On the first time I was called as a communist. At second time I
) was called as lesbian.
) And now at third time the top one: I'm called as an Anthro-agent.
) God Bless the Americans!
Sharon: I *asked* if you were an Anthro agent not because of your peculiar
beliefs about moon walking, but because you said you find the Atlantis myth
more credible than moon walking.
(I am a god less S African-American).
Again, here's what you said and my response:
) ) It is very diffucult to believe that on such technology (34 years ago)
) ) someone has gone to the moon and even came back. If the module ever
) ) landed the moon, it is still there.
) ) Another myth is Atlantis. If I had to choose, which myth is more
) ) believable, I prefer Atlantis.
)
) Sharon: I'm shocked, speechless. Maybe you are an Anthro double agent?
) I'm very surprised Klaudia.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:35:54 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: SR-71, Windows (was RE: Myths)
david kehoe wrote:
)I am an aeronautical engineer for the U.S.AF. The technology did exist
)and we did go to the moon and back. You need wake up and take a look at
)what is going on in this world around you, try for starters by looking
)out your window. Do you have still any windows or were they all boarded
)up back in the 20' by your parents. The technology that you are saying
)could not have been around 34 years ago was actually around long before
)that, look at the SR-71, now officially retired. It was built in the
)early 50's. The plans to build it were done in 1948 and 1949. That air
)craft was 60 years ahead in technology compared to what was available to
)the general public, so yes the government had the technology to send a
)man to the moon and back 34 years ago.
SSgT Kehoe
McGuire AFB NJ
)
Klaudia:
You told that SR-71 was built in the early 50's.
On many sources it is told that SR-71's first operational flight was on
1968. Someone is telling bull-shit...
But nobody has ever told that man has visited the moon flying in SR-71,
so SR-71 don't proof anything on this case. And this has nothing to do
with anthroposophy.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/barrier/machines.html
"The two-seat SR-71 was developed in the early 1960s by the U.S. Air
Force as a strategic reconnaissance aircraft. The first flight of an
SR-71 was in 1964 at a classified location in Nevada. The aircraft's
first operational "sortie" was flown out of Okinawa, Japan in 1968. Most
of the SR-71 fleet has now been retired, except for two Blackbirds
currently on loan to NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center where the
aircraft are being used as "test beds" for high altitude research."
david kehoe wrote:
Do you have still any windows or were they all boarded up back in the
20' by your parents.
Klaudia:
Yes, I still have Windows. But hopefully I can throw my Windows to
garbage soon. I'll replace Microsoft Windows with Linux.
http://www.linux.org/
"Linux is a free Unix-type operating system originally created by Linus
Torvalds with the assistance of developers around the world. Developed
under the GNU General Public License , the source code for Linux is
freely available to everyone. Click on the link below to find out more
about the operating system that is causing a revolution in the world of
computers."
I don't want to support any more Bill Gates -mafia.
Linux uses computers much more effectively than Microsoft Windows. Even
old 486-computers can be useful, when Linux-programs are installed
instead Microsoft programs.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:41:44 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: Back in the Doctor Steiner (was RE: Myths)
mysplum wrote:
)
) Sharon: Well, yes Anthroposophists do believe their astral and I bodies
) take
) cosmic journeys while they sleep and frolic with spiritual beings in the
) cosmos. These bodies of man journey far beyond the moon, past Saturn and
) Sun
) even, but frankly I've never heard much on moon walking in the sixties
) and
) seventies from Anthroposophists, so I can't say.
)
) Steiner often spoke of "moon men", but mostly he was referring to his
) moon
) period of Earth. He said the Earth has evolved through periods he
) called--
) Saturn, Sun, Moon, Earth and his future periods of Earth are dubbed
) Jupiter,
) Venus and Vulcan. He taught that our moon of today is the discarded
) remnant
) of his Old Moon incarnation of the Earth. Here's what he says:
)
) Steiner: "Occultists know that a fixed star need not always have been a
) fixed star; the Sun only became a fixed star after having been a planet.
) The Sun we see to-day was once united with the Earth and took with it
) many
) beings who were at a higher stage of development than the beings of the
) Earth; just as with the Moon that we see went the inferior portions and
) the
) Moon is therefore a body of discarded dross. The Moon is a planet that
) has
) degenerated; the Sun is a body that has ascended" (p 79 Theosophy of a
) Rosicrucian, Steiner, Rudolf Steiner Press London. Lectures from 1907,
) reprint 1981).
Klaudia:
Thanks to You for guiding the conversation back to anthroposophy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:41:47 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: Back in the Doctor Steiner (was RE: Myths)
mysplum wrote:
)
) Sharon: Well, yes Anthroposophists do believe their astral and I bodies
) take
) cosmic journeys while they sleep and frolic with spiritual beings in the
) cosmos. These bodies of man journey far beyond the moon, past Saturn and
) Sun
) even, but frankly I've never heard much on moon walking in the sixties
) and
) seventies from Anthroposophists, so I can't say.
)
) Steiner often spoke of "moon men", but mostly he was referring to his
) moon
) period of Earth. He said the Earth has evolved through periods he
) called--
) Saturn, Sun, Moon, Earth and his future periods of Earth are dubbed
) Jupiter,
) Venus and Vulcan. He taught that our moon of today is the discarded
) remnant
) of his Old Moon incarnation of the Earth. Here's what he says:
)
) Steiner: "Occultists know that a fixed star need not always have been a
) fixed star; the Sun only became a fixed star after having been a planet.
) The Sun we see to-day was once united with the Earth and took with it
) many
) beings who were at a higher stage of development than the beings of the
) Earth; just as with the Moon that we see went the inferior portions and
) the
) Moon is therefore a body of discarded dross. The Moon is a planet that
) has
) degenerated; the Sun is a body that has ascended" (p 79 Theosophy of a
) Rosicrucian, Steiner, Rudolf Steiner Press London. Lectures from 1907,
) reprint 1981).
Klaudia:
Thanks to You for guiding the conversation back to anthroposophy.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 931
-- Topica Digest --
Rabbit-Proof Fence
By pstaud hotmail.com
SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By gbg2013 minpost.nu
far right spirituality then and now
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By pstaud hotmail.com
eliminating Jewry
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 17:19:14 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Hello everybody,
I wanted to recommend a new movie to those of you who read this list and
have a generally positive evaluation of Steiner's teachings on racial
harmony. The movie is from Australia and is currently showing in US
theaters; it's called Rabbit-Proof Fence and is evidently based on real
events from the middle of the twentieth century. I can't vouch for the
movie's historical accuracy, and I'd be interested to hear what Australian
list members thought of it and its reception there. I didn't think it was a
great film, but I was impressed by its portrayal of well-intentioned racism,
embodied in the figure of an Australian government official (played by
Kenneth Branagh) whose title is Chief Protector of Aborigines. Branagh's
character espouses a version of benevolent racism that mistakes itself for
anti-racism, one that is based on the goal of assimilating non-white people
into white society through intermarriage. At one point the film offers a
striking visual image of this government-sponsored plan for 'helping'
natives by gradually eliminating their native heritage. While watching the
movie, I couldn't help thinking of the various debates I've had with
anthroposophists over the years about racial character and the universal
human and so forth. Whether you share David's approach or Charlie's approach
to the question of "blood mixing", I urge you to see the movie and reflect
on its implications.
Greetings for the new year,
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 00:39:45 +0100
From: "Lennart Sundstr=?ISO-8859-1?B?9g==?=m" (gbg2013 minpost.nu)
Subject: SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Hi Peter,
so the human race is one - as in universal?
see you,
Lennart
----------
)Fr?n: Peter Staudenmaier (pstaud hotmail.com)
)Till: waldorf-critics topica.com
)?mne: Rabbit-Proof Fence
)Datum: s?n 5 jan 2003 00.19
)
) While watching the
) movie, I couldn't help thinking of the various debates I've had with
) anthroposophists over the years about racial character and the universal
) human and so forth.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 17:40:27 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: far right spirituality then and now
Hello again all,
Below is a link to an interview with Mattias Gardell, a Swedish scholar
whose work on the contemporary far right I appreciate greatly. Historians
who study the cultural currents in early twentieth century Europe and North
America are often struck by unsettling parallels between our own time and
the social and intellectual developments that came to prominence a century
ago. One of those parallels is the increasingly common marriage of
alternative spiritual traditions with far-right politics. Gardell gives a
fine overview of one wing of this phenomenon, the racist variants of
neo-paganism. Near the end of the interview he mentions anthroposophy in
passing as part of a similar ideological ferment that marked the beginning
of the twentieth century. I recommend the interview to anyone who wants to
understand how progressive cultural impulses can turn into dangerous and
regressive ones.
http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-4q9.html
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 18:07:39 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Hi Lennart,
)so the human race is one - as in universal?
I suppose that depends on what you mean by one and universal. I think there
is one human species, and that what we call race is a way of categorizing
some of the variation within humankind. I don't believe that there is such a
thing as the universal human; there are particular human beings and human
groups, each of them just as human as any other, but there is no universal
standard of humanness against which any of them could be judged.
Steiner, on the other hand, taught that racial diversity is an unfortunate
detour on the path of evolution toward the universal human, a sort of glitch
in cosmic development. He coupled these teachings with various
pronouncements about the worth of all racial and ethnic groups. The reason
why I consider Steiner's version of universalism to be a prime example of
false universalism is that it is actually built around one particular
perspective, that of white Europeans (and more specifically Germans). We've
been over this ground before on the list, but I'd be happy to explain
further if you'd like.
I mentioned the movie because a number of the anthroposophists I've sparred
with have put forward the notion that racism must involve some sort of
deliberate malice and those who are well-intentioned cannot be racist. This
is a deeply mistaken notion and makes it very difficult to grasp the
significance of anthroposophy's racial teachings. In addition, some
anthroposophists believe that Steiner's views on "blood mixing" are
anti-racist because, on their reading, he says that this mixing is a part of
the evolution of humankind toward the universal human. The movie offers an
excellent counterexample: an ideology of "blood mixing" that is patently
racist. I think that a similar sort of confusion is at work in the
predominant anthroposophist understanding of Steiner's views on Jews, and I
will try to address that topic in my next post.
Yours for human diversity,
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 19:06:33 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: eliminating Jewry
Charlie said of Steiner:
))I certainly don't think that he meant that Jews had no right to exist.
And Diana replied:
)Not Jews, but Jewry. (Well, Peter has argued that Steiner did indeed mean
)Jews should not exist; but I would like to point out that even if one takes
)"Jewry" to mean a cultural/religious phenomenon rather than persons to be
)eliminated, this is still an appalling statement.) Though I don't think
)Steiner thought Jews should be killed, it's hard to say what he thought
)Jews actually ought to do about their own obsoleteness, or (a more
)dangerous line of thought) what anyone else ought to do about it. I recall
)a Steiner defender here once saying that Steiner didn't think anything
)should be done, the Jews would have to "want to change" on their own. I
)suppose they could renounce their beliefs and cultural heritage, not call
)themselves Jews anymore. Or would it be enough if they would just stop
)"looking back"? Would you be comfortable, Charlie, with that interpretion
)of what Jews ought to do to rid the world of "Jewry" - giving you the
)benefit of the doubt that I'm sure you don't think anyone *else* should try
)to rid the world of Jewry?
I agree with Diana that Steiner didn't think Jews should be killed. It's
hard to keep this in mind, since we understandably view the history of
antisemitism through the lens of the holocaust, but before the 1930's most
antisemites didn't think Jews should be killed. Instead of favoring the
physical annihilation of Jews, the majority of antisemites in Steiner's day
favored the cultural elimination of Jews and Jewishness. That was Steiner's
own position as well.
Steiner's version of antisemitism is sometimes called assimilationist
antisemitism, a term which is not meant to suggest that all versions of
assimilationism are antisemitic (they aren't). The positions that Steiner
espoused both early in his career and after his theosophical conversion
were, at this level, fairly widespread among German intellectuals at the
time, though the later Steiner dressed up his antisemitism in a
distinctively anthroposophical vocabulary ("the Jewish mission is no longer
necessary in evolution" etc.).
There are quite a few very valuable scholarly studies of the phenomenon of
assimilationist antisemitism. For starters, I recommend chapter 3 of George
Mosse's book Germans and Jews. Mosse explains that from the point of view of
assimilationist antisemites, "The good Jew is one who ceases to be a Jew.
The bad Jew is the Jew per se, who refuses complete assimilation." (p. 71) I
also recommend Jacob Katz's work, for example his essay "German Culture and
the Jews" in Reinharz and Schatzberg, eds., The Jewish Response to German
Culture. Katz notes that "even during the liberal era the Jewish
contribution to German culture was acceptable only if it succeeded in being
not Jewish." (p. 99)
Even a number of German opponents of antisemitism shared this perspective
(indeed Steiner himself held to a similar line during the brief phase around
1900 when he publically opposed antisemitism); the late 19th century
historian Theodor Mommsen is an example. In one of the best studies of the
topic, Uriel Tal writes: "Mommsen did not have in mind the integration of
Jews within a pluralistic society which ensured the coexistence of various
hereditary groups as part of one united nationality, but rather an
integration within a uniform, homogenous society, and this meant, as far as
the Jews were concerned, extinction as the price for integration." (Tal,
Christians and Jews in Germany, p. 53)
Many anthroposophists today insist that Steiner's position was shared by
assimilationist German Jews of his era. This is completely false and one of
the more troubling instances of historical ignorance that I've encountered
in my debates with Steiner's followers. For an excellent antidote to this
notion, I recommend chapter 5 on "The Search for an Assimilationist
Identity" in Donald Niewyk's book The Jews in Weimar Germany. Niewyk's
extremely well-documented study notes that "the great majority of German
Jews" explicitly rejected the kind of thinking that Steiner promoted (p.
100).
On this question, I also recommend Alfred Low's book Jews in the Eyes of the
Germans. Low writes that many non-Jewish Germans demanded that their Jewish
fellow citizens "completely relinquish Jewish identity, irrespective of
whether it was primarily religious, cultural, or national in character. The
German Jew was to shed his Judaic heritage, cease to be a Jew, and eagerly
embrace Germandom." (p. 413)
I hope that this material helps to clarify why Rudolf Steiner taught that
Jewry had no right to exist, and how he thought it was to be eliminated.
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 22:28:53 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Peter S. wrote:
) I wanted to recommend a new movie to those of you who read this list and
) have a generally positive evaluation of Steiner's teachings on racial
) harmony. The movie is from Australia and is currently showing in US
) theaters; it's called Rabbit-Proof Fence and is evidently based on real
) events from the middle of the twentieth century.
I second that motion. I saw this film a month ago and was struck by a very
*real* distinction between the concepts of "racism" and "bigotry." A couple
of scenes made me think of Steiner. I went to the film with a good friend
visiting from Africa. He works with an environmental NPO there and spends
most of his time in the rain forest in Cameroon and Congo. Luckily, we
found an all night cafe after the film as there was much to discuss. The
film was controversial in Australia.
-Walden
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 932
-- Topica Digest --
Re: SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By mysplum earthlink.net
Marie Sievers-Steiner
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Is Waldorf about the children or the teachers?
By dan dandugan.com
Festival of 3 Kings (January 6)
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 09:42:30 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: SV: Rabbit-Proof Fence
on 1/4/03 4:07 PM, Peter Staudenmaier at pstaud hotmail.com wrote:
) Hi Lennart,
)
)) so the human race is one - as in universal?
)
)Peter S: I suppose that depends on what you mean by one and universal. I think
there is one human species, and that what we call race is a way of
categorizing
) some of the variation within humankind. I don't believe that there is such a
) thing as the universal human; there are particular human beings and human
) groups, each of them just as human as any other, but there is no universal
) standard of humanness against which any of them could be judged.
Sharon: There's been a lot in the news lately about chimpanzees and
"culture," which helps explain diversity. Researchers have documented
behaviors of groups of chimps that vary from group to group. In other words,
one group of chimps discovered that they could suck bugs out of a nest with
straws--so they do this--while another group hasn't figured that out but has
developed other habits. It really helps me to understand human diversity
when I think of the chimps. Each group has developed their own way of doing
things, their own views of the world, their own languages that are common to
that particular group because they teach each other. Despite the variation
of "culture", chimps are chimps. Naked apes and chimps are 99% identical.
Humans might wear different clothes, eat different foods, speak different
languages, but we are all Homo sapiens. Even though we've developed our own
ways of doing things, or our own realities, we still have everything in
common with our fellow humans. We also learn from each other and adopt
certain habits from each other, like what religion we believe. As you say
Peter, "there is no universal standard of humanness against which any of
them could be judged". Just as you can't judge one group of chimps as being
more "chimpish." A chimp is a chimp, and a human is a human.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 10:10:15 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
on 1/4/03 10:28 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
) Peter S. wrote:
)) I wanted to recommend a new movie to those of you who read this list and
)) have a generally positive evaluation of Steiner's teachings on racial
)) harmony. The movie is from Australia and is currently showing in US
)) theaters; it's called Rabbit-Proof Fence and is evidently based on real
)) events from the middle of the twentieth century.
)
) I second that motion. I saw this film a month ago and was struck by a very
) *real* distinction between the concepts of "racism" and "bigotry." A couple
) of scenes made me think of Steiner.
Sharon: I saw the film advertised in an Amnesty International publication I
received in the mail and have been watching for it locally. Now I really
*must* see it! thanks for recommending it.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 21:27:54 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: Marie Sievers-Steiner
http://www.templelodge.com/pages/titles.html
On the page mentioed above is also a book:
"Marie Steiner
Her Place in World Karma
Hans Peter van Manen
translated by J. Collis
Van Manen presents the results of his own carefully considered thoughts
on Marie Steiner's karmic past. In doing so, he links her to a
well-known individuality connected with Aristotle in ancient Greece.
1995; 48pp; 21.5 x 13.5cm; paperback"
Has anyone read that? What individuality it means?
I have understood that RS was incarnated as Aristotle and his soulmate
Ita Wegman as Alexander the Great, but what on earth cute Marie was
doing there? And what was Marie's place on World Karma?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 00:25:41 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
G'day all,
even though I have not seen the film that Peter S and now Walden have
recommended I would like to make some comments. The film has been widely
reviewed in Australia. The film is based on historical events which are now
reffered to as "The Stolen Generation". The Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission in Australia held hearings and published a report
which is available on the web at
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/rsjproject/rsjlibrary/hreoc/stolen/
I am sure that much of this will not be pleasant reading. I do not know how
historically accurate the particular story in the Rabbit Proof Fence is. It
is absolutely clear that many aboriginal children were forcibly removed from
their families and sent to foster parents and to orphanages and the like. I
have no doubt that many of the people who were reponsible for this thought
that they were doing the best thing for those children at the time. Some who
are still living continue to claim that the forcible removal was
appropriate. It may be that in some cases they were right. It is certain
that in a large number of cases they were not right.
There has been a very large amount of discussion of this topic in Australia
over the last few years. The film has played a relatively small part in this
discussion, not because of any failing in the film, but because the
discussion was so widespread already.
The Australian Aborigines have suffered and continue to suffer perhaps more
than any other recognisable group on earth from bigotry and from benevolent
racism. I think that this is improving, but I also think that while white
Australians are happy to support government programs to improve the lot of
Aborigines in Australia, few of us welcome Aboriginal neighbours with open
arms.
I also claim ignorance and stupidity in terms of what might be best for the
future. Is it possible that Aboriginal culture could coexist with the
dominant western culture in Australia? Should Aborigines be completely
integrated into that western culture?
I have no idea, but I do know we have a lot of work to do to remove the
bigotry and the benvolent racism from Australia.
Check out the film. I'm sure the contryside is authentic. The film maker is
well known in Australia. The fence itself is real although I don't believe
it worked.
See you,
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 17:40:28 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Is Waldorf about the children or the teachers?
Someone wrote to PLANS after reading our web site, commenting that we
didn't include this information:
) Teachers are on a path of spiritual initiation. Their students
) represent to them undeveloped aspects of their own soul and spirit.
) That is the true basis of the children staying with the same teacher
) year after year. When the teacher notices difficulties or
) 'unacceptable' expressions from their students, they use it as a mirror
) to repair that weakness within themselves. In so doing, the teacher is
) able to climb the spiritual ladder of anthroposophical development.
) That is why it is so difficult to get a responce to difficulties that a
) child may be having in the classroom, wether schoolastic or behavioral
) in nature. They are not concerned with the development of the child,
) only the progression of the adult anthroposophist.
I was just reading the current issue of *Gateways: The Journal of the
Waldorf Early Childhood Association of North America*, and in an
article by Margaret Meyerkort, she says:
"The self-education of the caregiver is all important--the heartbeat
of an ever-evolving, child-centered education. The adult, like the
child, needs to be in a process of continual development, observing
her own struggles, so that she can do justice to the child as an
effective relator. The children are best served when caregivers share
and support each others' activities in self-education rather than
worrying together over a difficult child." (Issue 43, p. 20)
Self-contradictory, isn't it. She calls it "child-centered," but then
says "the children are best served when caregivers share and support
each others' activities in self education rather than worrying
together over a difficult child."
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 23:24:02 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Festival of 3 Kings (January 6)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C2B511.880CB1C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
January 6 is the Festival of the Three Kings, at the end of the 12
days of Christmas, and this festival has special significance in
anthroposophy. See
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Festivals/Christmas/19041230p01.html
According to Steiner the Festival of the Three Kings will take on
greater significance when its symbolism becomes understood. Waldorf
teachers I have known thought it was very important to observe this
festival in the classroom in some way; in fact I recall a teacher
saying it was more important than Christmas. Though some years it
will fall during the winter break, this year it does not, the kids
will be in school, and I expect it will be observed in many Waldorf
classrooms tomorrow.
According to Steiner the meaning of this festival is in its
connection to the evolution of the races. The 3 kings are Caspar, who
is African and whose skin is black; Melchoir, who is European and
whose skin is white; and Balthasar, who is Asian (Indian) and whose
skin is yellow. Yes, it is Steiner who notes the importance of their
skin color. The 3 kings or Magi represent the three preceding races
or epochs of culture. "The remaining survivors of the Lemurian race
are black; those of the Atlantean race are yellow; and the
representatives of the Fifth Root Race, the Post-Atlantean or Aryan
race, are white."
Thus the gifts they bring the Christ child are symbolic. "The
European (Melchoir) brings gold, the symbol of wisdom, of
intelligence which comes to expression paramountly in the Fifth Root
Race." (Meaning modern-day whites.) The Asian, Balthasar, brings
frankincense. Since he represents the Atlanteans, of which Asian
peoples are today's left over representatives, the frankincense
represents the "suggestive influence" or "universal hypnosis" the
Atlanteans experienced in their relationship with the "Godhead." (I
think this is connected to the hazy clairvoyance thing.)
Finallly the black man brings myrrh, "the symbol of dying, of death."
"Myrrh is the symbol of the dying of the lower life and the
resurrection of the higher life. It is offered by the Initiate
representing the Third Root Race (Lemurian)."
He also connects the Festival of the 3 Kings (or Epiphany) to the
Egyptian festival of Osiris. Osiris disappeared in the middle of
Lemurian epoch, Steiner says, and Christ is the resurrected Osiris.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 20:20:18 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
Peter Farrell, you wrote,
)The Australian Aborigines have suffered and continue to suffer
)perhaps more than any other recognisable group on earth from bigotry
)and from benevolent racism. I think that this is improving, but I
)also think that while white Australians are happy to support
)government programs to improve the lot of Aborigines in Australia,
)few of us welcome Aboriginal neighbours with open arms.
)
)I also claim ignorance and stupidity in terms of what might be best
)for the future. Is it possible that Aboriginal culture could coexist
)with the dominant western culture in Australia? Should Aborigines be
)completely integrated into that western culture?
)I have no idea, but I do know we have a lot of work to do to remove
)the bigotry and the benvolent racism from Australia.
I was introduced to the problem of aboriginal/technological culture
clash when I was stationed in Alaska with the army (1965-67). My
friend the drama professor at the U of A was involved in a program
(COPAN) that was attempting to improve the drop-out rate of Native
Americans at the university. Natives from remote villages would come
to school and live in modern society. Then they would go home where
their grandmother was chewing skins. Teenagers have enough problems
without having to deal with a 3000-years-plus culture clash. Few were
able to negotiate it.
Another situation in Alaska at that time was a sudden increase in
deaths of trappers from exposure. Dog teams are a lot of work to
maintain. Snowmobiles are a lot less trouble, and get you there fast.
But dog teams don't break down.
These stories made me aware of a compassionate dilemma. Imagine
winter is longer than expected, and people are starving in a native
village a few miles from our modern town. I would feel obliged to
take them food. Christ said to love your neighbor as yourself. If
someone said we had to leave them alone to preserve their culture, I
would call that social Darwinism--it would be like Steiner saying the
natives were destined to die out.
In the Star Trek series they have a "prime directive" that the
civilizations they encounter are not to be contaminated. The conflict
of this directive with compassion leads to dramatic crises.
So I guess I could be called an assimlationist of sorts. I don't
think it's fair to wall off aboriginal cultures, even though contact
surely means destruction of a lot of what they value. But I would
never want hinder their preservation of their own culture, as
happened when Native Americans were sent to schools where they were
forbidden to speak their language. Same thing happened in Australia.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 933
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
By willow.firesong creative-interweb.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 12:50:34 +1030
From: Willow Firesong (Willow.Firesong creative-interweb.com)
Subject: Re: Rabbit-Proof Fence
)Dan Dugan:
)These stories made me aware of a compassionate dilemma. Imagine winter is
)longer than expected, and people are starving in a native village a few
)miles from our modern town. I would feel obliged to take them food. Christ
)said to love your neighbor as yourself. If someone said we had to leave
)them alone to preserve their culture, I would call that social
)Darwinism--it would be like Steiner saying the natives were destined to
)die out.
)
)In the Star Trek series they have a "prime directive" that the
)civilizations they encounter are not to be contaminated. The conflict of
)this directive with compassion leads to dramatic crises.
)
)So I guess I could be called an assimlationist of sorts. I don't think
)it's fair to wall off aboriginal cultures, even though contact surely
)means destruction of a lot of what they value.
To treat people as members of the human race worthy of participating in its
interconnections is FAR from the same thing as requiring them to
"assimilate" into another culture, thereby losing their own.
I don't think anyone would claim that the Native Americans who brought food
to the first Europeans on the North American continent, during the first
hard winters, when they had not yet learned the agricultural techniques
suited to their new home, were attempting to "assimilate" the Europeans
into their own tribal cultures. I do not have to require my neighbor to be
like me, or to assimilate into my culture, in order to help him or her.
)But I would never want hinder their preservation of their own culture, as
)happened when Native Americans were sent to schools where they were
)forbidden to speak their language. Same thing happened in Australia.
And Wales, as well; until very recently, it was illegal to teach in Welsh
in the public schools in Wales, and the language nearly died out as a
result of other government-imposed and enforced "assimilationist" policies.
I think that it's very important that we all remember that this kind of
bias, and discrimination, isn't limited to situations which involve an
issue of color or the vast differences in "ethnic heritage" that we are
accustomed to thinking of when we think of racial and cultural
discrimination - this is white residents of the British Isles
discriminating against other white residents of the British Isles -
residents of the very same island, in fact.
All it takes is thinking "we are us and they are them, and our way is
better, and if they can't see that yet, it's because they haven't had our
advantages, so we will give them those advantages (by force if necessary) -
now why are they so ungrateful???" As Peter Farrell and the movie under
discussion both pointed out, this was the point of view that led to the
creation of the "Stolen Generation" of indigenous people, here in Australia.
Freedom cannot be enforced on a person; therefore, anything which has to
be enforced on a person isn't truly freedom. Sometimes, rarely, it can be
a part of a road to freedom, in a situation similar to those in which a
kidnap victim or drowning person must be knocked out in order to prevent
them from hindering their rescue, in their panic. One might also consider
detoxification programs, or inpatient mental health facilities which take a
person in if they are suffering from problems, long enough to get them to a
state where they can make rational decisions for themselves, to fall into
the same category. But we don't expect people to spend a lifetime knocked
out by the lifeguard, or in the Betty Ford clinic. Sooner or later, we
expect them to come to dry land and walk on their own two feet, and take
responsibility for their own lives and freedoms.
That can't be done, culturally, if the tool that was supposed to facilitate
the gaining of freedom instead served to extinguish a culture. If a child
is forced to learn one language INSTEAD of another, rather than in addition
to it, they LOSE freedom, freedom that they could so easily have GAINED,
instead, simply by being taught *both* languages while they were young
enough for them to have the capacity to easily learn to think in any
language they learned, as well as to speak it.
In my experience, it is that enforcement of culture that is generally
assumed to be meant, at least here in Australia, when "assimilationist"
policies are under discussion. There is a vast difference between
desegregation and assimilation.
It can be thought of as the difference between the old US self-image
metaphor, of the "melting pot", where all ethnicities go in and re-emerge
as a new dissolved solution, called American, and the "new" metaphor (which
I first encountered in the late 70s or early 80s) of the "tossed salad", in
which each ingredient retains its own unique identity, and the flavour of
the whole is the result of the way that these unique elements come
together. To desegregate means that we have the glory of the tossed salad,
instead of having a mound of homogenous shredded iceberg
styrofoam-I-mean-lettuce, which must by all means be kept separate from the
tomatoes. To assimilate means that we take that mixed salad, and boil it
into a newly homogenized mound of greenish-brown sludge. I think it's
obvious which approach I consider to be preferable.
Nowhere in the non-assimilationist point of view is it mandated that one
refrain from helping one's neighbour out of compassion. On the other hand,
if he's starving, and deathly allergic to peanuts, trying to force-feed him
peanut butter sandwiches could take him from starving to dead, however good
your intentions - so it's important to remember that helping your neighbour
out of compassion only works if what you are offering is actually of help
to your neighbour. Enforcing on him what works for you is no guarantee
that the things that you *think* will help will actually do so.
THAT, in my opinion, is what has confused people into thinking that
cultural preservation means rejection of contact with that which is outside
of the culture - so much of that contact has happened under circumstances
where it was *enforced* that, as a result, people (mostly on the outsides
of these situations) have gotten confused. It is my view that these
confused people have begun to believe that it was the contact, and any
desire to help, which was being rejected, when instead what was *actually*
being rejected was the enforcement of measures which, while they may have
been intended to be helpful, were actually non-functional for the
recipients, often to the point of being detrimental or even harmful.
Willow Firesong
---
A belief is a conclusion to which one subscribes strongly: "Our belief in
any particular natural law cannot have a safer basis than our unsuccessful
critical attempts to refute it" (Karl Popper).
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 934
-- Topica Digest --
Peter S.
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
Re: Peter S.
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 00:40:25 -0800
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Peter S.
Peter, I couldn't get the link to the Mattias Gardell interview to
work - any idea where the page went?
http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-4q9.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sarina McDonald
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 00:54:00 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Peter S.
Sarina McDonald wrote:
)Peter, I couldn't get the link to the Mattias Gardell interview to
)work - any idea where the page went?
)
)http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-4q9.html
It just opened for me, must have been internet weather.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 935
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Peter S.
By pstaud hotmail.com
(NNA news) Anthroposophical Society in Belgium regrets losing its
case against
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:38:28 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Peter S.
Hi Sarina,
)Sarina McDonald wrote:
)
))Peter, I couldn't get the link to the Mattias Gardell interview to
))work - any idea where the page went?
))
))http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-4q9.html
)
)It just opened for me, must have been internet weather.
)
)-Dan Dugan
Yep, looks to me like it's working now. If you still have trouble, try going
straight to the Southern Poverty Law Center site:
http://www.splcenter.org
They have a very good search system on the site; just type in "Gardell" (or,
for that matter, "anthroposophy") and you'll get to the interview. The SPLC
is perhaps the largest and most aggressive US organization working against
hate groups (and I very much encourage anyone who thinks that PLANS is a
hate group to consult the SPLC's definition). By the way, Gardell has a new
book due out from Duke University Press in June 2003 titled Gods of the
Blood. Anybody who has read Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke's book Black Sun has
already gotten a preview of Gardell's latest research (Gardell let
Goodrick-Clarke consult his materials). I don't know whether Gardell's new
book will discuss anthroposophy, but I recommend just about anything he
writes.
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:12:14 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: (NNA news) Anthroposophical Society in Belgium regrets losing its
case against anti-sect legislation
[In Europe "sect" means the same as "cult" in the U.S. - dd]
Copyright 2003 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved.
The following material may be republished without the prior consent
of News Network Anthroposophy. News Network Anthroposophy does,
however, require acknowledgement of the source and, if provided, the
author of the material.
+ + + + +
NNA-N A C H R I C H T E N
Anthroposophical Society in Belgium regrets losing its case against
anti-sect legislation
Ghent, 9 January (NNA) - The Anthroposophical Society in Belgium has
expressed its regret that the European Court of Human Rights in
Strasbourg dismissed its case against anti-sect legislation in
Belgium.
The Belgian law led to the establishment of an "Information and
Advice Centre on Harmful Sects".
"We very much regret this judgement and hope that the Centre, to
which we have already given various types of documentation about the
anthroposophical movement, will not just provide wrong or negative
information, as has already been done by the French and Belgian
authorities for example," Luc Vandecasteele from the Anthroposophical
Society said in a statement.
According to Vandecasteele, the Society's case before the human
rights court was raised to voice concerns about potential
discrimination against smaller groups with a specific world view,
which could now be designated as harmful by a body outside the normal
judicial process on the basis of non-verified information.
In its judgement, the Court declared that the conditions of Articles
34 and 35 of the [European human rights] convention had not been
complied with, Vandecasteele said. But the court had not specified
whether the case had not been brought in time, the national appeal
procedures had not been sufficiently exhausted - both conditions had
been met, according to Vandecasteele - or whether the party bringing
the action had not been discriminated against.
Article 34 of the human rights convention specifies who may make
application to the European Court of Human Rights, while Article 35
lays down the criteria for the admissibility of cases.
ENDS
+ + + + +
Item reference number: N030109-01EN
Date: 9 January 2003
More NNA reports at: http://www.nna-news.org/content/
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 936
-- Topica Digest --
virus alert
By charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk
Re: virus alert
By oscar001 earthlink.net
(NNA) Hamburger Waldorf schools in financial difficulty
By dan dandugan.com
Re: virus alert
By charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:34:19 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
Subject: virus alert
My wife has just received an e-mail an extract of which you'll find below.
It concerns a virus with the file name jdbgmgr.exe. I have just found and
deleted the file from our computer, so I suggest everyone check their hard
drives just in case.
Charlie.
***
)THIS IS URGENT. A virus has been passed on to us by a contact. Our
) ) address book in turn has been infected. Since you are in my address book
) ) there is a chance that you will find it in your computer also.
) )
) ) I followed the instructions below and eradicated the virus easily.
) ) The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by Norton or Macafee
) ) anti-virus system. This virus sits quietly for 14 days before damaging
)the
) ) system. It is sent automically by messenger and the address book,
)whether
) ) or not you send e-mails to your contacts.
) ) Here's how to check for the virus and get rid of it:
) )
) ) 1. Go to start, Find or Search option
) )
) ) 2. In the file/folders option, type the name : jdbgmgr.exe
) )
) ) 3. Be sure you search your C-drive and all the sub-files and any other
) ) drives you may have
) )
) ) 4. Click : "Find now"
) )
) ) 5. The virus has a grey teddy bear icon with the name jdbghgr.exe - DO
)NOT
) ) OPEN IT!
) )
) ) 6. Go to edit (on the menu bar) and choose SELECT ALL to highlight the
)file
) ) without opening it.
) )
) ) 7. Now go to the File (on the menu bar) and select DELETE. It will then
)go
) ) to the recycle bin.
) )
) ) 8. Go to the Recycle Bin and delete it there as well.
) )
) ) IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, you must contact all the people in your address
) ) book, so that they can eradicate it in their own address books.
) )
) ) To do this:
) )
) ) 1. Open a new e-mail message
) )
) ) 2. Click the icon of the address book next to the "To"
) )
) ) 3. Highlight evey name and add to "BCC"
) )
) ) 4. Copy this message, enter subject and paste to e-mail, and send
) )
) ) Remember you have to do this quickly.
) )
)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:35:41 -0800
From: "NJS" (oscar001 earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: virus alert
According to Symantec, this is a hoax:
http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/jdbgmgr.exe.file.hoax.html
It won't hurt your system to delete the file if you have already done so,
unless you use "Microsoft Visual J++ 1.1 to develop Java programs on Windows
XP, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows 98, or Windows 95."
Instructions to recover are located at the link above.
Jeanine
----- Original Message -----
From: charles morrison (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 7:34 AM
Subject: virus alert
) My wife has just received an e-mail an extract of which you'll find below.
) It concerns a virus with the file name jdbgmgr.exe. I have just found and
) deleted the file from our computer, so I suggest everyone check their hard
) drives just in case.
)
) Charlie.
)
) ***
) )THIS IS URGENT. A virus has been passed on to us by a contact. Our
) ) ) address book in turn has been infected. Since you are in my address
book
) ) ) there is a chance that you will find it in your computer also.
) ) )
) ) ) I followed the instructions below and eradicated the virus easily.
) ) ) The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by Norton or Macafee
) ) ) anti-virus system. This virus sits quietly for 14 days before damaging
) )the
) ) ) system. It is sent automically by messenger and the address book,
) )whether
) ) ) or not you send e-mails to your contacts.
) ) ) Here's how to check for the virus and get rid of it:
) ) )
) ) ) 1. Go to start, Find or Search option
) ) )
) ) ) 2. In the file/folders option, type the name : jdbgmgr.exe
) ) )
) ) ) 3. Be sure you search your C-drive and all the sub-files and any other
) ) ) drives you may have
) ) )
) ) ) 4. Click : "Find now"
) ) )
) ) ) 5. The virus has a grey teddy bear icon with the name jdbghgr.exe - DO
) )NOT
) ) ) OPEN IT!
) ) )
) ) ) 6. Go to edit (on the menu bar) and choose SELECT ALL to highlight the
) )file
) ) ) without opening it.
) ) )
) ) ) 7. Now go to the File (on the menu bar) and select DELETE. It will
then
) )go
) ) ) to the recycle bin.
) ) )
) ) ) 8. Go to the Recycle Bin and delete it there as well.
) ) )
) ) ) IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, you must contact all the people in your address
) ) ) book, so that they can eradicate it in their own address books.
) ) )
) ) ) To do this:
) ) )
) ) ) 1. Open a new e-mail message
) ) )
) ) ) 2. Click the icon of the address book next to the "To"
) ) )
) ) ) 3. Highlight evey name and add to "BCC"
) ) )
) ) ) 4. Copy this message, enter subject and paste to e-mail, and send
) ) )
) ) ) Remember you have to do this quickly.
) ) )
) )
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:52:05 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: (NNA) Hamburger Waldorf schools in financial difficulty
Copyright 2003 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved.
The following material may be republished without the prior consent
of News Network Anthroposophy. News Network Anthroposophy does,
however, require acknowledgement of the source and, if provided, the
author of the material.
+ + + + +
NNA-N E W S
Hamburger Waldorf schools in financial difficulty
Hamburg, 10 January (NNA) - The six Rudolf Steiner schools in Hamburg
are facing increasing financial difficulties.
According to a report in the newspaper "Hamburger Abendblatt" of 7
January, the situation of the schools has "dramatically worsened" as
a result of the austerity policy of the centre-right regional
government. The schools have been told that their government funding
will be cut by 10.2 percent in line with savings imposed on all state
schools in the city-state.
"We would actually need an increase in parental contributions of 30
percent to balance our budget," the paper quoted the bursar of the
Wandsbek Rudolf Steiner School, Matthias Farr, as saying.
As a result of the need to make savings, staff costs at the school
are to be cut by two percent. Waldorf teachers already earn
considerably less than their counterparts in state schools.
The dispute between the authorities and the independent schools has
been ongoing for some time - and not only in Hamburg. (See also NNA
report N020208-01EN Independent schools in the German regions of
Hesse and Hamburg demand proper funding, 8.2.2002).
Almost a year ago the parents' initiative "Improvement of State
Funding for Independent Schools in Hamburg", of which the Rudolf
Steiner schools are also a member, complained that the
recently-elected regional government had failed to keep to its
election promises in its proposed 2002 budget: "Despite trumpeting
election promises that cost unit rates per pupil would be increased
to 80% [of those for pupils in state schools], the new [centre-right]
senate is only implementing what the previous coalition of Social
Democrats and Greens had already agreed," the parents' initiative
said at the time.
In Hesse, too, there have been disputes between the Working Group of
Independent Schools (AGFS), which includes the Regional Association
of Free Waldorf Schools, and the regional government over a real
improvement in conditions for independent schools.
ENDS
+ + + + +
Item reference number: N030110-01EN
Date: 10 January 2003
More NNA reports at: http://www.nna-news.org/content/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 06:43:32 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
Subject: Re: virus alert
Thanks for pointing this out to me Jeanine and please accept my apologies
everyone. It was the shifty looking teddy bear that threw me.
warm regards,
Charlie.
----- Original Message -----
From: "NJS" (oscar001 earthlink.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: virus alert
) According to Symantec, this is a hoax:
)
) http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/jdbgmgr.exe.file.hoax.html
)
)
) It won't hurt your system to delete the file if you have already done so,
) unless you use "Microsoft Visual J++ 1.1 to develop Java programs on
Windows
) XP, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows 98, or Windows 95."
) Instructions to recover are located at the link above.
)
) Jeanine
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: charles morrison (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 7:34 AM
) Subject: virus alert
)
)
) ) My wife has just received an e-mail an extract of which you'll find
below.
) ) It concerns a virus with the file name jdbgmgr.exe. I have just found
and
) ) deleted the file from our computer, so I suggest everyone check their
hard
) ) drives just in case.
) )
) ) Charlie.
) )
) ) ***
) ) )THIS IS URGENT. A virus has been passed on to us by a contact. Our
) ) ) ) address book in turn has been infected. Since you are in my address
) book
) ) ) ) there is a chance that you will find it in your computer also.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) I followed the instructions below and eradicated the virus easily.
) ) ) ) The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by Norton or Macafee
) ) ) ) anti-virus system. This virus sits quietly for 14 days before
damaging
) ) )the
) ) ) ) system. It is sent automically by messenger and the address book,
) ) )whether
) ) ) ) or not you send e-mails to your contacts.
) ) ) ) Here's how to check for the virus and get rid of it:
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 1. Go to start, Find or Search option
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 2. In the file/folders option, type the name : jdbgmgr.exe
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 3. Be sure you search your C-drive and all the sub-files and any
other
) ) ) ) drives you may have
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 4. Click : "Find now"
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 5. The virus has a grey teddy bear icon with the name jdbghgr.exe -
DO
) ) )NOT
) ) ) ) OPEN IT!
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 6. Go to edit (on the menu bar) and choose SELECT ALL to highlight
the
) ) )file
) ) ) ) without opening it.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 7. Now go to the File (on the menu bar) and select DELETE. It will
) then
) ) )go
) ) ) ) to the recycle bin.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 8. Go to the Recycle Bin and delete it there as well.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, you must contact all the people in your
address
) ) ) ) book, so that they can eradicate it in their own address books.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) To do this:
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 1. Open a new e-mail message
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 2. Click the icon of the address book next to the "To"
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 3. Highlight evey name and add to "BCC"
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) 4. Copy this message, enter subject and paste to e-mail, and send
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) Remember you have to do this quickly.
) ) ) )
) ) )
) )
) )
)
)
)
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 937
-- Topica Digest --
Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 22:09:13 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
) Brad on Steiner's philosophy:
)
) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of humanity,
) )man/woman. And, of essential importance, the capacity of each human to
) )increase, toward the highest in the overarching term, Love. This process
) )can be called by many names: metanoia, transformation, transmutation,
) )individuation, self-actualization, et al. There is More
) )than the mechanistic sleep, eat, work and fornicate.
Diana said:
) See, I think this is a caricature. Are there really any philosophies that
) tout sleeping, eating, working and fornicating as a meaningful existence
and
) posit nothing beyond, or within, or among us (however you think of it)?
) Steiner I suppose would be an improvement on such a theory, but you're
) setting the bar kind of low.
Brad: That was a deliberate extreme statement, although I would think there
might be at least one wife out there who has a full time couch potato for a
husband with non stop sports on the tube who would say that the bar was at
an accurate level. It more refers to what Gurdjieff spoke of when he said
that humanity was 'asleep'. ie that normal state of consciousness is only a
part of what is possible. Maslow devoted his scientific profession to the
question and there is academic interest from the 1990's in consciousness
studies, and numerous others are verifying and researching the deeper
aspects of the question of, What is Life? Mechanistic science has created
the wonders we enjoy today, but they had to put aside the question, What is
Life?, first because of the Church. Now, the more complete systems science
is addressing the many systemic questions which were put aside for the time,
such as qualities.
My comment above about the 'capacity of each human to increase' was expanded
upon with my posting from the biography of the self described Jewish atheist
practical mystic, Abraham Maslow. No one from WC has responded to that
direct 'evidence' from his biography.
) )So, why did these folks embellish with such rhetorical excess? That is a
) )perplexing question. Was it their own attempt at bringing to the larger
) number the wisdom not so
) )obvious to the majority who remain mired in the Whiteheadian, "fallacy
that
) )has infused tragedy", into civilization?
)
) Nah, you're taking him too seriously. Gurus invent a lot of outrageous
) stuff - the more outrageous it is, the likelier some people are to believe
) it. Once they tell a few stories, and realize people believe them, the
thing
) takes on a life of its own. Embellishment brings a bigger and more
gullible
) audience. And it must be so tempting!
I am taking seriously the core insights Steiner was investigating from the
broader and related discussion in the West. I am not taking seriously at all
his excesses. There are gurus and there are gurus. Among the most honored
have included Plato, Pythagoras, Jesus, the Buddha, etc. There are a large
number in the second and third rank. There are the complete charlatans such
as Jim Jones and David Koresh at Waco. No one has yet returned to my request
on who has written an objective evaluaton on Steiner separating the useable
insights from the nonsense. Further, I am surfing to try to find someone
identifying what my suspicious is that Steiner was using an elaborate
mythology as a rhetorical device to present more completely on the
individual and the spiritual as many have done. His purpose, along with many
others, was to give focus on the human being with capacities for 'the more',
that Abe Maslow, eg, has given modern focus.
Waldorf Critics has given strong evidence as to Waldorf teacher training,
teachers, and parents and Anthroposophists who are taking much of it more
literally than I was aware of. This has created the local problems that
resulted in WC. And, you folks on WC are buying into the literalism as if
Anthroposophy/Waldorf is 100% literalized. "Oh, my heavens, did you read
this from the lecture on September 2, 1906 where Steiner mentioned the root
race of the third hypoteneuse from the Galaxy Lemuria that was the spiritual
forebear of Aunt Minnie 10 million years ago and incarnated to him by a
previous life as an amoeba at the bottom of the primeval ocean that later
became the Mindanao Deep!!!!!!!" Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
From my investigation, it seems Steiner is being slotted in perhaps a third
rank, but not Anthroposophy being the Axis of Evil creating NeoNazi's and
budding terrorists in their educational derivation (deliberate rhetorical
excess) as WC seems to feel. A Jim Jones, by extension, is in the 10,000th
rank. By this measure, WC puts him around 5000! The disparity begs for
investigation as numerous have commented upon in the WC Archives. I also
conclude that the current discussion goes on apace as if some of the earlier
lengthy, intelligent, insightful, and objective comments on Anthroposopy and
Waldorf had never been posted, let alone learned from. Mr. Ron Miller comes
to mind.
The question remains, How much has modern Anthroposophy matured with modern
systems/quantum science and matured spirituality, and by extension to the
Waldorf organization, and how extensive is the presence of the literaizers
who don't get the big picture. You have given me evidence that it is,
unfortunately, less than what I would have expected. .
)Brad, how much Steiner have you read?
I had read much of McDermott's 'Essential Steiner', two or three of his
smaller books, such as on Music, and from an early edition around 1990 of
ReVision - A Journal of Consciousness and Transformation, which in it's
early years was where the intelligent minds of the counterculture were
publishing. The issue was devoted to Steiner, Waldorf, Montessori and
related trends in society. I have already said, I picked up some insight
from Steiner along with scores of others, Whitehead being one of the best.
I recognized the insight from Steiner, dismissed the nonsense and passed on
to the more cogent minds. This was 10 to 15 years ago for me. Now is a
revisit. I have been surfing for several months now, and, given that many
credible writers have written favorably on Steiner with the obvious
necessary critiques, and what seems to be a fairly large number of satisfied
Waldorf parents worldwide, I begin to have questions about WC.
) )Why is it that a large part of humanity has had, and continues to have,
the
) )predisposition in the symbol producing system of the psyche to concretize
) )the metaphor, rather than live the examined life with love, learning and
) )bliss, which is well documented within the Wisdom Literatures of the
world,
) )when undertood and experienced?
)
)
) What? Could you simplify that perhaps? Are you asking why do people end up
) believing the stories they tell? Or what is the "predisposition in the
) symbol producing system of the psyche to concretize the metaphor"? If
) that's what you're asking, I think it's simple - it is not easy to live
the
) "examined life," having dogma and rhetoric to rely on instead is very
) convenient. I think we all do it.
I respectfully disagree. I started from neutral, the basic story from
Christianity did not make sense. In my late 20', late 1960's, I started a
personal journey of education into the Western humanities and some Eastern,
such as the Tao Te Ching. From this journey comes the examined life. With
further development, one no longer needs to rely upon the 'dogma and
rhetoric', but matures into knowledge and experience. Moral values become
known and integrated into one's life. I posted earlier the most respected
and oftern quoted summation on the subject of personal maturation from
Dante's Convivio.
One of the more cogent, publicly available expostions on this are the six
hours played numerous times on Public Television of the Power of Myth with
Joseph Campbell. The historical few who have made this journey toward fuller
humanness are increasing by leaps and bounds. One can be ostracized today,
but not burned at the stake or beheaded. If that were the case I would have
been roasted some years ago. So, we have made a modest advance in
civilization.
I see Steiner having contributed to that advance. Again, the question I will
be pursuing in the ongoing time, as my niece is involved, is how well, or
badly, are the Waldorf educational organization doing and the Waldorf
schools, on these larger questions. Directly, how well are they teaching as
metaphors to stir the imaginative vessel into which the data of the Readin',
Ritin', and Rithmatic can more easily and efficiently be entered.
Retain the good, dismiss the nonsense. A corollary would be, when taken
literally, it is nonsense, when understood allegorically, it is insight and
wisdom.
For example, a Gnome is a pithy saying that expresses a general truth or
fundamental principle; an aphorism; from the Greek, gnome, intelligence, and
gignoskein, to know. Aphorism is from the Greek aphorismos, from
aphorizein, apo (off, or far away) and horizein (to limit, from horos,
meaning boundary), meaning to mark off by boundaries, to set aside, cast
out, a delimitation: a short, pithy statement: a terse statement of a truth;
a brief statement of principle: an adage, maxim. A Gnome is also a member of
a fabled race of dwarflike creatures who live underground and guard hordes
of treasure. ---- I presume therefore, that discussion of a gnome is for
the childhood imagination to be used like Santa Claus and angels, to be used
appropriately, depending upon the age and understanding. Her mother and I
will be assisting in the transition to maturity, learning from the
mythology, passing on to the deeper understanding.
I received a Gnome for Christmas from her. (I am feeling the heat from hell,
although it may be the thermostat is set too high.) I gave her a crafty
sort of angel.
) No! We don't suggest Waldorf parents are mindless parrots - they don't
even
) usually *know* about this nonsense! Waldorf parents often, very gradually,
) catch on that many of the teachers are mindless parrots.
This is a fascinating issue with implications. Later-----
)There was a lot to disagree with in your prescription for PLANS,
In your opinion.
) snip to this point
) They don't aim to help children absorb knowledge or information or
readily, or to
) speed up such a process. Just the opposite. They believe the more
knowledge
) of the world (facts) children take in, the more materialistic they become
) and less able to perceive spiritual realities.
This gets at the heart of the matter of what is the strategic intention of
holistic
education and how well and not well is it being carried out.
Thanks, Diana, for your comments,
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:36:55 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net) wrote:
(snip)
I have not returned enough to Steiner yet to uncover if there is an IMOS on
him and Anthroposophy, separating the wisdom from the nonsense.
(snip)
Peter F responds:
G'day Brad. There is a lot in your posts that deserves comment but this bit
is the bit that caught my eye first. I want to turn this question around.
Why the hell didn't Steiner do this separating? It seems to me to be easy to
find nonsense in Steiner's writings and recorded lectures. Why would anyone
want to spend time wading through all that to find some pearls of wisdom
which may or may not exist? I would assert the opposite to your suggestion.
There is clearly so much nonsense in Steiner's work that this it is obvious
that it is not a good place to look for wisdom.
You listed a number of people who you describe as IMOS, then others of the
second or third rank, and finally some charlatans. Surely that which
separates the charlatans from the rest is the presence of nonsense.
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:59:58 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
Peter Farrell said:
) (snip)
) I have not returned enough to Steiner yet to uncover if there is an IMOS
on
) him and Anthroposophy, separating the wisdom from the nonsense.
) (snip)
)
) Peter F responds:
) G'day Brad. There is a lot in your posts that deserves comment but this
bit
) is the bit that caught my eye first. I want to turn this question around.
) Why the hell didn't Steiner do this separating? It seems to me to be easy
to
) find nonsense in Steiner's writings and recorded lectures. Why would
anyone
) want to spend time wading through all that to find some pearls of wisdom
) which may or may not exist? I would assert the opposite to your
suggestion.
) There is clearly so much nonsense in Steiner's work that this it is
obvious
) that it is not a good place to look for wisdom.
) You listed a number of people who you describe as IMOS, then others of the
) second or third rank, and finally some charlatans. Surely that which
) separates the charlatans from the rest is the presence of nonsense.
) See you, Peter
Brad:
Right, it truly is perplexing. I remember wading through some Theosophical
material channeled from the Mahootma Hatma HooWoo's from caverns of
antiquity in Afghanistan, or wherever, and then getting to Leadbetter
thinking he had some intellectual snap. Wrong!. -- He got caught up in
Blavatsky's woo woo, as well. And, of course, Gurdjieff is a leaden weight
of verbosity, although I imagine there are Gurdjieffians who hang on every
word. As I said, Maurice Nicoll's, 'New Man', is an excellent synthesis on
Theosophy, beautifully presenting the wisdom within the lines of the Bible.
After the Koresh Waco disaster, I took the opportunity to read the entire
Book of Revelation that they were taking literally word for word. My opinion
is that that piece of literature was an excellent account of someone who
wrote down his mental voyage under an hallucinogen.
I took the opportunity a while back on a trip to Chicago to visit the
Theosophical Library at the Olcutt mansion in Wheaton, Illinois. What a
gorgeous place. The library covers the main large, high ceilinged living
room. I deliberately went through all the sections, which covered all the
world's religions and serious writers on the metaphorical knowledge. There
was only one shelf on what I would call the New Age nonsense. On the same
grounds is their bookstore. Also, quite impressive with a mixture of the
serious and the popular. Often in a town will be a 'New Age' bookstore with
99% nonsense. I understand the Bodhi Tree in Los Angelas and the main book
store in Boulder, CO are both good stores along this line. In any event, the
Theosophical Library was extremely impressive and reflected the strategic
purpose for organizations such as Theosophy, Gurdjieff and Anthroposophy in
the first place, which was to counter the hegemony of the Western Church. At
this library, I feel they succeeded admirably. If a person wanted to
seriously study the world's religious traditions, it is an excellent source.
Everyone was exceedingly nice, no horns or tails, and their quaterly
schedule seemed rational enough with minimal of the 'nonsense'.
So, agreed, why did he write in such a fashion??? He was by no means the
only one doing so. More importantly 100 years later, what is Anthroposophy
doing today to extract the good. Someone had recommended his Philosophy of
Freedom as a more seminal work which I have printed out.
9/11 has made a new day out of this crucial issue. The reality of the
fundamentalist mindset is no longer one of smugly saying, "oh, each has a
right to their belief", stated from a position of security from this
relatively safe democracy. Tthe effects of this mindset upon the individual
and the community of the logical result of the tragic extremes of the
mindset must be guarded againt. My reading of history is that the framers
were smart guys, learned from European history and put this check and
balance in.
In the larger context, Anthroposophy is not on my radar screen. I lump it in
with the other two similar organizations which had strategic value at
countering the arrogant hegemony of the Church and bringing in the reality
that there are other important religious traditions.
I have no interest in Anthroposophy. I will gain my knowledge from more
credible and efficient sources. However, I do have an interest in Waldorf
now that my niece is there. I will be looking for the fox(es) in the
henhouse, how well her local school and teacher is separating out the
nonsense and how well the hoistic, imaginative approach to pedagogy is doing
for her. Until this recent round of surfing, I had not realized at how
extensive the holistic had gained ground in various places, in additon to
the Waldorf and Montessori.
So, in response to your last line, who is going to clean out the nonsense in
the three major Western Abrahamic traditions? More importantly is the
recognition, as Alfred North Whitehead has done, that the actual sayings and
life of Jesus, for example, was certainly exemplary. It is those who mucked
it up who need to be relegated to a lesser rank.
It is happening. Mathew Fox being thrown out of the Catholic Church and
becoming Episcopal is an example. Bishop Spong of the Episcopal traditon
taking a year's sabatical traveling the country to attempt to rescue
Christianity from the fundamentalists is another.
Brad
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 938
-- Topica Digest --
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
RE: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Two Scientific American Articles
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Anthroposophy and prisons
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Two Scientific American Articles
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 08:23:45 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
Brad (previously) on Steiner's philosophy:
)) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
)) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of humanity,
)) )man/woman.
Such puffery. You call that "radical"? I don't think I know a single
individual who wouldn't agree, and doesn't try, to "increase, toward the
highest in the overarching term, Love." Whether you use fancy words like
"metanoia" that maybe puzzle or intimidate the average person, or a simpler
formulation like, trying to be a good person, love makes it all worthwhile,
etc., it's pretty basic, Brad, it's hardly a "radical approach to humanity."
(also previously)
)And, of essential importance, the capacity of each human to increase,
)toward the highest in the overarching term, Love. This process can be
)called by many names: metanoia, transformation, transmutation,
)individuation, self-actualization, et al. There is More than the
mechanistic
)sleep, eat, work and fornicate.
(and I replied:)
)) See, I think this is a caricature. Are there really any philosophies that
)) tout sleeping, eating, working and fornicating as a meaningful existence
))and posit nothing beyond, or within, or among us (however you think of
)) it)? Steiner I suppose would be an improvement on such a theory, but
you're
)) setting the bar kind of low.
Brad:
)That was a deliberate extreme statement, although I would think there
)might be at least one wife out there who has a full time couch potato for a
)husband with non stop sports on the tube who would say that the bar was at
)an accurate level.
Amusingly there was an article in our paper the other day, front page, about
our football team, about which the city is in a fever pitch because they may
make it to the Superbowl, and how so many, if not most, of the players are
deeply religious. Yeah sure, your average sports zombie doesn't know from
love or spirituality or meaning in life, just lives to eat, sleep and
fornicate. (sarcasm; caricature alert) When are people calling themselves
spiritual going to get off their high horse? *All* of humanity is concerned
with love, meaning, purpose in life, y'all haven't got it all wrapped up.
)My comment above about the 'capacity of each human to increase' was
)expanded upon with my posting from the biography of the self described
Jewish
)atheist practical mystic, Abraham Maslow. No one from WC has responded to
that
)direct 'evidence' from his biography.
What response do you want? What did you mean to give evidence of? I believe
you, lots of people are interested in "increasing" in a spiritual sense. I
considered it obvious, not a new revelation.
) No one has yet returned to my request on who has written an objective
)evaluaton on Steiner separating the useable insights from the nonsense.
Maybe 'cus no one has. Those inside anthroposophy are hardly objective; he
is their guru. Outside anthroposophy, few find anything useful
outside the nonsense. Perhaps if you clarified what you think the "useable
insights" are, you'd get a specific response from someone here.
)Further, I am surfing to try to find someone identifying what my suspicious
)is that Steiner was using an elaborate mythology as a rhetorical device to
)present more completely on the individual and the spiritual as many have
done.
You mean, then, that Steiner himself didn't really believe *literally* or
mean for us to take literally, his descriptions of spirits on other planets,
and stories like the lost continent of Atlantis etc. In that case he was
indeed a charlatan, since he certainly encouraged his followers to believe
it all literally. Llike so many people interpreting Steiner, you're free to
decide he didn't really mean what he said, but the fact is he said it. Over
and over, he said that the "insights" of anthroposophy were literally true
and that anyone who had true spiritual vision would know that they were
true. If you did his exercises, eventually you would see these spiritual
realities are clearly as most of us perceive physical realities.
)Waldorf Critics has given strong evidence as to Waldorf teacher training,
)teachers, and parents and Anthroposophists who are taking much of it more
)literally than I was aware of. This has created the local problems that
)resulted in WC. And, you folks on WC are buying into the literalism as if
)Anthroposophy/Waldorf is 100% literalized.
You miss the point. We don't buy it literally, obviously. We are pointing
out what *is* believed by many in the movement.
)"Oh, my heavens, did you read this from the lecture on September 2, 1906
)where Steiner mentioned the root race of the third hypoteneuse from the
)Galaxy Lemuria that was the spiritual forebear of Aunt Minnie 10 million
years ago and incarnated )to him by a previous life as an amoeba at the
bottom of the primeval ocean that later
)became the Mindanao Deep!!!!!!!" Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
Just our point. No serious educator studies stuff like that in preparation
to teach first grade. This is what you read if you take Waldorf teacher
training however.
)I also conclude that the current discussion goes on apace as if some of the
)earlier lengthy, intelligent, insightful, and objective comments on
Anthroposopy
)and Waldorf had never been posted, let alone learned from. Mr. Ron Miller
comes
)to mind.
Well, you know Brad, there are only so many hours in a day. I vaguely recall
an article by a Ron Miller on the website but if I ever read it it was years
ago. Have you something to say about Ron Miller's article? Say it. I'm sure
you will get comments if you do.
)One of the more cogent, publicly available expostions on this are the six
)hours played numerous times on Public Television of the Power of Myth with
)Joseph Campbell. The historical few who have made this journey toward
)fuller humanness are increasing by leaps and bounds. One can be ostracized
today,
)but not burned at the stake or beheaded.
Oh baloney. I'm sorry, I'm the wrong person to be answering you probably, I
have no patience with this stuff anymore. Don't try to tell me you are
"ostracized" for an interest in Joseph Campbell. Few things are more chic
today than
New Age spirituality in its many forms. I doubt anybody is ostracizing you,
anywhere you go in your daily life, give me a break.
Can't have this both ways, Brad. Is this so rarefied and advanced that only
a few people dare to make this special journey, risking ostracism or worse .
. . or . . . is it 6 hours on PBS, replayed countless times and loved by
thousands?
)If that were the case I would have been roasted some years ago. So, we
)have made a modest advance in civilization.
Lol! Would have to agree. Don't want to see you roasted at stake Brad. Just
have little patience for the puffery and pretension that seems to accompany
so much of this.
)I see Steiner having contributed to that advance. Again, the question I
)will be pursuing in the ongoing time, as my niece is involved, is how well,
or
)badly, are the Waldorf educational organization doing and the Waldorf
)schools, on these larger questions. Directly, how well are they teaching as
)metaphors to stir the imaginative vessel into which the data of the
)Readin', Ritin', and Rithmatic can more easily and efficiently be entered.
Brad, Read up on Waldorf pedagogy. You have a fundamental misunderstanding
of the intent. They don't aim to help children enter readin' and writin'
"more efficiently." They delay all cognitive development as long as
possible, they think it is harmful.
)For example, a Gnome is a pithy saying that expresses a general truth or
)fundamental principle; an aphorism; from the Greek, gnome, intelligence,
)and gignoskein, to know.
Maybe so. My son's teacher told me she had seen gnomes in the woods.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 05:22:27 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Fw: The Case of Anthroposophy
Brad Martin wrote:
)
)
) ) Brad on Steiner's philosophy:
) )
) ) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
) ) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of humanity,
) ) )man/woman. And, of essential importance, the capacity of each human to
) ) )increase, toward the highest in the overarching term, Love.
Hi, Brad. Just noticing that this last line above is not a sentence.
Could you please clarify this ?
This process
) ) )can be called by many names: metanoia, transformation, transmutation,
) ) )individuation, self-actualization, et al. There is More
) ) )than the mechanistic sleep, eat, work and fornicate.
Metanoia means to regret or confess, in Greek. What's your point?
)
) Brad: That was a deliberate extreme statement, although I would think
) there
) might be at least one wife out there who has a full time couch potato
) for a
) husband with non stop sports on the tube who would say that the bar was
) at
) an accurate level.
You underestimate your audience, sir. But apocalyptic thinking seems to
be your bar of normalcy. I wonder why?
It more refers to what Gurdjieff spoke of when he said
) that humanity was 'asleep'. ie that normal state of consciousness is
) only a
) part of what is possible.
Having read Gurdjieff extensively and also having read of how many
people's lives he destroyed (Katharine Mansfield for one) I wonder that
you set him as a model.
Maslow devoted his scientific profession to the
) question and there is academic interest from the 1990's in
) consciousness
) studies, and numerous others are verifying and researching the deeper
) aspects of the question of, What is Life?
Maslow was interested in peak experiences, and deriving the meaning from
our daily existence, not in determining what Life is.
) Mechanistic science
Please define what mechanistic science is as opposed to science. Is
there a difference?
has created
) the wonders we enjoy today, but they had to put aside the question, What
) is
) Life?, first because of the Church.
Please explain; the Church has caused us to put aside what?
Now, the more complete systems science
) is addressing the many systemic questions which were put aside for the
) time,
) such as qualities.
Qualities of what?
)
) My comment above about the 'capacity of each human to increase' was
) expanded
Increase what?
) upon with my posting from the biography of the self described Jewish
) atheist
) practical mystic, Abraham Maslow. No one from WC has responded to that
) direct 'evidence' from his biography.
Your sentences are so poorly constructed that it is difficult to
decipher the meaning. Maybe you should post one idea at a time and then
deal with each individually.
) I am taking seriously the core insights Steiner was investigating from
) the
) broader and related discussion in the West. I am not taking seriously at
) all
) his excesses. There are gurus and there are gurus. Among the most
) honored
) have included Plato, Pythagoras, Jesus, the Buddha, etc. There are a
) large
) number in the second and third rank. There are the complete charlatans
) such
) as Jim Jones and David Koresh at Waco. No one has yet returned to my
) request
) on who has written an objective evaluaton on Steiner separating the
) useable
) insights from the nonsense. Further, I am surfing to try to find
) someone
) identifying what my suspicious is that Steiner was using an elaborate
) mythology as a rhetorical device to present more completely on the
) individual and the spiritual as many have done. His purpose, along with
) many
) others, was to give focus on the human being with capacities for 'the
) more',
) that Abe Maslow, eg, has given modern focus.
Please try to understand that the Waldorf Critics have taken many
actions of the Anthroposophist schools and have found the underlying
philosophy in Steiner's writings to explain the actions. There are
concrete correlations between what Steiner preached, wrote, and what
went on in the Waldorf Schools and still goes on.
)
) Waldorf Critics has given strong evidence as to Waldorf teacher
) training,
) teachers, and parents and Anthroposophists who are taking much of it
) more
) literally than I was aware of. This has created the local problems that
) resulted in WC. And, you folks on WC are buying into the literalism as
) if
) Anthroposophy/Waldorf is 100% literalized.
Waldorf Critics have merely connected the dots. They have connected the
activities and policies of the Waldorf schools with the texts of
Steiner. It's really quite easy to connect the dots, if you have the
patience and fortitude to read the texts. It's all there. Very concrete.
"Oh, my heavens, did you read
) this from the lecture on September 2, 1906 where Steiner mentioned the
) root
) race of the third hypoteneuse from the Galaxy Lemuria that was the
) spiritual
) forebear of Aunt Minnie 10 million years ago and incarnated to him by a
) previous life as an amoeba at the bottom of the primeval ocean that
) later
) became the Mindanao Deep!!!!!!!"
You are minimizing the fact that Steiner's words are taken literally.
Yesterday, today, and most certainly tomorrow!!
Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
) From my investigation, it seems Steiner is being slotted in perhaps a
) third
) rank, but not Anthroposophy being the Axis of Evil creating NeoNazi's
) and
) budding terrorists in their educational derivation (deliberate
) rhetorical
) excess) as WC seems to feel.
On the contrary, Waldorf has been plodding along for years, doing the
same nonsense and no one has bothered to expose it until now. It is just
getting outed for what it is.
A Jim Jones, by extension, is in the 10,000th
) rank. By this measure, WC puts him around 5000!
Thousand what?
The disparity begs for
) investigation as numerous have commented upon in the WC Archives. I also
) conclude that the current discussion goes on apace as if some of the
) earlier
) lengthy, intelligent, insightful, and objective comments on Anthroposopy
) and
) Waldorf had never been posted, let alone learned from. Mr. Ron Miller
) comes
) to mind.
It is very difficult to decipher your sentences. Perhaps using the
grammatical checks in your program might help you with sentence
construction, and in turn make this a more fruitful discussion.
Peace.
Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 06:55:14 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Two Scientific American Articles
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_7162_5e97_4880
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
There are two topical Scientific American articles available on the web at
the moment. The first deals with the genetic basis for race.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0002A353-C027-1E1C-8B3B809EC588EEDF&catID=2
The second discusses the reality of the moon landings.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0007467E-C454-1E1C-8B3B809EC588EEDF&catID=2
Enjoy.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------=_NextPart_000_7162_5e97_4880
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name="Scientific American Sheer Lunacy.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="Scientific American Sheer Lunacy.url"
W0RFRkFVTFRdDQpCQVNFVVJMPWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2NpYW0uY29tL2FydGljbGUuY2ZtP2FydGlj
bGVJRD0wMDA3NDY3RS1DNDU0LTFFMUMtOEIzQjgwOUVDNTg4RUVERiZjYXRJRD0yDQpbSW50ZXJu
ZXRTaG9ydGN1dF0NClVSTD1odHRwOi8vd3d3LnNjaWFtLmNvbS9hcnRpY2xlLmNmbT9hcnRpY2xl
SUQ9MDAwNzQ2N0UtQzQ1NC0xRTFDLThCM0I4MDlFQzU4OEVFREYmY2F0SUQ9Mg0KTW9kaWZpZWQ9
RjA3QkRCMkI5OUJCQzIwMTg4DQo=
------=_NextPart_000_7162_5e97_4880--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:55:26 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Anthroposophy and prisons
From a fund-raising letter from The Anthroposophical Society in America:
"Violence in the United States is escalating, and we build additional
prisons each year. Is there a way to help prisoners find their way
back to a healthy social life? The Prison Outreach program of the
Anthroposophical Society in America is touching the lives of many
prisoners. The letters they write after reading books by Rudolf
Steiner and working on basic exercises are incredibly moving."
I guess a captive audience is a good ground for missionary work.
Maybe they'll go into Waldorf teacher training when they get out;
most Waldorf schools don't do background checks. The letter continues:
"In addition, when Waldorf practices were introduced in a program for
incarcerated teens, the students reacted very positively to the
curriculum, that included story telling and the arts. Commenting on
the wonder of two boys from conflicting gangs playing recorder
together, a teacher wrote, 'How can you fight someone after you've
played a Mozart duet with him?'"
There's no limit to the mileage they'll try to get out of the Thomas
E. Mathews School in Marysville, CA. There are two problems with
this: first, the school is a disaster. Award-winning teacher Kathleen
Sutphen, who quit Mathews after being forced to attend classes at
Rudolf Steiner College, wrote in response to Todd Oppenheimer's
Atlantic Monthly article:
"I worked at this school for seven years over the course of 1989 -
1997. Despite being chosen Employee of the Month and receiving
several national awards and grants, including Teacher of the Year
(Continental Cablevision - 1991), I was subjected to ongoing
harassment and character assassination after I began to question the
legality of Anthroposophical religious indoctrination in staff
training sessions led by uneducated, unaccredited Anthroposophists
brought over from Europe. Both staff and students were subjected to
nonacademic, occultist activities through the Waldorf training and
pedagogy adopted from the Rudolf Steiner College, a nonaccredited
Anthroposophical religious institution located in Fair Oaks,
California. I quit in frustration over the academic dearth of Waldorf
education and grief at watching our nation's most needy students
being subjected to occultist religious indoctrination in the place of
a sound academic program.
"Mr. Oppenheimer neglected to include in his article any concrete
measurement of Waldorf's effect on the juvenile offenders that attend
Mathews School. He failed to mention that last spring's STAR test
scores show these students tested among the lowest in the state of
California. After more than 6 years of Waldorf inclusion most of the
students are still functionally illiterate. Few can read for meaning,
if, indeed, they can read at all. Few can perform more than the most
elementary mathematical computations. Criminal recidivism is
extraordinarily high. Physical altercations on campus are a common
occurrence. Students continue to come to school under the influence
of drugs and truancy is common. Many of the older students look upon
their education at Mathews School as a joke.
"I wonder why Mr. Oppenheimer didn't ask how many of Mathews'
students were able to obtain their high school diploma since the
Waldorf pedagogy was adopted. The answer is zero or very close to it.
Mathews' students leave the campus with little or no increase in
academic skills. They do not have the ability to pass the GED.
Instead of learning minimal competencies to pass the GED or read on
the most elementary level, these students are copying their lesson
books off the blackboard; playing plastic recorders; and chanting
anthroposophical verses."
Sutphen's full letter is at:
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/SutphenLtrAtlanticMth.html
The school doesn't even appear in the 2002 California test results.
Perhaps it was too embarrassing to be compared with real schools.
Second, it's interesting to note that publicly-funded Waldorf schools
like Mathews go to great lengths to deny any connection between
Anthroposophy and their Waldorf programs; but on the other side of
the fence, Anthroposophists are bragging about the school.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:47:17 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Two Scientific American Articles
Thanks!
-dd
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 939
-- Topica Digest --
re: the cast for anthrop.
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By dan dandugan.com
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: the case for anthrop.
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
RE: The Case of Anthroposophy
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
girl branded "devil child" by anthros
By momof2gals mindspring.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:46:12 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: the cast for anthrop.
Brad writes:
Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
Lisa: Yes, *we* know that. But Waldorf teachers and Anthroposophers need to
hear this news and digest it. Instead of living in the world today, they
strive to live according to tenets of a religion with tentacles stretching
back to the Middle Ages and even further. THEY take Steiner literally,
resulting in problems for children and parents at Waldorf schools.
It is not us, the Waldorf Critics, who are taking Steiner literally.
Many of us consider most of what he said patent nonsense! Waldorf teachers,
on the other hand, believe his word is gospel, that he "knew" the truth via
his clairvoyance. So they do everything they can to toe Steiner's line.
Get it?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:58:04 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
on 1/12/03 8:09 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
) I am taking seriously the core insights Steiner was investigating from the
) broader and related discussion in the West. I am not taking seriously at all
) his excesses. There are gurus and there are gurus. Among the most honored
) have included Plato, Pythagoras, Jesus, the Buddha, etc. There are a large
) number in the second and third rank. There are the complete charlatans such
) as Jim Jones and David Koresh at Waco.
I would not put Koresh in the same category as Jim Jones, rather, I would
say that Koresh and Steiner were similar to each other. Both Steiner and
Koresh were true believers (of different religions), both preached
apocalyptic sermons, both were interested in indoctrinating children, both
had an entourage of female devotees, both promoted a healthy diet, both
opposed the outside world and both claimed they had the truth. (The Waco
disaster had more to do with people from outside of his cult than Koresh
himself, whereas Jim Jones made followers rehearse mass suicides in
anticipation).
No one has yet returned to my request
) on who has written an objective evaluaton on Steiner separating the useable
) insights from the nonsense.
Sharon: The only book devoted to Steiner/Anthroposophy from outside the
movement and printed in English is G. Ahern's "Sun at Midnight", but it does
not do as you wish. It is a history and overview of Steiner's nonsense.
Further, I am surfing to try to find someone
) identifying what my suspicious is that Steiner was using an elaborate
) mythology as a rhetorical device to present more completely on the
) individual and the spiritual as many have done.
Sharon: Wish on. That is not the case.
His purpose, along with many
) others, was to give focus on the human being with capacities for 'the more',
) that Abe Maslow, eg, has given modern focus.
Sharon: It's no secret to me that Maslow was drawn to mysticism, and that he
taught "self actualization" meant a person reached their highest human
potential when they delved into mysticism. (Though at public school they
don't teach you this little point). More people have taken Maslow seriously
than they have Steiner, but Maslow is not particularly "in" nowadays. Even
Freud and Jung have fallen by the wayside.
)
) Waldorf Critics has given strong evidence as to Waldorf teacher training,
) teachers, and parents and Anthroposophists who are taking much of it more
) literally than I was aware of.
Sharon: Well, when the Guru says "there's an etheric, astral, I and physical
body" and bases his entire pedagogy on his scheme of reincarnation and
personal religious beliefs, what would you expect? When the movement only
focuses on Steiner's doctrinal works, training teachers from an
Anthroposophical perspective, making them read Steiner's doctrine at Waldorf
teacher training--and nothing but Steiner--ignoring the last 100 years of
education experts and research, of course teachers end up taking Steiner
literally. Besides, Steiner was literal!
This has created the local problems that
) resulted in WC. And, you folks on WC are buying into the literalism as if
) Anthroposophy/Waldorf is 100% literalized. "Oh, my heavens, did you read
) this from the lecture on September 2, 1906 where Steiner mentioned the root
) race of the third hypoteneuse from the Galaxy Lemuria that was the spiritual
) forebear of Aunt Minnie 10 million years ago and incarnated to him by a
) previous life as an amoeba at the bottom of the primeval ocean that later
) became the Mindanao Deep!!!!!!!"
Sharon: Anthro is literal, your caricature is precisely the kind of
mentality Steiner believers had at our ex-school.
) Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
)
Exactly! This is W critic's point, it is now 2003! When Dan told his school
that racist doctrine "was then, this is now" he got kicked out.
) From my investigation, it seems Steiner is being slotted in perhaps a third
) rank, but not Anthroposophy being the Axis of Evil creating NeoNazi's and
) budding terrorists in their educational derivation (deliberate rhetorical
) excess) as WC seems to feel.
Sharon: Oh rubbish. That's your excess. We merely look at the historical
Steiner and his racist doctrine. Most people in Waldorf are clueless about
the esoteric subtext. These people add a veil of "normalcy" to the schools.
A Jim Jones, by extension, is in the 10,000th
) rank.
Sharon: Jim Jones was opposed to racism. He was trying to build a non -
racist society. Unfortunately, things went terribly wrong. Human's sadly
follow.
By this measure, WC puts him around 5000! The disparity begs for
) investigation as numerous have commented upon in the WC Archives. I also
) conclude that the current discussion goes on apace as if some of the earlier
) lengthy, intelligent, insightful, and objective comments on Anthroposopy and
) Waldorf had never been posted, let alone learned from. Mr. Ron Miller comes
) to mind.
Sharon: Why don't you add some lengthy, intelligent, insightful, and
objective comments on Anthroposopy then? Why don't you re-post Ron Miller's
work, or better yet, invite him back?
)
)) Brad, how much Steiner have you read?
)
) I had read much of McDermott's 'Essential Steiner', two or three of his
) smaller books, such as on Music, and from an early edition around 1990 of
) ReVision - A Journal of Consciousness and Transformation, which in it's
) early years was where the intelligent minds of the counterculture were
) publishing. The issue was devoted to Steiner, Waldorf, Montessori and
) related trends in society. I have already said, I picked up some insight
) from Steiner along with scores of others, Whitehead being one of the best.
) I recognized the insight from Steiner, dismissed the nonsense and passed on
) to the more cogent minds. This was 10 to 15 years ago for me. Now is a
) revisit. I have been surfing for several months now, and, given that many
) credible writers have written favorably on Steiner with the obvious
) necessary critiques, and what seems to be a fairly large number of satisfied
) Waldorf parents worldwide, I begin to have questions about WC.
Sharon: You need to read more Steiner, clearly you don't have enough under
your belt. McDermot is a supporter, I've also read his book. It's
interesting that you find Whitehead to be one of the best, I cringe at some
of what Whitehead has to say. Could it just be that irrationality and reason
are like oil and water? Perhaps critics and defenders collide because
ideologically we cannot mix?
)
))) Why is it that a large part of humanity has had, and continues to have,
) the
))) predisposition in the symbol producing system of the psyche to concretize
))) the metaphor, rather than live the examined life with love, learning and
))) bliss, which is well documented within the Wisdom Literatures of the
) world,
))) when undertood and experienced?
))
))
)) What? Could you simplify that perhaps? Are you asking why do people end up
)) believing the stories they tell? Or what is the "predisposition in the
)) symbol producing system of the psyche to concretize the metaphor"? If
)) that's what you're asking, I think it's simple - it is not easy to live
) the
)) "examined life," having dogma and rhetoric to rely on instead is very
)) convenient. I think we all do it.
)
) I respectfully disagree. I started from neutral,
Sharon: I started from neutral too. I sent my daughter to Waldorf not
knowing about the esoteric subtext. I had never read Theosophy,
Rosicrucianism or Anthroposophy, I only began to read such books after
leaving Waldorf. Our Waldorf *experience* was bad, on paper Anthroposophy is
even worse. Ideologically, we collide, though Steiner's racist doctrine
coincides with my Apartheid experience.
the basic story from
) Christianity did not make sense. In my late 20', late 1960's, I started a
) personal journey of education into the Western humanities and some Eastern,
) such as the Tao Te Ching. From this journey comes the examined life. With
) further development, one no longer needs to rely upon the 'dogma and
) rhetoric', but matures into knowledge and experience. Moral values become
) known and integrated into one's life. I posted earlier the most respected
) and oftern quoted summation on the subject of personal maturation from
) Dante's Convivio.
Sharon: Christianity makes no sense to me either, nor any of the religions
I've explored, including Steiner's hotch potch. "There are no gods, no
devils, no angels, no gnomes, no kamaloca, no Sixth Epoch, no Vulcan, no
heaven nor hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and
superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds". That's my Freethought
maxim. May reason prevail.
)
) One of the more cogent, publicly available expostions on this are the six
) hours played numerous times on Public Television of the Power of Myth with
) Joseph Campbell. The historical few who have made this journey toward fuller
) humanness are increasing by leaps and bounds. One can be ostracized today,
) but not burned at the stake or beheaded. If that were the case I would have
) been roasted some years ago. So, we have made a modest advance in
) civilization.
Sharon: Yeah, yeah, we all watched Campbell, a popular new age guru mass
marketed because of his popular old age ideas. Perhaps the next step for
humanity is non belief? People who face up to the concept that this life is
most likely all that there is? Such people might begin to think of life as
"sacred". A world of non believers might oppose war on the grounds that life
is finite. A world of non believers might care about the lives of fellow
human beings because this life is probably all that there is. Unfortunately,
heretical non believers (infidels) are ranked lower than new age heretics,
we are still being roasted. Just the other day a nice Atheist scout was
kicked out of Boy Scouts because he doesn't believe in God. Oddly, the whole
scandal began when a scout leader accused Atheists of being thieves and the
young, honest atheist objected.
) I see Steiner having contributed to that advance.
Sharon: I see him as contributing to irrationality.
Again, the question I will
) be pursuing in the ongoing time, as my niece is involved, is how well, or
) badly, are the Waldorf educational organization doing and the Waldorf
) schools, on these larger questions. Directly, how well are they teaching as
) metaphors to stir the imaginative vessel into which the data of the Readin',
) Ritin', and Rithmatic can more easily and efficiently be entered.
) Retain the good, dismiss the nonsense. A corollary would be, when taken
) literally, it is nonsense, when understood allegorically, it is insight and
) wisdom.
Sharon: Have fun. I hope she doesn't end up toast in the job market because
she lacks computer skills. I also hope her parents don't have to provide a
tutor when she reaches fourth grade and they realize Waldorf's not working
and that your niece still can't read or write. Hope your niece isn't too
artistic because creative children find early Waldorf education frustrating.
Hope she isn't gung ho on learning how to read. Hope she enjoys color
devotion for occult purposes instead of free artistic expression.
)
) For example, a Gnome is a pithy saying that expresses a general truth or
) fundamental principle; an aphorism; from the Greek, gnome, intelligence, and
) gignoskein, to know. Aphorism is from the Greek aphorismos, from
) aphorizein, apo (off, or far away) and horizein (to limit, from horos,
) meaning boundary), meaning to mark off by boundaries, to set aside, cast
) out, a delimitation: a short, pithy statement: a terse statement of a truth;
) a brief statement of principle: an adage, maxim. A Gnome is also a member of
) a fabled race of dwarflike creatures who live underground and guard hordes
) of treasure. ---- I presume therefore, that discussion of a gnome is for
) the childhood imagination to be used like Santa Claus and angels, to be used
) appropriately, depending upon the age and understanding. Her mother and I
) will be assisting in the transition to maturity, learning from the
) mythology, passing on to the deeper understanding.
Sharon: Steiner taught that gnomes actually exist which is why children
learn about them. My daughter copied pictures of gnomes mining in metal
mines off the board. Wonder why? See Steiner's "Nature Spirits" below.
Steiner: "I should like to relate quite simply and plainly how such beings
show themselves to clairvoyant sight. There are beings that can be seen with
clairvoyant vision at many spots in the depths of the earth, especially
places little touched by living growths, places, for instance, in a mine
which have always been of a mineral nature. If you dig into the metallic or
stony ground you find beings which manifest at first in remarkable fashion -
it is as if something were to scatter us. They seem able to crouch close
together in vast numbers, and when the earth is laid open they appear
to burst asunder. The important point is that they do not fly apart into a
certain number but that in their own bodily nature they become larger. Even
when they reach their greatest size, they are still always small creatures
in comparison with human beings. The enlightened man knows nothing of them.
People, however, who have preserved a certain nature-sense, i.e. the old
clairvoyant forces which everyone once possessed and which had to be
lost with the acquisition of objective consciousness, could tell you all
sorts of things about such beings. Many names have been given to them, such
as goblins, gnomes and so forth...Their nature prompts them to play all
sorts of tricks on man, as every miner can tell you who has still preserved
something of a healthy nature sense--not so much the miners in coal mines as
those in metal mines" (Steiner, "Nature Spirits," p. 63).
If you don't follow Steiner's path, you Brad, will become a gnome on
Jupiter.
)
) I received a Gnome for Christmas from her. (I am feeling the heat from hell,
) although it may be the thermostat is set too high.) I gave her a crafty
) sort of angel.
Sharon: Yeah, yeah, we all received faceless knitted gnomes, my daughter
would come home and "spice" her Waldorf crafts up with pom poms, beads,
ribbons and embroidery. Her finishing touches (adding faces and color) were
a vast improvement. I also watched another Waldorf child draw on a face once
the knitted gnome came home. Was it a fuzzy woolen angel you gave your
niece? I used to wonder why people made such kitsch things and charged so
much for them. Brushed fuzz tied with wings for 15 bucks? No thanks.
Waldorf's "kosher" sanctioned aesthetic makes me shudder. I developed a
really strong aversion to it while involved Waldorf.
)) They don't aim to help children absorb knowledge or information or
) readily, or to
)) speed up such a process. Just the opposite. They believe the more
) knowledge
)) of the world (facts) children take in, the more materialistic they become
)) and less able to perceive spiritual realities.
)
) This gets at the heart of the matter of what is the strategic intention of
) holistic
) education and how well and not well is it being carried out.
Sharon: I could care less if people choose to worship sausages, I do however
feel it is wrong to force children to worship sausages especially without
parental knowledge and permission. I also don't wish to pay for it.
Church and state, keep them separate! Exotericize esotericism!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:06:09 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
Sharon, you wrote,
)It's
)interesting that you find Whitehead to be one of the best, I cringe at some
)of what Whitehead has to say. Could it just be that irrationality and reason
)are like oil and water? Perhaps critics and defenders collide because
)ideologically we cannot mix?
I don't think Brad has read Australian Anthroposophical fanatic Alan
Whitehead. I think he's referring to mathematician Alfred North
Whitehead.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 17:13:38 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
) ) ) Brad on Steiner's philosophy:
) ) )
) ) ) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
) ) ) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of
humanity,
) ) ) )man/woman. And, of essential importance, the capacity of each human
to
) ) ) )increase, toward the highest in the overarching term, Love.
Su said:
) Hi, Brad. Just noticing that this last line above is not a sentence.
) Could you please clarify this ?
)
Brad: Good idea to have one or two ideas at a time. I attach my
excerpt's from Maslow's biography to clarify. The main point is about
process and capacity to the Good, attempting to the use the term Love in
it's largest sense. Maslow's B-values are the component's of Love. Then the
interesting and related question is, what can be done to foster this human
capacity in children, who are in a profound time of maturation? To the best
of my knowledge, this strategy is included within holistic education.
Su:Maslow was interested in peak experiences, and deriving the meaning from
our daily existence, not in determining what Life is.
Brad: I include the peak experience, which often is transitory, within
'Love'. As Maslow describes, the more loving the person, the more peak
experiences happen. Can't separate Life from Love. Erich Fromm's
classic, "The Art of Loving" is also a clarification.
It reminds me of one of the pioneering minds about being more human and
loving, Abraham Maslow.
His 1988 biography, 'Right to be Human', by Hoffman, a clinical psychologist
in New York, came out
which gave an enormous amount of insight into his background and
significance.
His early research was on primates, native Indians in Canada, and sexual
dominance in women.
He fully acknowledged his benefitting, as well as America, from the 'brain
drain' from Europe in the 1930's.
As a young man he was soaking up the energy and intelligence surrounding the
New School in Manhatten.
He was highly moved by Max Wertheimer, Gestalt psychology, and Ruth
Benedict, Anthropology/ethnology, and others he
felt were such fine examples of mature, intelligent, loving human beings.
"---what kind of culture would be generated by self-actualizing people in
bulk?"
However, "----the very concept of studying healthy people was too alien to
be aired publicly in professional gatherings."
This was the 1940's.
"Throughout the ages, philosophers have sought to undertand the true, the
good, and the beautiful, and to speak for its forces. Now we know that the
best place to look for them is in man himself."
"Meanwhile, the nature of peak-experiences absorbed much of Maslow's
research."
"He became more convinced that these rare, transcendent episodes are a key
to our unrealized potential."
"Self actualization is a development of personality which frees the person
from the deficiency problems of growth-----"
He, "---longed for a scientific way to talk about such qualities as awe,
wonder, and ecstasy."
"Perhaps his most important insights came during further analysis of the
narrations of great mystics and sages and those who reported
peak-experiences to him. From these accounts, he identified seventeen
universal values, which he termed Being-values, or B-values, that seemed to
be mentioned again and again: truth, beauty, justice, goodness, wholeness,
perfection, uniqueness, simplicity, order, aliveness, self-sufficiency,
necessity, completion, richness, effortlessness, playfulness, and
dichotomy-transcendence."
"Although he never abandoned his atheistic contempt for ritual observance,
such conversations (colleagues and friends) convinced him that his
unpleasant childhood experience of Judaism had blinded him to the wisdom
with it and the world's other great religions, especially their views of
human nature."
"While still an atheist, he therefore stressed a kind of naturalistic
mysticism, denying the traditional trappings of religion such as an
afterlife, a personal God, and a divine order. For Maslow, none of these is
necessary to be religious, to live the B-values to their fullest."
Then he coined the term Transpersonal Psychology, the "Fourth Force",
devoted to religious and spiritual issues.
Pioneers of the transpersonal include Wm. James, Teilhard de Chardin, C.G.
Jung, Roberto Assagioli, (Psychosynthesis), Abe Maslow, and Stanislav Grof.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:26:23 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
) Brad (previously) on Steiner's philosophy:
)
) )) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
) )) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of humanity,
) )) )man/woman.
Diana said:
) Such puffery. You call that "radical"? I don't think I know a single
) individual who wouldn't agree, and doesn't try, to "increase, toward the
) highest in the overarching term, Love." Whether you use fancy words like
) "metanoia" that maybe puzzle or intimidate the average person, or a
simpler
) formulation like, trying to be a good person, love makes it all
worthwhile,
) etc., it's pretty basic, Brad, it's hardly a "radical approach to
humanity."
Brad: Of course it is not radical in our day. We take this as a freedom and
a norm. Yes, it is basic. The main point I have been making is,
historically, the individual was swallowed up, subsumed by the Church. All
came from the Church as The Center. All came to the human from the
external, all other, separate from nature entity called God. God was the
center, not the human. If you felt, or spoke, as we are now, that was
radical and heretical. This belief system is no small part of our society
today. 9/11 is one result.
My understanding of Theosophy/Anthroposophy from my reading 15 years ago
(and reaffirmed now) is that these were elaborate mythological systems
(yes, loaded with baggage) to bring the focus back to the Individual. They
joined a host of minds throughout western civilization who were on the same
course. The term Esoteric, or inner directed, has been used for this more
human centered reality. Holistic education, including Waldorf, is a
derivative from that central idea.
The question remains, Is the Waldorf leadership and organization today in
the hands of those who understand the metaphor and the inner wisdom
potential as it relates to the childhood part of the human journey? Or, are
the fundies in charge? If the wise are in charge, your argument collapses.
They will need a number of decades to shape up the program, and weed out the
fundies. If the fundies are in charge, get after 'em.
And, I'll be darned if I did not find the below on Krishnamurti on education
from the Whole Systems Education Project. http://www.whole.org/ When
Blavatsky and company asked him to be their main guy, he said, 'Hell, no',
and went on to be one of the voices of the mature side of the
counterculture.
Brad
1.
Title: KRISHNAMURTI Education: Philosophy and Schools
Author(s):
Martin, Robin
Publication Type: Article
Journal Title: Paths of Learning Resource Center
Web Document
Date Published: 2000
Publisher: Foundation for Educational Renewal
P.O. Box 328
Brandon, VT, 05733-0328
(800) 639-4122 paths great-ideas.org.
Publication Web Site:
http://www.pathsoflearning.net/library/Krishnamurti.cfm
Indexed by: Purposes - Teaching styles for holistic classrooms.
Reform or restructure schools: examples. Learning Options - Experiential
education (emergent, organic curriculum). Affiliations - Private - tuition
and other funding. Topics - Holistic Education: Integrative Learning.
Viewpoints - Teachers: historic sages.
Summary: The introduction to this online guide asks readers: "How do
we move beyond our own conditioning? How do we create schools for the young
that do not instill in them our own fears and prejudices? According to
KRISHNAMURTI, you create an education that is not a "system" but built
around the attitudes and qualities of the teacher and child, and how they
relate to one another."
This guide contains links to information about schools based on
KRISHNAMURTI's approach to education. Links to the KRISHNAMURTI Foundation
and articles about KRISHNAMURTI's life are provided as well as links to
Rishi Valley School, Brockwood Park Edcuational Center, and references to
related books, videos, and other publications. The author summarizes her
initial understanding of KRISHNAMURTI's approach to education by suggesting
that it is about "coming to understand the flowering of the mind, goodness,
relationship, facing fear, responsibility, and moving SLOWLY into the
meanings within our own lives rather than rushing through new ideas or
concepts."
The guide concludes with a thoughtful quotation from KRISHNAMURTI's
famous book Education and the Significance of Life, and some reflective
comments about moving away from idealism and toward an integrated life.
Contact Name:
Notes - Miscellaneous: To obtain the referenced article from Paths of
Learning, call 1-800-639-4122.
Abstractor's Initials: hsl/ram
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:26:35 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
) Brad writes:
)
) Give me a break! It is now 2003, not 1903.
)
) Lisa: Yes, *we* know that. But Waldorf teachers and Anthroposophers need
to
) hear this news and digest it. Instead of living in the world today, they
) strive to live according to tenets of a religion with tentacles stretching
) back to the Middle Ages and even further. THEY take Steiner literally,
) resulting in problems for children and parents at Waldorf schools.
) It is not us, the Waldorf Critics, who are taking Steiner literally.
) Many of us consider most of what he said patent nonsense! Waldorf
teachers,
) on the other hand, believe his word is gospel, that he "knew" the truth
via
) his clairvoyance. So they do everything they can to toe Steiner's line.
) Get it?
Brad: Just so. I am seeing the nonsense as I surf today, such as on the
Yahoo anthropop list. Shudder! I repeat my contention just posted to
Diana: 'If the wise are in charge (of Waldorf) WC's argument collapses. They
will need a number of decades to shape up the program, and weed out the
fundies. If the fundies are in charge, get after 'em.' By surfing, I can
see some rather impressive results with Waldorf and respected folks
attesting thereto.. You all seem to think Anthropop is rotten at it's core.
I do not. I see it as only one modest effort in the larger attempt at
civilization to become wise. So far, it is the Few, another meaning of
Esoteric, who get it.
It is the Wisdom Tradition that has the 'tentacles stretching back to the
Middle Ages and even further'. As Alfred North Whitehead (not Alan
Whitehead) points out, it returns to the carpenter from Galilee who spread
Love and had it's successes until the Roman Caesar's took over and made it
corporate writ. The Esoteric (the inner directed individual human process)
are good tentacles, not bad. Unless, one is orthodox, or the more dogmatic
fundamentalist. Then those tentacles are deemed bad. In fact, the fundy
assumes Satan himself is spreading the tentacles. Sigh!! And, the Tradition
goes further into the wise of Greece.
Brad
PS What fascinates me is the return to hundreds of millions of years in the
evolution of life through greater understanding of patterns and structure
from modern systems/quantum science. The work of Eric Jantsch, Ilya
Prigogine, Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela, and numerous others are
writing on self organizing systems: pattern and structure. This work will be
giving the midcourse correction to the current Darwinean pure randomness
concept. Root races, Lemuria, or Blavatsky's Mahatma Letters, et al, go into
the dustbin of history like the Model T and so much else.
Insert into google.com: "self organization" autopoiesis Prigogine
Jantsch universe
Pursue the inner knowledge without the baggage.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:44:24 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: The Case of Anthroposophy
Brad Martin wrote:
)
)
) ) ) ) Brad on Steiner's philosophy:
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) )At it's heart, as is true from Important Minds of Synthesis, is the
) ) ) ) )a.essential, if not radical, approach to the individality of
) humanity,
) ) ) ) )man/woman. And, of essential importance, the capacity of each human
) to
) ) ) ) )increase, toward the highest in the overarching term, Love.
)
) Su said:
) ) Hi, Brad. Just noticing that this last line above is not a sentence.
) ) Could you please clarify this ?
) )
)
) Brad: Good idea to have one or two ideas at a time.
Not quite sure what the idea is. Increasing love?
I attach my
) excerpt's from Maslow's biography to clarify. The main point is about
) process and capacity to the Good, attempting to the use the term Love in
) it's largest sense. Maslow's B-values are the component's of Love. Then
) the
) interesting and related question is, what can be done to foster this
) human
) capacity in children, who are in a profound time of maturation? To the
) best
) of my knowledge, this strategy is included within holistic education.
You stray from the point. What does Maslow have to do with Steiner. How
can an educational system that tries to teach occult knowledge to
children be teaching love. What does love have to do with occult
knowledge?
)
) Su:Maslow was interested in peak experiences, and deriving the meaning
) from
) our daily existence, not in determining what Life is.
)
) Brad: I include the peak experience, which often is transitory, within
) 'Love'. As Maslow describes, the more loving the person, the more peak
) experiences happen. Can't separate Life from Love.
Fuzzy logic here...
Erich Fromm's
) classic, "The Art of Loving" is also a clarification.
)
) It reminds me of one of the pioneering minds about being more human and
) loving, Abraham Maslow.
) His 1988 biography, 'Right to be Human', by Hoffman, a clinical
) psychologist
) in New York, came out
) which gave an enormous amount of insight into his background and
) significance.
) His early research was on primates, native Indians in Canada, and sexual
) dominance in women.
) He fully acknowledged his benefitting, as well as America, from the
) 'brain
) drain' from Europe in the 1930's.
) As a young man he was soaking up the energy and intelligence surrounding
) the
) New School in Manhatten.
)
) He was highly moved by Max Wertheimer, Gestalt psychology, and Ruth
) Benedict, Anthropology/ethnology, and others he
) felt were such fine examples of mature, intelligent, loving human
) beings.
) "---what kind of culture would be generated by self-actualizing people
) in
) bulk?"
) However, "----the very concept of studying healthy people was too alien
) to
) be aired publicly in professional gatherings."
) This was the 1940's.
Things have changed since the 1940's....
) "Throughout the ages, philosophers have sought to undertand the true,
) the
) good, and the beautiful, and to speak for its forces. Now we know that
) the
) best place to look for them is in man himself."
Where else would you look, Brad, if not in Man? Not getting this...
)
) "Meanwhile, the nature of peak-experiences absorbed much of Maslow's
) research."
) "He became more convinced that these rare, transcendent episodes are a
) key
) to our unrealized potential."
) "Self actualization is a development of personality which frees the
) person
) from the deficiency problems of growth-----"
) He, "---longed for a scientific way to talk about such qualities as awe,
) wonder, and ecstasy."
) "Perhaps his most important insights came during further analysis of the
) narrations of great mystics and sages and those who reported
) peak-experiences to him. From these accounts, he identified seventeen
) universal values, which he termed Being-values, or B-values, that seemed
) to
) be mentioned again and again: truth, beauty, justice, goodness,
) wholeness,
) perfection, uniqueness, simplicity, order, aliveness, self-sufficiency,
) necessity, completion, richness, effortlessness, playfulness, and
) dichotomy-transcendence."
I have no information about how this is supposed to relate to Waldorf or
Anthroposophy....
)
) "Although he never abandoned his atheistic contempt for ritual
) observance,
certainly not an anthroposophist....
) such conversations (colleagues and friends) convinced him that his
) unpleasant childhood experience of Judaism had blinded him to the wisdom
) with it and the world's other great religions, especially their views of
) human nature."
) "While still an atheist, he therefore stressed a kind of naturalistic
) mysticism, denying the traditional trappings of religion such as an
) afterlife, a personal God, and a divine order. For Maslow, none of these
) is
) necessary to be religious, to live the B-values to their fullest."
) Then he coined the term Transpersonal Psychology, the "Fourth Force",
) devoted to religious and spiritual issues.
Very good. So you are saying that Waldorf and Anthroposophy promote
spiritual and religious issues?
)
) Pioneers of the transpersonal include Wm. James, Teilhard de Chardin,
) C.G.
) Jung, Roberto Assagioli, (Psychosynthesis), Abe Maslow, and Stanislav
) Grof.
)
)
)
This is great information Brad, but not sure what the point is. Let me
think, however. Maybe you are saying that Rudolf Steiner was promoting
peak religious and spiritual experiences and those can be gotten from
the great religious experiences of Anthroposophy, a religious belief
system and which is covertly taught in the Waldorf Schools? If so, you
have confirmed our understanding and we thank you!!!
Sincerely, Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:50:17 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: girl branded "devil child" by anthros
The following was brought to my attention by someone interested in Waldorf
education.
It apparently appeared in the Daily Record of Glasgow, Scotland, on May 5,
1996 and was written by Paul Gilfeather.
A girl branded a devil child by teachers is getting a schol built
for her.
The (pounds) 50,000 will let mentally-handicapped Simone Beaurain
back in class for the first time in six months. And yesterday, Simone's mum,
Dorothy said: "Its a dream come true. Every child has a right to an
education."
Social work and education bosses will convert a derelict part of an
existing school into a two-class mini centre.
Last month, the Record revealed how 12 year old Simone was booted out
of a school after staff claimed she was possessed. Bosses at the Camphill
Rudolf Steiner School, near Aberdeen, even suggested she should go to a
faith healer. The satanic slur devastated Simone, who was brain damaged at
birth, and also prevented her family from (trying to find) another school.
Dorothy, of Fraserburgh, Aberdeenshire, said: "It has taken us months
to recover from what Camphill did. They were wrong to call my child a
monster. Whenever gave up fighting, but I believe it was the Record's
support that won the day."
Aberdeenshire Council are now advertising for a private tutor and
nurses will also be drafted in for support.
Simone's unit at the Ramsay School in Banff, is expected to open in
September.
End
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 940
-- Topica Digest --
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
By mysplum earthlink.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:43:06 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
Brad:
) The main point I have been making is, historically, the individual was
)swallowed up, subsumed by the Church. (snip) My understanding of
)Theosophy/Anthroposophy from my reading 15 years )ago (and reaffirmed now)
)is that these were elaborate mythological systems
)(yes, loaded with baggage) to bring the focus back to the Individual. The
)term Esoteric, or inner directed, has been used for this more human
)entered reality. Holistic education, including Waldorf, is a derivative
)from that central idea.
My dictionary says esoteric means "understood by or meant for only the
select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite; belonging to
the select few; private, secret, confidential." I have never heard it
defined as meaning "inner directed" or "human centered." It is the opposite
of human centered, and could only mean "inner directed" in a navel-gazing
sense.
It amazes me people think a return to secret societies is progress. These
groups are not working for freedom for individuals, unless it is a
preselected group of individuals (perhaps a karmically selected group),
never the common person. I think your understanding of occult traditions is
completely, 180 degrees turned around. Members of the group view themselves
as special and superior, in possession of knowledge the average Joe is not
spiritual enough to "get."
Take a look at how these groups *behave* not at their fancy rhetoric. Nor
are they anything new with Steiner or his ilk. They're throwbacks, they're
even more oppressive than the churches. Keep all the so-called wisdom in the
hands of initiates. Secrecy is about power.
I see that in another post you have yet another definition for esoteric: "So
far, it is the Few, another meaning of Esoteric, who get it." Don't know
where you got that definition either, esoteric does not mean "the Few," but
you seem to be missing the point in a most spectacular fashion. All the
goodies and the wisdom for "the few"? And for those of us who don't "get
it"? "Human centered' has now been revealed to actually mean, with "the
Few." ("The few who get it" always implicitly includes the speaker.)
Take a look at the reality, Brad. If you are interested in learning about
Waldorf education, I suggest you forget the theosophical library, call up
your niece's teacher and ask if you can come observe the class for a day.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:54:44 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: The Case of Anthroposophy
on 1/14/03 3:13 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
) "While still an atheist, he therefore stressed a kind of naturalistic
) mysticism, denying the traditional trappings of religion such as an
) afterlife, a personal God, and a divine order. For Maslow, none of these is
) necessary to be religious, to live the B-values to their fullest."
) Then he coined the term Transpersonal Psychology, the "Fourth Force",
) devoted to religious and spiritual issues.
Sharon: Steiner was definitely not an atheist after his
Theosophical/Rosicrucian conversion. Steiner did believe and teach about an
after-life, a divine order and man as divine. He also bungs in a savior, god
and devil. Anthroposophists usually argue that Steiner was never an atheist,
but most critics recognize that he had an atheist period.
Maslow's movement began as secular, but it paved the way for the later
spiritualization of psychotherapy. The primary goal of the Human Potential
Movement was to explore the area of feelings and relationships that were
taboo in those days. British society had encouraged "a stiff upper lip"
during the two world wars. Militarization had fostered rigidity and
repression which encouraged "character armor" which Wilhelm Reich identified
as the cause of neurosis, psychosomatic disorders, and sociopolitical
problems including fascism. Post war children grew up emotionally deprived.
Elizabeth Puttick says this phenomenon can be interpreted in gender
terms--masculine values subjugated feminine values (feeling, nurture,
tenderness, etc) These repressed virtues were rediscovered and affirmed by
the HPM with the help of Eastern spirituality. (See Women in New Religions:
In Search of Community, Sexuality and Spiritual Power, Elizabeth Puttick).
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 941
-- Topica Digest --
The few and the many
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: The few and the many
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: The few and the many
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:03:00 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: The few and the many
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2BDB3.6AE54080
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
This is an incidental post, see below, from doing some surfing this
evening. I am still trying to fathom what Waldorf Critics is really
about, it's underlying modus operandi. I gather that it's bent is of
materialist science, ie, if it can't be measurable and reapeatable,
it does not exist. Secondly, it seems toward the religious orthodoxy,
but not fundamentalist. In this context, the term mystic, for
example, would be a pejorative.
In order to adequately judge holistic pedagogy, which would include
Waldorf, the larger scientific and spiritual issues must be
understood, such as the definition of the term spiritual and it's
context in civilization.
Diane asked about the term esoteric:
Diana: My dictionary says esoteric means "understood by or meant for only the
select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite; belonging to
the select few; private, secret, confidential." I have never heard it
defined as meaning "inner directed" or "human centered." It is the opposite
of human centered, and could only mean "inner directed" in a navel-gazing
sense.
Essay excerpt: Roger Walsh, MD, PhD, Dept of Psychiatry and Human
Behavior, California College of Medicine, University of California,
Irvine, writes in the American Journal of Psychiatry 137:6, June
1980, in an essay "The Consciousness Disciplines and the Behavioral
Sciences: Questions of Comparison and Assessment". ---- Western
behavioral scientists are giving attenton to the relavance of
recent findings in state-dependent learning, meditation studies, peak
and transcendental experiences, transpersonal psychology and quantum
physics. ----- The term 'consciousness disciplines' refers to a
family of practices and philosophies ------- whose central claim is
that through intensive mental training it is possible to obtain
states of consciousness and psychological well-being beyond those
currently described by traditonal western psychologies as well as
profound insight into the nature of mental processes, consciousness,
and reality. Some of these disciplines have been asso!
ciated with the *ESOTERIC* core of certain non-western philosophies,
psychologies, and religions, eg, Buddhism and Hinduism, The terms
'consiocusness disciplines' has thus sometimes been used more or less
interchangeably with terms such as 'Eastern tradition', 'mysticism,
and 'spiritual disciplines.'
Brad:(There also is the quite legitimate *ESOTERIC*, mystical core in
the three major western Abrahamic religions. Later on that one.)
Brad: Yes, Diana, that is a dictionary definition of esoteric of
more common useage. Later I will dig out the further etymology of the
term. The term "inner directed" *IS* human centered. It is about
those methodologies that enable "psychological well being" and the
"higher order love", the healthiest among us, that Abe Maslow
dedicated his life to. I gather you are using 'navel gazing' in a
pejorative sense. This is from only the first page using 'naval
gazing' and meditation into Google.com: 'Most of Milwaukee (WI)
psychotherapist Mary Waller's clients are down-to-earth factory
workers and homemakers. These are the very people inclined to sneer
at meditation as so much California navel-gazing - until they find
out they've been doing it for weeks. "I've had uptight business
people in my office, people absolutely wound up all the time . and
their idea of relaxation is a punishing game of handball,'' Waller
says. She gets those people to lie down on the floor and teaches them!
some beginning breathing techniques. After practicing at home for a
few weeks, Waller's clients begin to ask her what they're doing. She
explains that meditation is a centuries-old practice of meditative
breathing that has been used by people of various faiths. "By that
time, they don't care where it's from," she says. "They just know it
works."
http://www.savvyhealth.com/disp.asp?doc_id=96
At the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX, one of the major
cancer centers in the US, they have a small building just off the
entrance called 'Place of Wellness'. Meditation is taught there.
Diane, it is naive to continue to assume that meditation is just some
wacko New Age practice. I learned to meditate in 1972 because of an
article in Scientific American by the research done by Dr. Herbert
Benson of Harvard and Deaconess Hospital in Boston. I guarantee you I
am no wacko New Ager, but a WASP from small town middle America with
an engineering degree with a career in systems engineering and
management. However, my path is to seek out the wise in civilization
and learn from them. Meditation works. The use of the terms 'few' and
'private' are perpetuated by the uninformed. Also, later on that one.
Anyway, the following caught my eye: an article on the history of
coffee. I have seen whirling dervishes in the auditorium of a
Catholic college. I have heard a full Tibetan orchestra. I have
witnessed a Sufi sacred ritual, called a dikhr. In the year 2003, to
feel only that the term mystic is a pejorative is uninformed.
A member of the Sufi order of Shadhili mystics is credited with first
brewing coffee, or qahwa (short for qahwa al-bon, "wine of the bean"
in Arabic), and it quickly spread through the group: Members used it
to sustain their all-night spinning ceremonies. These "whirling
dervishes," as the West called them, attempted to alter their
consciousness through ecstatic gyration, and thus get closer to God.
Caffeine helped them do it. Pretty soon, the wandering Shadhilis had
transported coffee throughout the Islamic world, where it shed its
religious trappings and became an everyday drink enjoyed by commoner
and royal alike.
http://www.reason.com/0301/cr.jk.tempest.shtml
Here is something from on the famous Sufi mystical poet, Rumi. Of
importance here is the comment upon that which was excluded from the
Canon of the western gospels. Again, the issue is Love in it's most
inclusive sense. Modern more inclusive systems/quantum sciencedoes
not exclude the subject of qualities as mechanistic science did of
necessity at the time. We are now catching up. (this comment for Su).
Love is a quality. You can't touch it, taste it, or measure it.
However, try telling a mother with a newborn or a newly married
couple that love does not exist because it's reality has not been
researched through clinical trials and published in a peer reviewed
journal. The religious fundamentalist will state that all of this
talk is heretical, blasphemy, and Satanistic. Sigh, shudder, rolling
of the eyes and utter amazement at how so much of this persists in
our 21st century culture.
Traditionally, the *FEW* got it. It has always been there. In the
second half of the 20th century, there has been, fortunately, a huge
increase toward maturity and intelligence. Still a few, but many
more. Remember, history is written by the winners.
Why are contemporary readers so drawn to Rumi?
"I don't have an explanation myself," Mr. Barks said recently from
his home in Athens, "but Robert Bly says that when Christianity
excluded the Gnostic material from the gospels, the ecstatic
material, there was a lack felt in the religion. There's some thirst,
some need for an intimate connection with the divine, and
simultaneously some grief about its absence, that Rumi knows well." A
stocky, bearded Southern gentleman, Mr. Barks speaks with the kind of
endearing drawl that adds an extra syllable to the word "love." "Rumi
uses the language of romance and drunkenness and addiction, because
he's trying to explode those love categories into a wider kind of
love that is just the atmosphere you walk within. It's not sexual, I
don't think, but it's beyond gender, beyond the old categories. Rumi
says: 'I'm not Christian or Jew or Moslem, not Hindu, Buddhist or
Zen. I'm not from the East or the West. I belong to the Beloved.' "
New York Times, December 6, 1998
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 05:43:24 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
Brad Martin wrote:
)This is an incidental post, see below, from doing some surfing this
) )evening. I am still trying to fathom what Waldorf Critics is really
) )about, it's underlying modus operandi. I gather that it's bent is of
) )materialist science, ie, if it can't be measurable and reapeatable, it
) )does not exist. Secondly, it seems toward the religious orthodoxy, but
) )not fundamentalist. In this context, the term mystic, for example, )would
)be a pejorative.
Peter F reponds:
G'day Brad,
I am sure I won't be the only one to say something like this but here goes
anyway. The critics are not homogeneous, and I would assert (without
measurement) that if anything they are less homogeneous than the defenders.
For myself, I am a materialist, but I am not sure that the majority of
critics are materialists as well. But materialists and scientists don't
necessarily hold that if it can't be measured and is not repeatable it
doesn't exist, nor do they hold that the term mystic is a pejorative.
Some things may not be measureable because we do not have the equipment yet.
For example, X-Ray astronomy can only be done by getting outside the
atmosphere. Perhaps some can be done by high altitude ballon, but the Hubble
telescope makes an enormous difference. Other things may not be measurable
because they don't occur sufficiently often. Proton decay might be an
example of this, although various researchers are having a go.
One of the main themes I have pursued as a contributor here is that many
things can be measured including things that have a bearing on whether on
should accept the writings of Steiner as valid.
If I speak about the mystical or the spiritual, I differ from
anthroposophists in believing that the spiritual and the mystic arises from
the material. I have no doubt there are a variety of other opinions and
beliefs among the critics.
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 05:59:35 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
Brad Martin wrote quoting Roger Walsh:
The term 'consciousness disciplines' refers to a family of practices and
philosophies ------- whose central claim is that through intensive mental
training it is possible to obtain states of consciousness and psychological
well-being beyond those currently described by traditonal western
psychologies as well as profound insight into the nature of mental
processes, consciousness, and reality.
Peter responds:
It is easy to make these claims. I don't have a whole lot of problems with
people claiming that they can understand mental processes and consciousness
by meditating and the like although I don't know if this has been
demonstrated. I don't beleie that anybody has demonstrated any profound
insight into reality. My personal view is that that claim is outlandish.
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 942
-- Topica Digest --
Re: The few and the many
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: The few and the many
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: The few and the many
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: The few and the many
By mysplum earthlink.net
More on "The Few" and how they see themselves
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: the case for anthrop.
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: the case for anthrop.
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Steiner's nationalism
By charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:12:41 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2BE00.35221A20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Brad:
)I am still trying to fathom what Waldorf Critics is really
about, it's )underlying modus operandi.
Your posts amuse me, Brad. Do you think *we* too are a secret
society? Waldorf critics is a mailing list, and a very loosely
moderated one. Anyone can subscribe, anyone can say anything. If you
mean PLANS, have you read the web site? That would be the way to
figure out what PLANS is "really about." Click on the little buttons
that say things like "Mission" and "Concerns." There's no need to
read between the lines - the concerns are stated there. If you have
questions, ask. The lawsuit, in particular, is pretty darn public.
Read the court documents?
)I gather that it's bent is of materialist science, ie, if it
can't be )measurable and reapeatable, it does not exist.
Well, as Peter F. pointed out, there is little point trying to
figure out a "bent" of Waldorf critics, because there are at least
several dozen people here of varying bents. I have, personally, never
yet heard one say that if it can't be measurable and repeatable, it
does not exist. Perhaps you are confusing this with the repeated
calls for Waldorf to allow outsiders to measure and investigate their
outcomes? Or Peter F. who
)Secondly, it seems toward the religious orthodoxy, but not
)fundamentalist.
Again, this is amusing- the "critics," even to the extent that
there is such a group - most often, people come and post their
experiences and opinions with Waldorf and then leave in a few weeks -
but if you were to pick, say, the officers of PLANS or the people who
have posted most regularly in the past year, it would be very
difficult to pin any kind of adherence to orthodoxy on them - you
should hear some of us argue in person. :)
)Diane asked about the term esoteric:
No, I didn't ask, I told you my dictionary's definition. I don't
know what the excerpt about meditation has to do with anything; I
have no bone to pick with meditation, I did not call it a wacko New
Age practice, or anything *remotely* like that. Your article
associated "state-dependent" learning and meditation with "esoteric"
traditions - why would I argue with that? It has no bearing on the
meaning of the term "esoteric" that people in esoteric traditions
might meditate. ?????
I'm a little irritated to be needing to clarify things I never
said, and I'm not really interested in meditation.
But I'm not only burnt out, I also have to work, will try to come
back later.
Diana
)" Western behavioral scientists are giving attenton to the
relavance of )recent findings in state-dependent learning, meditation
studies, peak and )transcendental experiences, transpersonal
psychology and quantum )physics. ----- The term 'consciousness
disciplines' refers to a family of )practices and philosophies
------- whose central claim is that through )intensive mental
training it is possible to obtain states of consciousness )and
psychological well-being beyond those currently described by
)traditonal western psychologies as well as profound insight into the
)nature of mental processes, consciousness, and reality. Some of
these )disciplines have been associated with the *ESOTERIC* core of
certain )non-western philosophies, psychologies, and religions, eg,
Buddhism and )Hinduism, The terms 'consiocusness disciplines' has
thus sometimes been )used more or less interchangeably with terms
such as 'Eastern tradition', )'mysticism, and 'spiritual disciplines.'
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:16:07 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
Sorry, on that last post I meant to go back and quote Peter F. and forgot:
)many things can be measured including things that have a bearing on whether
on
)should accept the writings of Steiner as valid.
re: Brad's theory that Waldorf critics (homogeneous mass that we are) don't
believe that anything exists if it can't be measured.
The point being, never mind all the things in life that can't be measured,
how about the things that *can*, but Waldorf teachers say, no you can't, if
we even agree to let you in the classroom, you must sit at the back of the
room and knit.
DIana
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:35:17 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C2BE03.5D1C24A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Going back and trying to be patient with the stuff Brad posted,
apparently to challenge my definition of "esoteric," but which
doesn't really seem to have any relevance. Actually I'll just move
on; re-reading the article excerpt left me no less baffled than
before about what the point was. Re-reading the stuff from the
website of the therapist who helps her clients meditate didn't seem
to get me anywhere either. In fact she also uses the term "navel
gazing" in a negative sense. Then more snips of stuff on the health
benefits of meditating. Again I have no argument with anybody
meditating.
Diana
(frustrated - maybe later I will remember what the point was Brad
was arguing about) - it feels to me like what you did, Brad, was to
insist on taking the conversation exactly in the direction of the
stuff I find myself so uncomfortable with now - we quit talking about
the realities of what these groups do, the social, political,
psychological aspects, and, yes, gazed inward instead - meditation
makes people feel good, right?
PS, No Brad, I am sure you are not a New Age wacko, or if you
are, so is most everyone I know.
)In the year 2003, to feel only that the term mystic is a
pejorative is )uninformed.
It's like through the looking glass to argue with you, Brad. Did
I ever even use the term "mystic," let alone call it pejorative?
)A member of the Sufi order of Shadhili mystics is credited with
first brewing coffee, or )qahwa (short for qahwa al-bon, "wine of the
bean" in Arabic), and it quickly spread through )the group: Members
used it to sustain their all-night spinning ceremonies.
LOL!!!! Can't argue with this - I"m sure coffee would be of great
help if one wanted to stay awake whirling all night!!!
)These "whirling dervishes," as the West called them, attempted
to alter their )consciousness through ecstatic gyration,
Or perhaps - hello??? - through coffee??? though I don't doubt
hours of spinning will alter your consciousness.
cracking up here.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:07:58 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
) Brad Martin wrote:
I am still trying to fathom what Waldorf Critics is really
))) about, it's underlying modus operandi.
Sharon: It's about parents who were duped/lied to by Waldorf. It's about
parents who oppose racist doctrine. It's about a group of people who have
had experience with a religious organization that thumbs its nose at the
Constitution, racist doctrine, science and parents. It's about a group of
people who feel strongly about church and state separation.
I gather that it's bent is of
))) materialist science, ie, if it can't be measurable and reapeatable, it
))) does not exist. Secondly, it seems toward the religious orthodoxy, but
))) not fundamentalist. In this context, the term mystic, for example, )would
)) be a pejorative.
Sharon: I personally put my faith in science because science searches for
the falsity content of our best theories. Science is a search for truth,
Anthroposophy is Steiner's declaration of "truth". I think you have a very
narrow and outdated view of science. As far as I'm concerned, the term
"mystic" is definitely not pejorative. In fact, one of my main disagreements
with Anthroposophists is that they have secularized the terminology used at
Waldorf schools. I urge them to use words like "mystic". In Waldorf, psychic
sight has become imagination, The Art (of magic) has become art, nature
alter has become nature table, mystery school has become school, sectarian
has become nonsectarian, Steiner's scheme of reincarnation--the "True Nature
of Man" has become child development model. Steiner is promoted as an
educator, scientist and philosopher instead of mystagogue, occultist,
Anthroposophist. I call for Waldorf to use a vocabulary that would help the
uninformed place Waldorf and Steiner in context.
It was a defender of Anthroposophy who told me I was name-calling when I
used terms like mystic, occultist, magic etc, yet Anthros use such words
amongst themselves--even Steiner used such words. So it is Anthros who think
terms like "mystic" are pejorative, not I. Religious terminology was missing
at our ex-school and I'm protesting because I say it should be standard in
Waldorf schools--call Steiner a mystic in brochures and in schools!
Brad: In order to adequately judge holistic pedagogy, which would include
Waldorf, the larger scientific and spiritual issues must be understood, such
as the definition of the term spiritual and it's context in civilization.
Sharon: Waldorf is based on a specific religious worldview, Anthroposophy.
Despite what New Agers say, spiritual = religious.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:56:36 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: More on "The Few" and how they see themselves
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2BE06.57A4E220
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Some Steiner relevant to the wisdom of "the Few" as Brad champions:
"A few contemporaries of the individual who first introduces a new
element in human evolution are born with the ability to understand
it, but the remaining great majority of human beings ascends slowly
toward the goal and achieves it only much later.' (p. 167)
"If anthroposophical wisdom sometimes seems overly aggressive, that
is because it encounters unhealthy circumstances in human beings.
Spiritual wisdom is perfectly healthy, but human beings are not. That
is why the spiritual wisdom that will be revealed in the course of
time cannot be disclosed today in its entirety and all at once. We
must avoid causing excessive damage; we cannot send city children out
into the mountain air that sears their lungs. It is only possible to
convey as much as human beings, on the average, can bear. If still
deeper wisdom were revealed, individuals with certain constitutions
might collapse under the burden, just as their physical health might
be disturbed in mountain air. The greatest wisdom has to be disclosed
to humankind only gradually." (p. 169)
from Rudolf Steiner, According to Luke (cycle of ten lectures), Great
Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 2001.
Hopefully I don't have to point out the arrogance of speaker, who
speaks from the position that he of course is in possession of this
wisdom. The appeal of following him is, of course, that the follower
can then also feel he is in possession of at least little bits of the
great knowledge that the average person is not ready for. I feel that
in 2003 it is amazing that people can read words like this and not
see danger ahead.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:32:25 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
on 1/14/03 5:26 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
Root races, Lemuria, or Blavatsky's Mahatma Letters, et al, go into
) the dustbin of history like the Model T and so much else.
Sharon: Anthroposophists find themselves in a dilemma, if they throw
Steiner's Aryan supremacist theories in the dustbin, Steiner loses all
credibility. His claims of clairvoyance become shaky, his disciples are left
to determine what is "true" or "untrue". If his racist doctrine is thrown
away, his religion crumbles because it is based on a racist premise--this is
why they choose to instead deny that it is racist.
I support freedom of religion and beliefs, and freedom of speech. I throw
Steiner's and Blavatsky's work into the dustbin, but I do not expect true
believers to do the same. Anthroposophy should not be funded or promoted by
the state, nor should Christianity or any other religion. We are a
democracy, not a theocracy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:01:14 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
Sharon said:
) I support freedom of religion and beliefs, and freedom of speech. I throw
) Steiner's and Blavatsky's work into the dustbin, but I do not expect true
) believers to do the same. Anthroposophy should not be funded or promoted
by
) the state, nor should Christianity or any other religion. We are a
) democracy, not a theocracy.
Brad:
As I have been bringing myself up to date in last few months, I can
definitely see the source of your concern. It's like the mother wolf or
bear. "You try to mess with my cubs, bubba, you are toast!!!!" Said to
whatever predator is lurking around. If a Waldorf teacher and/or the parent
does not understand what a metaphor is, I can certainly see a problem
arising. (Hell, I started really 'getting it' by my late 30's, the 70's. I
recall my significant other at the time. She was smarter than a whip. She
assisted my education on metaphor. Engineers have a thicker skull on these
things.) So, if I have my kid in a Waldorf school, and A, I have no doubt
there would be a few in other holistic schools, and B, the teacher did not
know a metaphor from a Mack Truck, and C, this person was going to be my
kid's teacher for the next 8 years, I could definitely get my nose out of
joint. If the parent does not understand metaphor, and there are many, then
the problem is compounded. Basic, rational, intelligent thought is the
foundation for, but not the same, as wisdom. There are terms such as
perception, insight, awareness, comprehension, etc. Integrate them with our
rational foundation and one 'becomes wise'. It is a process of maturity for
all of us. By my late 20's with an engineering degree and a good job, I
discovered I did not *know* a damned thing. I know quite a bit more now. The
learning never stops. History seems to show that the majority do not do all
that well on this journey to becoming wise. Hence, the few and the many. I
am in process, more wise today from the ignorance of early adulthood.
The question again, is the leadership of Waldorf and it's strategic purpose
among the wise or the ignorant? (In this context, ignorant is not a
pejorative.) Waldorf Critics has provided evidence that some teachers are
not of 'the wise'.
Pardon me for bringing coals to Newcastle here. Fairy tales, mythology,
etc., are all vehicles of awe and wonder for the child. Whether Santa
Clause, the tooth fairy, gnomes, angels, or trolls, they are a healthy
imaginative part of childhood. I have loved reading Winnie Ther Pooh in
adulthood. Childhood should never cease. By the way, Sharon, one of the
great sources of spirituality for me has been the opera house. Great operas
are filled with mythology and symbols to stir the soul.
The issue is the parent and teacher assisting the process of maturaton. If
done well, the early story 'taken literally', then becomes, over time, a
source of insight and knowledge as the child can handle it. My younger
sister with the niece in Waldorf is 16 years younger than me. She
understands metaphor not least because I have been sharing my own journey of
understanding with her. Also, it appears that her teacher 'gets it'. I hope
to have a talk with her some time.
Sharon, I have a question for you. Joseph Campbell taught comparative
religion and mythology at Sarah Laurence College in New York State for 38
years. He had the interviews that have been shown on Public TV at least four
times nationwide.
-Why do you call Joseph Campbell New Age?
-What is your definition of New Age?
Regards,
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:33:34 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Steiner's nationalism
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C2BE89.3C3071C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:42 PM
Subject: Steiner's nationalism
) I'm going to limit my initial comments on Charlie's post so as not to swamp
) the discussion, but there is one important point that I think needs
) clarification. Charlie wrote:
)
)
) )According to Steiner, the two main evils opposing Christianity in the 19th
) )and 20th centuries are nationalism (yes nationalism) and false socialism.
) )It's interesting that two of the most evil men in the 20th century, Hitler
) )and Stalin, forced their nationalism and false socialism respectively, on
) )the world. To accuse Steiner of being nationalistic in his anthroposophical
) )phase is to accuse him of deliberately following what was, in his eyes, an
) )evil path, and I don't for one minute think he would have done that.(
)
)
) The word "deliberately" makes that last sentence false. To accuse Steiner of
) being nationalistic in his anthroposophical phase is simply to point out
) that his fundamental assumptions during this phase were thoroughly
) nationalist and ethnocentric. It is not at all to charge him with deliberate
) self-contradiction.
Charlie: He believed that since the Mystery of Golgotha it is
possible for any individual, no matter who or where they are, can
overcome nationalistic tendencies. This doesn't mean that they
immediately abandon working within the culture or nation that they
are a part of. This would be like expecting a woman to give birth to
a fully conscious adult. Maybe some of the things you see as
fundamental assumptions I see as objective observations. At this
moment in history I would say that the European culture, for good or
bad, has done most to shape the way people in general live. Are my
views ethnocentric or are they based on objective facts?
Peter:
) Throughout his career, including his anthroposophist phase, Steiner was so
) deeply immersed in German nationalist thinking that he never even realized
) that his position was in fact nationalist. He saw his own position as
) universalist. This is a classic example of a phenomenon that is at least as
) widespread as false nationalism and false socialism: namely false
) universalism.
Charlie: You read Steiner and judge him to be confused about his
position, that's your prerogative. I read Steiner and take his advice
that I need to rise above any backward, nationalistic tendencies I
possess. Nationalism he saw as rooted in egoism, Internationalism as
rooted in love. Sounds right to me. It's a strange sort of
nationalistic thinking that considers Egyptian and Greek myths
superior to Germanic myths. He thought that the Germanic people
contributed to the repression of the spirit in the early centuries of
European Christanity and if there isn't a return to the spirit the
people of Middle Europe will revert to barbarism.
Peter:
) False universalism is what happens when a member of a specific group takes
) that group's experience as universally valid for all other groups. That is
) precisely what Steiner the anthroposophist did regarding "Aryans" and
) Germans. He thought of ethnic Germans as the most advanced segment of
) humankind, the bearers of universal humanity. He excoriated other ethnic
) groups, from Jews to Slavs to Africans and Asians, for failing to live up to
) the supposedly universalistic standards represented by Germans. In other
) words, he faulted them for not being German enough.
Charlie: He believed that the universal human did not physically
exist on Earth. He explained ethnic differences as he saw them
without making judgements about the rights and wrongs, superiority or
inferiority. If one group was said to be superior in one direction it
was at the expence of being inferior in another direction. He
considered women to be closer to the spirit than men who are more
materialistic in general. Does this mean that he considered women
superior to men? He saw a polarity between east and west with Germany
in the middle. This polarity came into sharp focus during the time of
the cold war. He did not wish for the differences between east and
west to disappear, only for there to be understanding between the
two. Without our differences humankind cannot progress. A plant
cannot grow without its parts developing in multiple ways. It would
remain a seed if this did not happen.
Peter:
) This fundamental attitude expressed itself in explicitly nationalist ways on
) many occasions. Steiner's early reactions to World War One, his stance
) during the anthroposophist engagement in Upper Silesia, and his tirades
) against the French occupation of the Rhineland (and especially of the
) presence of French colonial troops there), among many other directly
) political pronouncements, all brought his German nationalist convictions
) clearly to the foreground.
Charlie: I'm sure he wasn't the only one who was unhappy about the
use of colonial troops by the French.
Peter:
) The reason that Steiner consistently denounced all other nationalisms save
) his own is that these other nationalisms were at the time in competition
) with German nationalism. In fact, that historical context is one of the
) aspects that made anthroposophy even more susceptible to the temptations of
) the far right than mainstream theosophy had been. When Steiner split from
) the Theosophical Society, he gave even stronger emphasis to the eurocentric
) and specifically germanocentric strands already embedded in its teachings.
) This had profoundly dangerous consequences when the outcome of World War One
) yielded a widespread sense among Germans that their own national dignity had
) been wounded and could only be restored by a spiritual-national renewal,
) which is precisely what anthroposophists awaited from Steiner. They expected
) this messianic renewal to bring salvation to the rest of the world as well,
) thus fulfilling the tenets of false universalism on a grand scale.
)
) Anthroposophists today -- including some who are not themselves ethnic
) Germans -- continue to preach this doctrine of nationalism-as-universalism.
) I encourage anyone who doubts this to review the passages from the 1997 book
) Overcoming Racism through Rudolf Steiner's Spiritual Science, by the
) anthroposophist Pietro Archiati, that I posted to the list last October
) under the heading "individuality and nationality".
)
) It is crucial to keep this background in mind when trying to make sense of
) Steiner's antisemitic writings:
Charlie: Steiner didn't denounce all other nationalisms save his own.
He saw real communities of people forming to whom national boundaries
were insignificant. The community of anthroposophists was and is one
such community. Those at Dornach comprised individuals from several
different nations; many of these nations on opposite sides of the
conflict. He continued to lecture to these people throughout the
period of the war. All were welcome.
) )"Jewry as such has long since outlived its time; it has no more
) )justification within the modern life of peoples, and the fact that it
) )continues to exist is a mistake of world history whose consequences are
) )unavoidable. We do not mean the forms of the Jewish religion alone, but
) )above all the spirit of Jewry, the Jewish way of thinking." (Steiner, GA
) )32,
) )p. 152)
) )Charlie:
) )Any people that haven't had a homeland for nearly two thousand years yet
) )still remain a distinct group must have very strong cultural bonds, they
) )must have strong blood ties, to put it in Steiner's terms. Although I
) )realise that their insular tendency was not all of their own making. I
) )think he meant the term "Jewry" to be a way of thinking that is looking
) )backwards, back to the ancestors, back to the land of ones fathers. And it
) )isn't totally inconceivable that he wasn't just speaking of Jews in this
) )quote. We need only think how the word "philistine" has come to be used, as
) )Steiner often used it. I certainly don't think that he meant that Jews had
) )no right to exist. Either way he gets no points for being tactful to Jews.(
)
Peter:
) I'd like to take Charlie's explication of this passage step by step.
)
) The great majority of the peoples on this earth have lacked a homeland for
) most of their existence. Germany itself did not come into existence as a
) state until 1871. Ethnic groups never simply "remain distinct", they are
) constantly made and re-made as their distinctiveness shifts over time. Jews
) are anything but unusual in this respect. Steiner failed to grasp this
) simple fact precisely because he was beholden to nationalist precepts and
) was unconsciously committed to the assumption of German ethnic superiority.
) So much so, in fact, that he could not conceive of German Jews as real
) Germans; in order for them to count as such in his mind, they had to stop
) being Jewish. That is what he says in the quoted passage.
Charlie: From your first two sentences it would seem that you equate
homeland with national boundaries. I don't for one minute believe
that you do equate the two. But it shows how easy it is to take false
meaning from someones words if so desired. So very many national
boundaries have been drawn up, usually by Western imperialists, with
blatent disregard for ethnic groupings and local feeling. I don't
think you are the type of person who would condone such things.
I consider one aspect of the term "Jewry" that Steiner is talking
about is one that consists of those Jews who considered themselves as
belonging to the Promised Land and being a distinct "chosen people".
To these Jews salvation is a community affair. But, in Steiner's
view, salvation is now an individual affair. Every person must take
responsibility for their own progress.
Ethnic groups are like rivers, they can't be defined in static,
physical terms. I don't think Steiner failed to grasp this.
Steiner believe that someone's religion shouldn't be determined by
the nation or people to which they belonged. It is no longer suitable
to be born into a religion. At last, something that Sharon and
Steiner are in total agreement about, the separation of church and
state. He saw humanity as evolving towards freedom. Any culture which
dictates what its people must believe, what they can eat, how they
live their lives, does not allow for the development of individual
freedom. He would have had no objection to any person, German or
otherwise following the Jewish religion or adopting a Jewish way of
life, if this was their own free decision as an adult.
Peter:
) Cultural bonds and blood ties are not only not the same thing, they are
) opposites. Steiner writes here of Jews as a people, not merely of particular
) cultural conventions that he (rightly or wrongly) associates with
) Jewishness. Steiner also said that Jews' supposed "insular tendency" was
) indeed of their own making, a result of their "inner nature". Those are not
) cultural arguments, those are essentialist arguments.
Charlie: You can't say that cultural bonds and blood ties are
opposites for all situations. Would you say that these are opposites
in the situation in the Scottish Highlands a few centuries ago?
Peter:
) Charlie's hunch that Steiner was using the term "Jew" metaphorically here is
) belied by the context, an 1888 article defending an aggressively antisemitic
) book by a German nationalist author. Viennese Jews -- among the most
) thoroughly assimilated ethnic minorities to be found anywhere in the world
) at the time -- had rightly condemned the book, which prompted Steiner to
) come to its defense while attacking its "Jewish critics" for remaining stuck
) in their particularistic worldview. Steiner addresses these Jews directly as
) Jews, not in any metaphorical way but exactly in the sense of Jewry as a
) people, as the quoted passage itself indicates. One could scarcely ask for a
) more blatant instance of false universalism and nationalist hubris than this
) article by Steiner.
Charlie: I was just thinking aloud in suggesting that he was using
the term "Jewry" as a metaphor. But I can see how it would have been
possible for him to use it metaphorically.
Not having read the book, its condemnation, or Steiner's article, I
can't really comment on this. I'll just ask one question. Would it be
wrong for you to criticise me for being stuck in a particularist,
anthroposophical world view, if that is your sincere opinion? Could
someone think that the world would be a better place without
anthroposophists but still defend their right to exist? I certainly
hope so!
) Finally, the fact that Steiner meant that Jews had no right to exist is so
) self-evident that I don't really know how to respond to Charlie's
) conclusion. Steiner moreover maintained this position throughout his
) anthroposophical phase. In the final year of his life, for example, Steiner
) declared: "the best thing that the Jews could do would be to disappear into
) the rest of humankind, to blend in with the rest of humankind, so that Jewry
) as a people would simply cease to exist." (The context for these remarks,
) which have been completely excised from the English translation of the book
) containing them, can be found in my post to the list from March 20 of this
) year, in the thread headed "Quote from GA 353".)
Charlie: If it's looked at objectively it would indeed have been best
for the tens of millions of Jews who suffered at the hands of the
Nazis if they had blended in. This is not blaming them in any way for
what happened. I'm just stating a fact and wondering 'what if?'.
Maybe what I can see with hindsight, Steiner had the foresight to
see. Would it have been better for the Middle East and thus the rest
of the world if Israel hadn't been reformed in 1948? Time will tell.
Personally I would have preferred to see Jews and Arabs living
together in Palestine with everyone having equal rights and no
national boundaries being formed on the basis of religious and ethnic
persuasion.
) This is not a demand that Jews or anyone else give up certain cultural
) traits, it is a straightforward demand that Jews should cease to exist,
) should stop being Jews. What makes such passages so appalling is not at all
) their lack of tact, it is their content, plain and simple. At the time that
) Steiner made these repeated antisemitic statements, most German Jews were
) highly assimilated and enthusiastic members of the German national
) community, many of them conspicuous in their German patriotism and their
) forward-looking cultural inclinations. The reason that Steiner was incapable
) of conceiving of such people as genuine Germans was hardly the Jews'
) supposed penchant for "looking backwards"; the reason was his own
) nationalist mindset, in which "Jews" and "Germans" were incompatible
) categories.
Charlie:
As I said before, I think that it's possible for someone to be
opposed to the world outlook of others, think the existence of their
society is based on a mistake, but would still defend their right to
exist. Steiner believed that the coming of the Messiah was the
turning point in our history. It would have been inconsistent of him
to regard those who still had messianic expectations as anything but
an anachronism.
) These same assumptions explain the ferocity of Steiner's polemics against
) the presence of black people in Europe and so forth. Much of anthroposophy's
) core doctrine is built around such nationalist and ethnocentric beliefs
) parading under the guise of universalism. Anthroposophists today still have
) a long way to go in coming to terms with these beliefs and rejecting the
) racist and nationalist baggage that comes along with them.
)
)
) Peter Staudenmaier
Charlie:
I think that the brunt of Steiner's arguements were directed against
the politicians and decision makers of the time. This seems to have
been justified.
Was Steiner speaking out against the general presence of black people
in Europe, or the fact that they were sent there by the French to
risk their lives over a piece of land that was nothing to do with
them? If it was the latter then I'm on his side.
Enough for now,
warm regards,
Charlie.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 943
-- Topica Digest --
RE: The few and the many
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner's 'freedom'
By nmfoss hotmail.com
RE: Steiner's 'freedom'
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: The few and the many
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:41:10 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: The few and the many
Su here:
Brad Martin wrote:
) This is an incidental post, see below, from doing some surfing this
) evening. I am still trying to fathom what Waldorf Critics is really
) about, it's underlying modus operandi.
Su: We are here to tell the public what is really going on in Waldorf
Schools, which is that they are deceiving the public, and promoting
religious values in spite of their claim to the contrary.
I gather that it's bent is of materialist science, ie, if it can't be
measurable and reapeatable, it does not exist.
Su: Not. We are a very heterogeneous group, with a mainly liberal (not
libertarian) views about respecting each other's beliefs, but demanding
honesty from Waldorf schools regarding their agenda.
Secondly, it seems toward the religious orthodoxy, but not
fundamentalist. In this context, the term mystic, for example, would be
a pejorative.
Su: Mysticism is fine, if you are direct about the fact that that is
what you are promoting in the school. That's exactly what W is not
saying. That's what we are quite cranky and downright incensed about.
) In order to adequately judge holistic pedagogy, which would include
) Waldorf, the larger scientific and spiritual issues must be understood,
) such as the definition of the term spiritual and it's context in
) civilization.
Su: so holistic pedagogy is not religious? Not spiritual? Not
sectarian??
)
) Diane asked about the term esoteric:
)
) Diana: My dictionary says esoteric means "understood by or meant for
) only the
) select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite; belonging
) to
) the select few; private, secret, confidential." I have never heard it
) defined as meaning "inner directed" or "human centered." It is the
) opposite
) of human centered, and could only mean "inner directed" in a
) navel-gazing
) sense.
)
) Essay excerpt: Roger Walsh, MD, PhD, Dept of Psychiatry and Human
) Behavior, California College of Medicine, University of California,
) Irvine, writes in the American Journal of Psychiatry 137:6, June 1980,
) in an essay "The Consciousness Disciplines and the Behavioral Sciences:
) Questions of Comparison and Assessment". ---- Western behavioral
) scientists are giving attenton to the relavance of recent findings in
) state-dependent learning, meditation studies, peak and transcendental
) experiences, transpersonal psychology and quantum physics. ----- The
) term 'consciousness disciplines' refers to a family of practices and
) philosophies ------- whose central claim is that through intensive
) mental training it is possible to obtain states of consciousness and
) psychological well-being beyond those currently described by traditonal
) western psychologies as well as profound insight into the nature of
) mental processes, consciousness, and reality. Some of these disciplines
) have been associated with the *ESOTERIC* core of certain non-western
) philosophies, psychologies, and religions, eg, Buddhism and Hinduism,
) The terms 'consiocusness disciplines' has thus sometimes been used more
) or less interchangeably with terms such as 'Eastern tradition',
) 'mysticism, and 'spiritual disciplines.'
) Brad:(There also is the quite legitimate *ESOTERIC*, mystical core in
) the three major western Abrahamic religions. Later on that one.)
Hi Brad,
The 1980's were seminal years for the movement of spirituality into the
fields of medicine and science. More recent (20 years later) research
tempers the claims that meditation, spirituality and the above mentioned
techniques and belief systems that you mention.
Hey, let's quote some more contemporary literature. I will try and find
some of my sources.
) Brad: Yes, Diana, that is a dictionary definition of esoteric of more
) common useage. Later I will dig out the further etymology of the term.
) The term "inner directed" *IS* human centered. It is about those
) methodologies that enable "psychological well being" and the "higher
) order love", the healthiest among us, that Abe Maslow dedicated his life
) to. I gather you are using 'navel gazing' in a pejorative sense. This is
) from only the first page using 'naval gazing' and meditation into
) Google.com: 'Most of Milwaukee (WI) psychotherapist Mary Waller's
) clients are down-to-earth factory workers and homemakers. These are the
) very people inclined to sneer at meditation as so much California
) navel-gazing - until they find out they've been doing it for weeks.
) "I've had uptight business people in my office, people absolutely wound
) up all the time . and their idea of relaxation is a punishing game of
) handball,'' Waller says. She gets those people to lie down on the floor
) and teaches them some beginning breathing techniques. After practicing
) at home for a few weeks, Waller's clients begin to ask her what they're
) doing. She explains that meditation is a centuries-old practice of
) meditative breathing that has been used by people of various faiths. "By
) that time, they don't care where it's from," she says. "They just know
) it works."
) http://www.savvyhealth.com/disp.asp?doc_id=96
Su:Still you stray from the essential discussion, Brad, which is; what
has this got to do with Waldorf Education?
I can understand teaching some of the basic yoga positions to children.
I remember being taught how to remain calm and to sit quietly and think,
as a child in my public school. But the idea that someone thinks that
they can teach a cosmology and a system of belief to children and claim
it is non sectarian, is beyond logic.
)
) At the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX, one of the major cancer
) centers in the US, they have a small building just off the entrance
) called 'Place of Wellness'. Meditation is taught there. Diane, it is
) naive to continue to assume that meditation is just some wacko New Age
) practice. I learned to meditate in 1972 because of an article in
) Scientific American by the research done by Dr. Herbert Benson of
) Harvard and Deaconess Hospital in Boston. I guarantee you I am no wacko
) New Ager, but a WASP from small town middle America with an engineering
) degree with a career in systems engineering and management. However, my
) path is to seek out the wise in civilization and learn from them.
) Meditation works. The use of the terms 'few' and 'private' are
) perpetuated by the uninformed. Also, later on that one.
Su: Prayer works too, and unfortunately it hasn't been fully explored
but that is a beginning step. And prayer may be much more culturally
appropriate, in a religious setting, and NOT in the schools.
The techniques of quietude and thought can be taught to children, quite
nicely, without all the weird Waldorf pedagogy.
We are not against Prayer, Brad. Nor are we against meditation. We
question the right of Waldorf Education to teach these religious values
to children without their parents' knowledge.
)
) Anyway, the following caught my eye: an article on the history of
) coffee. I have seen whirling dervishes in the auditorium of a Catholic
) college. I have heard a full Tibetan orchestra. I have witnessed a Sufi
) sacred ritual, called a dikhr. In the year 2003, to feel only that the
) term mystic is a pejorative is uninformed.
Su: Brad, you constantly stray from the real issue. Are you saying that
Waldorf Education owes it's existence to whirling dervishes? Or that we
wouldn't be drinking coffee if it weren't for these guys? I would guess
that coffee was a drink long before the dervishes got a hold of it!
)
)
) A member of the Sufi order of Shadhili mystics is credited with first
) brewing coffee, or qahwa (short for qahwa al-bon, "wine of the bean" in
) Arabic), and it quickly spread through the group: Members used it to
) sustain their all-night spinning ceremonies. These "whirling dervishes,"
) as the West called them, attempted to alter their consciousness through
) ecstatic gyration, and thus get closer to God. Caffeine helped them do
) it. Pretty soon, the wandering Shadhilis had transported coffee
) throughout the Islamic world, where it shed its religious trappings and
) became an everyday drink enjoyed by commoner and royal alike.
)
) http://www.reason.com/0301/cr.jk.tempest.shtml
Su: yes, I think we all know how wonderful coffee is. No religion needed
here. Thank god I don't have to whirl like a dervish to drink it!!!
)
)
) Here is something from on the famous Sufi mystical poet, Rumi. Of
) importance here is the comment upon that which was excluded from the
) Canon of the western gospels. Again, the issue is Love in it's most
) inclusive sense. Modern more inclusive systems/quantum science does not
) exclude the subject of qualities as mechanistic science did of necessity
) at the time. We are now catching up. (this comment for Su).
Su: This is so condescending, Brad. Others attempt to tell us what
"love" is and I can tell you my experience of Waldorf Education is
denial of just this valuable human feeling.
Love is a quality. You can't touch it, taste it, or measure it.
Su: Incorrect, Brad. You can feel it. It is not measureable, and I
believe that the level of this discussion group is such that this
understanding is one all of us have a very clear understanding of. I
doubt you can teach us much about it!!
However, try telling a mother with a newborn or a newly married couple
that love does not exist because it's reality has not been researched
through clinical trials and published in a peer reviewed journal. The
religious fundamentalist will state that all of this talk is heretical,
blasphemy, and Satanistic. Sigh, shudder, rolling of the eyes and utter
amazement at how so much of this persists in our 21st century culture.
Su: I am not here to defend religious fundamentalists. That's not where
any one of us here is at. We are here to challenge the deceptive nature
of Waldorf Education, and the manner in which Anthroposophy proselytizes
through it's schools. We are "outing" the belief system that allows this
to happen. And Love, as the song goes, is everywhere, if you are open to
it.
Unfortunately you are an Anthroposophist, and you are protected from
learning about how the schools are run. You would have to sign on as an
assistant teacher, or teach in one to learn the difference between
theory and practice of Steiner's philosophy, and what old time pedagogy
is all about.
Anthroposophy is a tiered system with a unique hierarchy, like many
organizations, and mostly like secret organizations. There is no reason
for you to know what goes on in the schools because you are then enabled
through lack of experience to proselytize in the ingenouous and really
earnest way that you do about anthroposophical "wisdom", which
tangentially teaches you things that are tangentially related to this
discussion, but not appropriately on target.
) Traditionally, the *FEW* got it. It has always been there. In the second
) half of the 20th century, there has been, fortunately, a huge increase
) toward maturity and intelligence. Still a few, but many more. Remember,
) history is written by the winners.
Su: Naaahh. History was written by those who could read and write!! And
naaahh, the many HAVE *gotten* it, only *they* (think Russan peasants,
Jewish shtetls, holocaust victims, the masses of millions killed by
Stalin) didn't have the power or the money at the appropriate time to
right the wrongs.
We aren't any wiser or more mature, or more intelligent now than we were
in 440 BC. We just have bigger weapons.
) Why are contemporary readers so drawn to Rumi?
) "I don't have an explanation myself," Mr. Barks said recently from his
) home in Athens, "but Robert Bly says that when Christianity excluded the
) Gnostic material from the gospels, the ecstatic material, there was a
) lack felt in the religion. There's some thirst, some need for an
) intimate connection with the divine, and simultaneously some grief about
) its absence, that Rumi knows well." A stocky, bearded Southern
) gentleman, Mr. Barks speaks with the kind of endearing drawl that adds
) an extra syllable to the word "love." "Rumi uses the language of romance
) and drunkenness and addiction, because he's trying to explode those love
) categories into a wider kind of love that is just the atmosphere you
) walk within. It's not sexual, I don't think, but it's beyond gender,
) beyond the old categories. Rumi says: 'I'm not Christian or Jew or
) Moslem, not Hindu, Buddhist or Zen. I'm not from the East or the West. I
) belong to the Beloved.' "
)
) New York Times, December 6, 1998
Su: It's sweet, the way you describe Rumi and ecstasy in religious
experience, but that's not where it's at in this discussion. We are here
to discuss the value of teaching religion when Waldorf Schools say there
isn't any!!!
We're here to stay on topic about the truth of what is *really* going
on in the schools. That means separating theory from practice!!!
Whether you believe that religion is the opiate of the masses, or you
believe that you "belong to the beloved" is your own business, but not
the business of a school that proclaims that it is non-sectarian, and
arts-based.
Sincerely, Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:44:42 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner's 'freedom'
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Charlie wrote: He <Steiner>saw humanity as evolving towards
freedom. Any culture which dictates what its people must believe,
what they can eat, how they live their lives, does not allow for the
development of individual freedom.(/P)
(P)Nicole: To a large extent, this kind of control over initially
unsuspecting families is exactly what the anthroposophical community
seeks today. At Waldorf schools there are rules about what children
can eat, what they can wear (right down to the type of fabric
that their clothes are to be made of) and, most
importantly, how they (and their families) are expected to live
their lives at home. Considerable pressure to conform can be exterted
by teachers and other members of the community (see the archives for
many examples from many people), although it varies a great deal
depending on the individuals involved. This is indeed incompatible
with individual freedom, and deliberately so. It seems to me that the
kind of 'freedom' Steiner had in mind was the 'freedom' to do exactly
as you are told.(BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8
and (a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMMEN/2016")get 2 months FREE*(/a)
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:27:35 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner's 'freedom'
Nicole Foss wrote:
)
) Charlie wrote: He (Steiner)saw humanity as evolving towards freedom. Any
) culture which dictates what its people must believe, what they can eat,
) how they live their lives, does not allow for the development of
) individual freedom.
) Nicole: To a large extent, this kind of control over initially
) unsuspecting families is exactly what the anthroposophical community
) seeks today. At Waldorf schools there are rules about what children can
) eat, what they can wear (right down to the type of?fabric that?their
) clothes are to be made of) and, most importantly,?how they (and their
) families) are expected to live their lives at home. Considerable
) pressure to conform can be exterted by teachers and other members of the
) community (see the archives for many examples from many people),
) although?it varies a great deal depending on the individuals involved.
) This is indeed incompatible with individual freedom, and deliberately
) so. It seems to me that the kind of 'freedom' Steiner had in mind was
) the 'freedom' to do exactly as?you are?told.
Su: Hi Nicole. Yes, isn't this odd? The explanation is that in
Anthroposophy, you are "free" if you understand the limitations placed
on you by karma,the world order as described by Steiner's cosmology, and
by your predestination as predicted by the clairvoyant Steiner's wisdom.
Read into all those things around you which suggest to you what you must
be or do. Your environment, your experiences, your traumas, all "teach"
you acceptance.
If you wear certain colors, or have a certain birthday, that
predetermines or explains who or what you are. If you "choose" certain
"difficulties" in life, that is your destiny, your choice, and your
burden.
Even the Waldorf teacher is actualizing his/her own destiny, and in the
8 year cycle of teaching, a particular teacher's dysfunctionality is
meant to be worked on in the classroom, with the children (as the guinea
pigs!).
-Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 02:08:47 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: The few and the many
Brad Martin wrote:
) ) Again, the issue is Love in it's most
) ) inclusive sense. Modern more inclusive systems/quantum science does not
) ) exclude the subject of qualities as mechanistic science did of necessity
) ) at the time. We are now catching up. (this comment for Su).
)
Peter F. reponds:
I missed this earlier. Who says quantum science is less mechanistic? In so
far as this is true, which is not very far, it is seen by most physicists as
a current failing in our understanding of quantum physics, rather than a
desirable feature. How does a mechanistic science exclude love? This
assertion is complete nonsense. It may be that mechanistic science doesn't
have a set of equations for love, but that does not mean mechanistic science
describes a universe in which love cannot arise, nor that mechanistic
science does not have any contribution to make to our understanding of love.
I think that the recent efforts of evolutionary biologists to understand
altruism are an important step in this direction.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 944
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Steiner's 'freedom'
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: The few and the many
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: The few and the many
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: the case for anthrop.
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: The few and the many
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
RE: the case for anthrop.
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: The few and the many
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: the case for anthrop.
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: The few and the many
By alice.javanet rcn.com
Re: the case for anthrop.
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Steiner's nationalism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Goethe and Steiner in Nature
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:33:01 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner's 'freedom'
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3125809981_113943_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
on 1/18/03 6:44 AM, Nicole Foss at nmfoss hotmail.com wrote:
Charlie wrote: He (Steiner)saw humanity as evolving towards freedom. Any
culture which dictates what its people must believe, what they can eat, how
they live their lives, does not allow for the development of individual
freedom.
Nicole: (snip) It seems to me that the kind of 'freedom' Steiner had in mind
was the 'freedom' to do exactly as you are told.
Sharon: ...so that you have assurance of eternal life. Steiner's "freedom"
is the same sort of "freedom" other religions offer--follow the rules, be a
believer, and you will get all the goodies and eternal life. Steiner's use
of the term "individuality" differs from the way most of us use it. The
"individual I" or "individuality" is the body that can be trained in
Steiner's doctrine to remember past lives. This is the body that will help
you find fellow Anthroposophists after death so that you can reincarnate
together on Earth in "core groups" to rule the rest who do no develop their
"individuality". (Remember, Steiner says humans have an etheric body, an
astral body, an I body and a physical body. This is his simplified scheme).
Steiner: The person in whom anthroposophical wisdom appears must be
completely unimportant compared to this wisdom; the person as such does not
matter at all. It is only essential that this person has developed so far
that his or her personal likes, dislikes, and opinions do not taint the
anthroposophical wisdom (Steiner, "The Universal Human," p. 17).
Steiner: It is the deeper task of the anthroposophical movement to enable a
number of human beings to enter their next incarnation with an I each
remembers as his or her own, individual I. These people will then form the
nucleus of the next period of civilization. Then these individuals who have
been well prepared through the anthroposophical spiritual movement to
remember their individual I will be spread over the earth. For the essential
characteristic of the next period of civilization is that it will not be
limited to particular localities, but will be spread over the whole earth.
These individuals will be scattered over the earth, and thus everywhere on
earth there will be a core group of people who will be crucial for the sixth
epoch of civilization. These people will recognize each other as those who
in their previous incarnation strove together to develop the individual I
(Steiner, " The Universal Human," 22-23).
Steiner: To put it bluntly, we can say that the earth and all it can yield
will belong to those who now cultivate their individualities. Those,
however, who do not develop their individual I will be dependent on joining
a group that will instruct them in what they should think, feel, will and
do. In the future development of humanity this will be felt as a regression,
a second Fall. Therefore, we should not regard the anthroposophical movement
and spiritual life as mere theory but rather as something that is given to
us now to prepare what is necessary for the future of humanity (Steiner,
"The Universal Human," p. 24).
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:46:48 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
on 1/18/03 6:41 AM, Su at sufrito53 yahoo.com wrote:
) Su: Prayer works too, and unfortunately it hasn't been fully explored
) but that is a beginning step. And prayer may be much more culturally
) appropriate, in a religious setting, and NOT in the schools.
Sharon: I've seen studies that show it doesn't work. I've also done my own
tests and determined that nothing fails like prayer. At the same time, I
don't mind if people pray, I just object to a religious group claiming to be
nonsectarian, yet making my child pray to the Aryan Christ/Sun Being without
my permission.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:59:59 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
on 1/18/03 6:08 PM, Peter Farrell at feetapparel hotmail.com wrote:
) Brad Martin wrote:
))) Again, the issue is Love in it's most
))) inclusive sense. Modern more inclusive systems/quantum science does not
))) exclude the subject of qualities as mechanistic science did of necessity
))) at the time. We are now catching up. (this comment for Su).
))
)
) Peter F. reponds:
) I missed this earlier. Who says quantum science is less mechanistic? In so
) far as this is true, which is not very far, it is seen by most physicists as
) a current failing in our understanding of quantum physics, rather than a
) desirable feature. How does a mechanistic science exclude love? This
) assertion is complete nonsense. It may be that mechanistic science doesn't
) have a set of equations for love, but that does not mean mechanistic science
) describes a universe in which love cannot arise, nor that mechanistic
) science does not have any contribution to make to our understanding of love.
) I think that the recent efforts of evolutionary biologists to understand
) altruism are an important step in this direction.
Sharon: Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene" explores this.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:27:06 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
on 1/17/03 9:01 AM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
Pardon me for bringing coals to Newcastle here. Fairy tales, mythology,
etc., are all vehicles of awe and wonder for the child. Whether Santa
Clause, the tooth fairy, gnomes, angels, or trolls, they are a healthy
imaginative part of childhood. I have loved reading Winnie Ther Pooh in
adulthood. Childhood should never cease. By the way, Sharon, one of the
great sources of spirituality for me has been the opera house. Great operas
are filled with mythology and symbols to stir the soul.
Sharon: Of course stories are part of childhood, and as an adult, I still
collect children's books and spend time in children's bookstores. I come
from a family very interested in stories (my dad is a puppeteer). Most of
the old myths and fairy tales were written by adults for adults--some were
written to hide heretical beliefs and pass them. Children's literature is a
modern phenomenon. Waldorf has an ulterior motive--to inculcate a
magic/occult belief system. Waldorf teachers select "kosher"
Anthroposophically-correct tales, ignoring modern myths and stories (unless
they are occult tales like Lord of the Rings). For example, R. Dahl, one of
my child's favorites, was banned. James and the Giant Peach and Matilda were
Anthro no nos. The door was slammed shut on A. A. Milne, one of my favorite
childhood authors. Kelman and Siebold were not allowed. I got a letter from
an ex-Waldorf mom saying that her school in Cincinnati would not allow
"Where's Waldo". Contemporary children's literature was taboo at our
ex-school, teachers had the power to sort the materialistic from the
spiritual, my modern favorites were missing. No images of say Piglet, Gumby,
Maisy or Felix were permitted on lunch boxes, classroom walls or clothing,
however, a picture of micro-macrocosmic man was permitted to be worn on the
school T-shirt. Images of gnomes, angels and fairies were sanctioned to hang
on classroom walls as long as they were the kosher Anthro aesthetic.
(Precious Moments' renderings of angels would be banned). All images and
stories were highly regulated by the Anthro police. My child had to turn her
Felix T-shirt inside out.
I don't spend much time at the opera, though occasionally I'll watch an
opera on PBS. One could argue that rock music "stirs the souls" of more
people than does opera. I'd be more inclined to attend a rock concert than
an opera.
)
) Sharon, I have a question for you. Joseph Campbell taught comparative
) religion and mythology at Sarah Laurence College in New York State for 38
) years. He had the interviews that have been shown on Public TV at least four
) times nationwide.
Sharon: And I watched the episodes on TV pre Waldorf, I also borrowed tapes
from the library for a second viewing after leaving Waldorf. The question
posed to Campbell by Bill Moyers, that most sticks out in my mind, was
something like--"Is there more after death?" And Campbell answered that he
didn't think so.
)
) -Why do you call Joseph Campbell New Age?
Sharon: Because he had/has a large following of New Agers, an audience cult.
His promotion of mythology--with Sun as core belief--reached and affected
many people in our society, including Anthroposophists who view Campbell's
message of the Sun--as basic to and unifying all religions--as affirmation
of Steiner's doctrine of Christ the Sun Being.
) -What is your definition of New Age?
Sharon: My definition is based on the work of religion scholars, ie.
religion experts that I read such as Philip Jenkins. The term "New Age" is a
misnomer, it should really be "Old Age" because these ideas are not new. It
is a movement comprised of people who don't really understand *what* they
are (G) who adhere to occult or fringe ideas. Adherents spend billions on
self help books, tapes, etc. without really being affiliated with a specific
church or denomination. New Agers are usually part of an audience cult. Many
describe themselves as Jewish, Unitarians, Catholics or Methodists, few use
the term "New Ager". New Age ideas include belief in reincarnation,
channeling, astrology, micro-macrocosmic ideas, neopaganism and Goddess
spirituality. Theosophy and Anthroposophy are in reality more formally a
specific denomination, (Anthroposophy is a sect of Theosophy), but since
most adherents do not understand that they are involved in a reincarnation
sect / religious movement I'd classify them under "New Age". (Jenkins puts
Theosophy in the New Age context). If you study "The Aquarian Age" you will
see how "New Age" is just a new term for an old, astrological idea. In the
1880s John Ballou Newbrough claimed to channel a text published as "OAHSPE:
A New Age Bible", and the use of the term "New Age" spread. Writers of the
1920s and 1930s advocated a "New Age of occult enlightenment"--Alice Baily
did a lot to popularize both the term "New Age" and "Aquarian". There are a
multitude of prophets of the New Age, and Blavatsky was a major influence on
most of them (including Steiner). Rosicrucianism / mystery religion fed many
of them, including Blavatsky and Steiner. (Read Mystics and Messiahs: Cults
and New Religions in American History, Phillip Jenkins. This book also
focuses on the anti cult movements that historically go hand in hand with
cults, and of course PLANS is an anti-cult group. Also read Richard Noll's
"The Jung Cult").
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 17:17:44 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: The few and the many
mysplum wrote:
) on 1/18/03 6:41 AM, Su at sufrito53 yahoo.com wrote:
)
)
) ) Su: Prayer works too, and unfortunately it hasn't been fully explored
) ) but that is a beginning step. And prayer may be much more culturally
) ) appropriate, in a religious setting, and NOT in the schools.
)
) Sharon: I've seen studies that show it doesn't work. I've also done my
) own
) tests and determined that nothing fails like prayer. At the same time, I
) don't mind if people pray, I just object to a religious group claiming
) to be
) nonsectarian, yet making my child pray to the Aryan Christ/Sun Being
) without
) my permission.
)
Su: Agreed. Praying does not work to bring you what you want. But it
does, at times, soothe the Pray-er (one who prays). Like meditation, it
is a way of self-soothing that does work for some people.
Praying does not work for persons who have been abused or forced to
pray, or have been abused by religious fervor or doctrine. Like
everything else, it can be overdone, and misused, and used to abuse
people, as in forced prayer.
Praying and meditating is a private affair, and should be done with
children in the appropriate, religious setting, with the permission of
their parents.
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 17:32:44 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: the case for anthrop.
mysplum wrote:
) Is there more after death?" And Campbell answered that he
) didn't think so.
) )
) )Brad -Why do you call Joseph Campbell New Age?
)
) Sharon: Because he had/has a large following of New Agers, an audience
) cult.
) His promotion of mythology--with Sun as core belief--reached and
) affected
) many people in our society, including Anthroposophists who view
) Campbell's
) message of the Sun--as basic to and unifying all religions--as
) affirmation
) of Steiner's doctrine of Christ the Sun Being.
)
) ) -What is your definition of New Age?
)
) Sharon: My definition is based on the work of religion scholars, ie.
) religion experts that I read such as Philip Jenkins. The term "New Age"
) is a
) misnomer, it should really be "Old Age" because these ideas are not new.
) It
) is a movement comprised of people who don't really understand *what*
) they
) are (G) who adhere to occult or fringe ideas. Adherents spend billions
) on
) self help books, tapes, etc. without really being affiliated with a
) specific
) church or denomination. New Agers are usually part of an audience cult.
) Many
) describe themselves as Jewish, Unitarians, Catholics or Methodists, few
) use
) the term "New Ager". New Age ideas include belief in reincarnation,
) channeling, astrology, micro-macrocosmic ideas, neopaganism and Goddess
) spirituality. Theosophy and Anthroposophy are in reality more formally a
) specific denomination, (Anthroposophy is a sect of Theosophy), but since
) most adherents do not understand that they are involved in a
) reincarnation
) sect / religious movement I'd classify them under "New Age". (Jenkins
) puts
) Theosophy in the New Age context). If you study "The Aquarian Age" you
) will
) see how "New Age" is just a new term for an old, astrological idea. In
) the
) 1880s John Ballou Newbrough claimed to channel a text published as
) "OAHSPE:
) A New Age Bible", and the use of the term "New Age" spread. Writers of
) the
) 1920s and 1930s advocated a "New Age of occult enlightenment"--Alice
) Baily
) did a lot to popularize both the term "New Age" and "Aquarian". There
) are a
) multitude of prophets of the New Age, and Blavatsky was a major
) influence on
) most of them (including Steiner). Rosicrucianism / mystery religion fed
) many
) of them, including Blavatsky and Steiner. (Read Mystics and Messiahs:
) Cults
) and New Religions in American History, Phillip Jenkins. This book also
) focuses on the anti cult movements that historically go hand in hand
) with
) cults, and of course PLANS is an anti-cult group. Also read Richard
) Noll's
) "The Jung Cult").
Su: What always fills me with amazement is that the ideas of sin and
recompense are repeated over and over again, in all these religions.
There is always some reward for an observance of paternalistic beliefs
in a punitive god-system, where only the good are rewarded, where some
are the "beloved" and others are cursed and those who are not "in the
know" are left in hell, or worse; purgatory/kamaloca.
The sad thing is, it (religion in general) hasn't reduced the crime
rates...or the war mongering!
Funny, I am not an atheist, (that would be too much trouble and require
a religious fervor towards an ideal-atheism- that doesn't much concern
me) but isn't it all really silly, this switching around to different
belief systems, killing each other, trying to fool/deceive each other,
all for the existence of a belief system that is really just a variation
on the same "age old/old age" theme...
-Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:46:58 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
) on 1/18/03 6:41 AM, Su at sufrito53 yahoo.com wrote:
)
)
)) Su: Prayer works too, and unfortunately it hasn't been fully explored
)) but that is a beginning step. And prayer may be much more culturally
)) appropriate, in a religious setting, and NOT in the schools.
)
) Sharon: I've seen studies that show it doesn't work. I've also done my own
) tests and determined that nothing fails like prayer. At the same time, I
) don't mind if people pray, I just object to a religious group claiming to be
) nonsectarian, yet making my child pray to the Aryan Christ/Sun Being without
) my permission.
)
)
Lisa: From what I have been able to gather, and I have done some pretty
extensive reading on this, prayers has *not* been proven to work at all! In
the 1990s, a few stories hit the mainstream press about "studies" that
seemed to indicate that prayer helped people heal faster, have better
outcomes medically, etc. But my understanding is that those studies were
questionable. (One study that I recall had people pray for some patients in
a hospital Critical Care Unit. The pray-ers -- the people doing the praying
-- were not acquainted with the patients, and knew only their names and that
they were very ill. The results seemed to indicate that those patients who
had people praying for them had much more positive outcomes than their
non-prayed-for fellow patients. Unfortunately, there were too many other
factors that were not controlled for, like past health problems, etc.)
That said, I believe that many people who do have religious faith *do*
find comfort and solace in prayer, and indeed, some real studies apparently
have shown that believers (people who have some religious faith) have
longer, healthier lives than those who do not.
So there may be something there, even if it is only psychological!
Neverthless, Waldorf schools have NO right to impose their religion on
children without parental permission or knowledge.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:07:38 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
Sharon said:
)The door was slammed shut on A. A. Milne, one of my favorite
) childhood authors.
Brad: Oh, no, not Winnie. Say it isn't so. I have loved Expotitions to the
Hunderd Aker Wood all my life, including the opera. If those Waldorf
Anthropops are not letting my niece near Winnie, I will be torqued. I will
let you know.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 17:45:32 -0500
From: Al's stuff (alice.javanet rcn.com)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
on 1/19/03 2:46 PM, Lisa D. Ercolano at momof2gals mindspring.com wrote:
)) on 1/18/03 6:41 AM, Su at sufrito53 yahoo.com wrote:
))
))
))) Su: Prayer works too, and unfortunately it hasn't been fully explored
))) but that is a beginning step. And prayer may be much more culturally
))) appropriate, in a religious setting, and NOT in the schools.
))
)) Sharon: I've seen studies that show it doesn't work. I've also done my own
)) tests and determined that nothing fails like prayer. At the same time, I
)) don't mind if people pray, I just object to a religious group claiming to be
)) nonsectarian, yet making my child pray to the Aryan Christ/Sun Being without
)) my permission.
))
))
) Lisa: From what I have been able to gather, and I have done some pretty
) extensive reading on this, prayers has *not* been proven to work at all! In
) the 1990s, a few stories hit the mainstream press about "studies" that
)snips(
Alice here:
Concerning prayer: at risk of being pooh-poohed (a nod to Winnie) I will ask
the question - what if human thought is a form of energy? focused and
somehow "sent" there can be pathways for communication, just like within the
human nervous system.
I am curious because I have read that using "reiki" bodywork has become
more accepted and surgeons have used it during surgery, having a
"reiki-master" present and somehow bringing energy for healing. I remember
reading that the rates of recovery were faster and the quality of healing
better...
could this be viewed as a form of prayer?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:13:39 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
Steiner used the expression "new age" occasionally:
"The Christ [in Steiner's sculpture] towers in the middle as the One
who is carrying the Parcival principle into the new age and who, not
through his power but through his very being, induces others to
overcome themselves, rather than being overcome by Him. In
Michelangelo's painting [Sistine Chapel], we see a Christ who uses
His very power to send some to heaven and others to hell. In future,
such an image will no longer be seen as the genuine Christ, but
rather as a Christ having luciferic qualities. ...There has to be a
clear understanding that we cannot turn our attention just to the
Christ, but must set our sight on the threefold configuration:
Christ, Lucifer, Ahriman. I can only hint at this, but spiritual
science will eventually bring to light the full content of the
mystery, Christ in relation to Lucifer and Ahriman." [Steiner,
Rudolf. Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman. (1915) Trans.
Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. Spring Valley, NY: Anthroposophic Press,
1978, pp. 15-16.]
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 21:06:57 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner's nationalism
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C2BFFE.B37CE3A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Charlie to Peter S.:
)Maybe some of the things you see as fundamental assumptions I
see as objective )observations. At this moment in history I would say
that the European culture, for good or )bad, has done most to shape
the way people in general live. Are my views ethnocentric or )are
they based on objective facts?
Charlie, did you read my earlier response to you? It seems not
since you repeat this fallacy. The question is not (for example)
whether Europeans have shaped the way many people live. The question
is why. Is this dictated from on high? Is this karmic? Is this "meant
to be" because Spirits of This or That decreed? Is this because the
Europeans are tasked with birthing the Consciousness Soul? Steiner
does not merely objectively describe conditions or historical facts,
it is always a sermon about spiritual cause and effect. It does not
suffice to respond that you can make the same "objective
observations" as Steiner.
)He considered women to be closer to the spirit than men who are
more materialistic in )general. Does this mean that he considered
women superior to men?
Please Charlie, I take offense. This is total crud. Please
reconsider supporting such views in this day and age. Women are not
"closer to the spirit." Give me a break.
Charlie:
)You can't say that cultural bonds and blood ties are opposites
for all situations. Would you )say that these are opposites in the
situation in the Scottish Highlands a few centuries )ago?
You miss the point; you want them to either be the same or
opposites. You are stuck in the dichotomy. They are not the same *or*
opposites; they are not related. You seem to want a formula to make
the relationship between "culture" and "race" understandable. You're
stuck inside Steiner's frame in which it is a priori assumed race has
meaning. If told they are not the same, you flail about trying to
salvage some meaning from it - maybe reversing it will do it? But
this doesn't help. Step outside this box. Charlie: it's
*meaningless*. Science shows now that you can easily have more in
common genetically with someone of a different "race" than you have
with someone with skin as peachy as your own.
)Would it be wrong for you to criticise me for being stuck in a
particularist, )anthroposophical world view, if that is your sincere
opinion? Could someone think that the )world would be a better place
without anthroposophists but still defend their right to exist? )I
certainly hope so!
Another familiar fallacy on Waldorf critics. No one is born an
anthroposophist, it's a belief system. Criticizing your world view,
your belief system, is not the same as asking you not to exist. If
you stand by those beliefs, you ought to be able to deal with people
criticizing them, without trying to compare yourself to Jews or any
minority that has been persecuted because of *who they are* by birth;
not because they attend a church or join a group or become excited
hearing some New Age guru lecture. Sune also tried this tact
repeatedly, even suggesting once that Waldorf critics must hate
Waldorf children, or children born to anthroposophist families!. A
dirty trick. In your case I suspect it's sincere confusion.
Charlie:
)If it's looked at objectively it would indeed have been best for
the tens of millions of Jews )who suffered at the hands of the Nazis
if they had blended in. This is not blaming them
Ugh! You may not mean it to be "blaming," but it is a grotesque
statement, I really suggest you reconsider. Moreover it is absurd to
think they *could* have blended in, they were systematically
identified and hunted down. How do you "blend in" if you are forced
to wear a yellow star? Or you are detained on your way to work one
morning, and never see your home again? Many families tried to "blend
in" in the sense of trying to keep their heads down, going about
their business quietly, assuming that if they weren't causing anyone
any trouble surely their family would be left alone, things surely
were not as bad as they were starting to look . . . things would come
out all right in a few months' time? Next stop Auschwitz. Blending in
was a horrible mistake.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 07:15:19 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Goethe and Steiner in Nature
The article "Progressive evolution: Aspirational thinking" by HENRY
GEE (a Senior Editor of Nature)
Nature 420, 611 (2002)
has a reference to Goethe and Steiner. I should point out that it is
critical. You should be able to read it by following this link.
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v420/n6916/full/420611a_fs.html
You may have to register first before you can read it.
Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 945
-- Topica Digest --
Re: the case for anthrop.
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: The few and the many
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
RE: the case for anthrop.
By valslavnijinsky shaw.ca
RE: The few and the many
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
On Richard Noll
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
RE: was: nationalism
By Percedol netscape.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 08:10:20 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
on 1/19/03 12:07 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
) Sharon said:
)) The door was slammed shut on A. A. Milne, one of my favorite
)) childhood authors.
)
) Brad: Oh, no, not Winnie. Say it isn't so. I have loved Expotitions to the
) Hunderd Aker Wood all my life, including the opera. If those Waldorf
) Anthropops are not letting my niece near Winnie, I will be torqued. I will
) let you know.
Sharon: See, Brad, teachers don't read story books to children, they recite
religious parables, Bible stories and revolting tales such as one my
daughter heard about a husband chopping up his wife, remarrying and doing
the same, until numerous women had been chopped up and put in a room. In the
end the first wife, who didn't go to heaven, appeared and murdered the
husband. (Very "Bluebeardish", but I've yet to find the actual story which
was supposed to be "archetypal"). Another grim tale told was about a wicked
god ordering Isaaic to murder his son. My daughter wrote in her lesson book:
"and Abraham was just about to plung the knife into Isaaic's chest when
Miciel stept out of the clouds and said "Abraham pot down that knife you
have proovin yourself werthy".
The Anthro bent (Miciel) in that is obvious. I also had an idea of what
Waldorf would be...I thought Pooh and Piglet would replace all that blood
and guts and violence. Waldorf was not what I thought it would be because I
didn't know it was a mystery school, steeped in Steiner's esoteric religion,
Anthroposophy.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:05:05 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: The few and the many
Peter F.:
)How does a mechanistic science exclude love? This assertion is complete
nonsense. It may be that mechanistic )science doesn't have a set of
equations for love, but that does not mean mechanistic science describes a
universe )in which love cannot arise, nor that mechanistic science does not
have any contribution to make to our )understanding of love.
And if "mechanistic science" never explains love, so what? Sometimes I think
it is the New Agers who are "too intellectual," not the other way around.
They feel there should be no unanswered questions in life. For science not
to have answers to everything or be able to explain everything is
unacceptable, they feel, and therefore science is damned in its entirety.
Science is always incomplete and must constantly admit it doesn't know
everything, gets things wrong on a daily basis, and will always continue to
get some things wrong. Most of science is going back and fixing the mistakes
of the past. Maybe some day there will be a credible Grand Theory of
Everything, but most of these theories don't get far. (And thank goodness,
since their proponents are often madmen.) Does Steiner ever, anywhere, admit
he doesn't have all the answers? Is there any question in the universe
anthroposophy does not purport to answer?
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:12:34 +0000
From: David Gill (valslavnijinsky shaw.ca)
Subject: RE: the case for anthrop.
Brad Martin wrote:
) Sharon said:
) )The door was slammed shut on A. A. Milne, one of my favorite
) ) childhood authors.
)
) Brad: Oh, no, not Winnie. Say it isn't so. I have loved Expotitions to
) the
) Hunderd Aker Wood all my life, including the opera. If those Waldorf
) Anthropops are not letting my niece near Winnie, I will be torqued. I
) will
) let you know.
)
)
My own teacher read us Roald Dahl's "The Marvelous story of Henry Sugar"
aloud, and my younger sister's class was read Winnie-The-Pooh, both in
Waldorf.
Just dropping in to say hello --
Happy new year to all.
David.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 00:20:39 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: The few and the many
Diana Winters wrote:
) Peter F.:
) )How does a mechanistic science exclude love? This assertion is complete
) nonsense. It may be that mechanistic )science doesn't have a set of
) equations for love, but that does not mean mechanistic science describes
) a
) universe )in which love cannot arise, nor that mechanistic science does
) not
) have any contribution to make to our )understanding of love.
)
) And if "mechanistic science" never explains love, so what? Sometimes I
) think
) it is the New Agers who are "too intellectual," not the other way
) around.
) They feel there should be no unanswered questions in life. For science
) not
) to have answers to everything or be able to explain everything is
) unacceptable, they feel, and therefore science is damned in its
) entirety.
) Science is always incomplete and must constantly admit it doesn't know
) everything, gets things wrong on a daily basis, and will always continue
) to
) get some things wrong. Most of science is going back and fixing the
) mistakes
) of the past. Maybe some day there will be a credible Grand Theory of
) Everything, but most of these theories don't get far. (And thank
) goodness,
) since their proponents are often madmen.) Does Steiner ever, anywhere,
) admit
) he doesn't have all the answers? Is there any question in the universe
) anthroposophy does not purport to answer?
) Diana
)
Su: Just as Anthroposophy has appropriated Plato, Aristotle, Emerson,
Thoreau, (the two) Jesuses et al, and a host of concepts such as "karma"
and "Christology," we can now absorb the fact that Anthroposophy also
has received the heads up on Love. They've got it; we've not!!!!
Not!!
The way cults work is to totally re-evaluate values, to preach
catastrophe for those who follow different ideas, and preach their way
as the only way to redemption.
I'm sorry to sound like a cult-buster, but this is the way they do it...
Love (gr)
Su
It ain't over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:29:09 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: On Richard Noll
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2C0CA.F7D196F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Brad speaking.
To Sharon: You are embarking upon a sharing on WC, excerpts from the
books on CG Jung written by Richard Noll. There is much more
objective academic scholarship available on Jung. I have read both of
Noll's books. My opinion is that his work is the equivalent of a
second rate investigative reporter trying to dig out the
sensationalist dirt to discredit the subject while having minimal
comprehension of the larger view. If the reader has no other
knowledge on the subject, he/she buys into it; hook, line and sinker.
Brad
Below are book review comments on Noll from The Journal of Analytical
Psychology and the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
Conacher (below) "The problem with erroneous claims (Noll) is the
amount of time required to correct them,"
http://www.cgjungpage.org/articles/stevens1.html
Journal of Analytical Psychology, 1997, 42, 671-689
"Two books by Richard Noll, The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic
Movement (Princeton University Press) and The Aryan Christ: The
Secret Life of Carl Jung (Random House) -- henceforth to be referred
to as JC and AC respectively -- purport to be 'ground-breaking works
of historical reconstruction' bringing Jungian scholarship to 'a new
level ofsophistication'. In fact, both are masterpieces of
intellectual distortion and amount to a declaration of war on Jung
and on analytical psychology."
"Yet, despite this, Noll persists in his mockery of Jung as 'the
Aryan Christ'. Why does he do it? Presumably, it cannot be
unconnected with the fact that such a calumny will draw attention to
his book and produce better sales and higher royalties than if he
wrote a fair, honest, decent and scholarly book about Jung, his
symbolic life, and the sources of his inspiration. Why should a
travesty of Jung's life and work, such as that presented in The Jung
Cult, receive such wide circulation and universal acclaim?
Presumably, it is because of Noll's stature as a Harvard professor,
his skill as a self-publicist, and because our times are more
sympathetic to the iconoclastic than the sympathetic biographer."
"In The Jung Cult and The Aryan Christ Noll has produced carefully
contrived, scholarly and heavily detailed works of misinformation and
misinterpretation, designed to fill out his own prejudiced and
somewhat paranoid vision of Jung's achievement. It is unfortunate
that so much valuable research should be used as ammunition in what
looks like a purely personal vendetta."
http://www.cpa-apc.org/Publications/Archives/CJP/1998/Mar/mar98_brev.htm
Aryan Christ Review by
G Neil Conacher, MB, ChB, MRCPsych, FRCPC
Kingston, Ontario
"Noll's entry into the world of paparazzi historianism is
disappointing. It might make him rich, but it bodes ill for the
imminent biography of Jung he has promised in the endnotes, which
would complete a trilogy on Jung"
http://www.cpa-apc.org/Publications/Archives/CJP/1999/Mar/books.htm
Cult Fictions: CG Jung and the Founding of Analytical Psychology.
Sonu Shamdasani. London: RKP; 1998. 121 p.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Review by
G Neil Conacher, MB, ChB, MRCPsych, FRCPC
Kingston, Ontario
The early origins and development of psychoanalysis and analytical
psychology continue to be a source of fascination for the scholar
and, it would seem, sufficiently interesting to a general readership
that the works of such scholars can attract major publishers. Two
well-publicized books on Carl Jung by Richard Noll were previously
reviewed in the Journal (1,2), from the perspective of an interested
reader and admirer of Jung who lacked the depth of knowledge to
assess their merits as works of scholarship. Marking a transition
from the analysis of the social context of Jung's ideas to a personal
judgement upon the man himself, the books have generated controversy
and sold well.
The controversy has drawn into itself one of the undoubted leaders in
scholarship on Jung and his ideas, Sonu Shamdasani. "Cult Fictions"
places under the microscope of an encyclopedic knowledge Noll's claim
that Jung deliberately and consciously contrived a cult-like
organization to perpetuate a new religion. Reading the book is rather
like watching a greyhound set upon a lame rabbit-the rabbit has no
chance, and the chase is over all too quickly.
Central to Noll's argument has been the imputation that Jung authored
an anonymous document around the time of the founding of the
Psychological Club in Zurich in 1916. Noll assumes on very little
evidence that the document represents the draft of a talk delivered
by Jung at the inauguration of the Club. As if an eyewitness, Noll
gives a vivid account of Jung's delivery of the talk before his
enthralled listeners, who burst into excited applause. The document,
untitled and consisting of 5 typed pages with corrections in 2
different hands, is referred to by Shamdasani, the first to recognize
its potential importance, as "Analytical Collectivity." It provides
suggestions on the internal organization of the Club, suggestions
that might support an argument that the Club represents a front for
an elite analytical priesthood whose internal difficulties, if they
could not be solved by analytical principles, would be brought before
an "analytical tribunal." The problem for Noll is tha!
t there is nothing in the document to prove authorship and no
evidence that Jung ever gave such an address at the inauguration of
the Club, for which there are written minutes. Shamdasani argues from
an extensive knowledge of Jung's ideas of the time and the large
amount of available collateral information to simply blow the claims
away. It is most unlikely that Jung authored the document, Shamdasani
offers evidence of who might have, and plenty of documents including
private correspondence clearly authored by Jung testify to his
concern that his ideas should not form the basis for a cult.
If "Cult Fictions" were simply a refutation of some not very
creditable sensationalism, it would be of little interest except to a
few sceptical readers of Noll's works. From a welter of partisan
assertions, the historiography of the early origins of depth
psychology is entering a phase of mature scholarship and considered
argument at a time when new material is emerging. Shamdasani serves
notice that shoddy sensationalism can be answered with quiet
authority, which finds a publisher. He closes his argument with words
from Jung himself, prophetically warning of the dangers of prophets
and the malign effect upon the follower:
One modestly sits at the 'Master's feet and guards against having
one's own thoughts. Mental laziness becomes a virtue; one can enjoy
the sun of an at least semidivine being . . . since all
responsibility is laid at the 'Master'. Through his deification, one
grows in stature, apparently without noticing it, and moreover one
has the great truth.
The appreciation of Jung's massive oeuvre has been hampered by the
dross that has accumulated around it, from follower or iconoclast
alike. One of the marks of scholarship evident in Jung's work and in
"Cult Fictions" is the way an author does not intrude upon his
subject. Noll has abandoned this stance, to his detriment. In the
last of 3 appendices, "Of Scholarship," Shamdasani gives more detail
of the background to this controversy and makes reference to a work
of his own, in preparation, on Jung and the making of modern
psychology. "The problem with erroneous claims is the amount of time
required to correct them," and it is to be regretted that the writing
of this excellent little book may have taken time away from a much
larger project.
Reference
1. Conacher GN. The Jung cult: origins of a charismatic movement
[book review]. Can J Psychiatry 1995;40:217.
2. Conacher GN. The Aryan Christ: the secret life of Carl Jung [book
review]. Can J Psychiatry 1998;43:188.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 00:05:04 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C2C0E0.C0240AB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Brad: I was trying very hard to find evidence of cultish,
anti-semitic, racist, anthroposopical behavior among biodynamic
farmers in Iowa. No luck.
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, 209 Curtiss Hall,
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-1050 PH: (515)294-3711
http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/
Fred Kirschenmann, Ph.D., Director of the Leopold Center for
Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University, is the country's
largest biodynamic farmer, with 3,500 acres in cultivation. A
long-time educator who has written extensively on organic farming, he
manages Kirschenmann Family Farms in North Dakota and was until 1999
Chair of the Board for Farm Verified Organic, a certification agency.
A leader of the organic/sustainable agriculture movement, he has
served on many boards and advisory committees and just completed a
five-year term on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National
Organic Standards Board. On his own land, Kirschenmann has proven
that diversified organic agriculture can be practiced on a large
scale year after year. Since 1980 he and his family have produced
beef and at least 10 different organic grains on 3,100 acres near
Windsor, North Dakota. The prairie potholes that dot the farm provide
habitat for white pelicans and plovers, whooping cranes and san!
dhill cranes, even the occasional moose. For Kirschenmann, the shift
from industrial agriculture to a system based on landscape ecology is
critical to restoring the biodiversity lost over the past 50 years.
http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubinfo/papersspeeches/WBerry.html
Speech at Leopold Center
Where Are We Now?[1] Frederick Kirschenmann Director, Leopold
Center for Sustainable AgricultureIf the [current] pattern holds,
farming as a way of life will mainly disappear within the next 50
years, large swaths of the country will be virtually depopulated.
--Jedidiah Purdy
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/sustag/resources/prairietalk.html
ORGANIC FARMING RESOURCE LIST
Biodynamic Agriculture, Willy Schilthuis (Book)
A concise and fully illustrated introduction to the principles and
practice of biodynamic agriculture. Biodynamics is an internationally
recognized approach to organic agriculture in which the farmer or
gardener respects and works with the spiritual dimension of the
earth's environment, enabling the life processes and ecological
interconnections of plants and animals to function at their best.
Biodynamic Farming Practice, Sattler & Wistinghusen (Book)
The definitive book on biodynamics. This is a thorough, scholarly
textbook describing in detail scientifically proven biodynamic
techniques developed over many years in Europe. Used in college
agriculture programs in Europe.
http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/Booksand/BCOrganicGrower/Summer2000.htm
Certified Organic Associations of British Columbia
The Hijacking of Organic Agriculture by Frederick Kirschenmann
This article is condensed from an article by US farmer Fred
Kirschenmann. He suggests that the process of setting national
organic standards in the US is designed to facilitate the
industrialization of organic agriculture, to the detriment of its
original vision and practice. He suggests a two-track approach, where
the national standard (required for international trade) can be
supplemented by local standards whereby small enterprises can
differentiate themselves in the marketplace, subscribing to enhanced
ecological and social standards that exceed the base national
standard, filling niche markets, and marketing more directly to
consumers.
http://www.umich.edu/~nppcpub/resources/ResLists/agri.html
Sustainable Agriculture Resource List University of Michigan This
is a list of articles, books, videos, online resources, faculty, and
organizations that can help you incorporate pollution prevention into
your agriculture courses.
Kirschenmann, Frederick. Switching to a Sustainable System:
Strategies for Converting From Conventional/ Chemical to
Sustainable/Organic Farming Systems. Windsor, ND: The Northern Plains
Sustainable Agricultural Society, 1988.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:03:01 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: was: nationalism
P:
One should be careful about how scientific data are presented. Man and
woman are quite different since one entire chromosome is different (Y)
and women are a mosaic of two X chromosome (one paternal and one
maternal, only one being active in each cell). Therefore, you may say
that two man from different races have more in common genetically than a
man and a woman within the same race.
Also, it is not just the number of genes that count for a difference but
their place in the hierarchy of functions. For example hox genes
control a lot of other genes and just a little difference at their level
can cause a lot of differences at the phenotic level. To mesure the
differences in terms of percentages is deceptive.
You wrote:
Science shows now that you can easily have more in common genetically
with someone of a different "race" than you have with someone with skin
as peachy as your own.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:18:58 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad lists a lot of stuff associated with Biodynamic and Organic
Agriculture.
Peter responds:
It is clear that there is a difference between standard (for lack of a
better term) agriculture and organic agriculture. I would argue that there
is also a difference between what might be called standard organic practice
and Biodynamic agriculture. I would further assert that the differences
amount to the inclusion of astrological methods and some other methods which
rely on magic and something akin to hoemoepathy.
I note this book
"Biodynamic Farming Practice", Sattler & Wistinghusen (Book) which came with
the following description:
The definitive book on biodynamics. This is a thorough, scholarly textbook
describing in detail scientifically proven biodynamic techniques developed
over many years in Europe. Used in college agriculture programs in Europe.
This book seems very hard to come by for a text book. It does not appear at
Amazon not at the Australian University library catalogs I consulted.
Evidently it is not in great demand. I have serious doubts that the
differentiating features of Biodynamic agriculture from organic agriculture
have been scientifically proven.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:02:15 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad:
Yes, Peter, agreed. If someone is consulting an astrology chart on when to
plant, then there is a problem. However, what legitimate deeper concerns are
there in agriculture, soils, etc., that need to be understood? Loading on
chemicals and depleting the soil is not a long term solution. By no means am
I an expert on the subject. My observation on all this is that beneath all
the flakiness of the Steiner/anthropop phenom of 100 years ago, are some
very legitimate contributions. Dr. Frederick Kirschenmann, biodynamic farmer
in Iowa, looks to me to be quite a serious, no nonsense fellow. I wager that
he could give a very adequate discussion of the deeper meaning of it all and
able to dismiss the flake quotient. He could make the correlations between
organic and biodynamic. He could tell us where Steiner had insight and how
it correlated to the flake quotient.
The wise and objective are able to dismiss the flakiness. To repeat my
contention on two areas of contribution. In my reading thru Steiner, I can
see germs of thought in Steiner which has become the depth psychology of
today. Jung, Assagioli, and Maslow are the pioneers along with many others
in 2003. I can also see in Goethe the seeds of the expansion of reductionist
science into modern systems/quantum science. 200 years ahead of his time. By
the way, my read on astrology is that it is an ancient, elaborate method to
attempt to understand human nature. It has nothing to do with what a given
planet millions of miles away is doing relative to another. These just
became convenient metaphors for communication in a prescientific time. The
correction is the depth psychologies. The frivolous minds remain hard at the
charts and readings, however.
I have noticed a method on Waldorf Critics. There seems a tendency to find a
snippet of information that appears weak, extract it, and use it to
castigate the whole. For example, assuming the book referenced, "Biodynamic
Farming Practice", was indeed a scholarly treatment, a WC activist would
comb through it try to find a comment to attempt a justification for their
pre-existing bias. Sigh.
Brad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 1:18 AM
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
) Brad lists a lot of stuff associated with Biodynamic and Organic
) Agriculture.
)
) Peter responds:
) It is clear that there is a difference between standard (for lack of a
) better term) agriculture and organic agriculture. I would argue that there
) is also a difference between what might be called standard organic
practice
) and Biodynamic agriculture. I would further assert that the differences
) amount to the inclusion of astrological methods and some other methods
which
) rely on magic and something akin to hoemoepathy.
)
) I note this book
) "Biodynamic Farming Practice", Sattler & Wistinghusen (Book) which came
with
) the following description:
) The definitive book on biodynamics. This is a thorough, scholarly textbook
) describing in detail scientifically proven biodynamic techniques developed
) over many years in Europe. Used in college agriculture programs in Europe.
)
) This book seems very hard to come by for a text book. It does not appear
at
) Amazon not at the Australian University library catalogs I consulted.
) Evidently it is not in great demand. I have serious doubts that the
) differentiating features of Biodynamic agriculture from organic
agriculture
) have been scientifically proven.
)
) Peter F.
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
) http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
)
)
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 946
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: On Richard Noll
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: was: nationalism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: the case for anthrop.
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: was: nationalism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: the case for anthrop.
By nmfoss hotmail.com
What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By dan dandugan.com
wear peat!
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By dan dandugan.com
religious observances at Camphill
By dan dandugan.com
Re: wear peat!
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
AFF meetings news
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: wear peat!
By momof2gals mindspring.com
RE: wear peat!
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
RE: wear peat!
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Re: What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:49:30 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
on 1/20/03 11:18 PM, Peter Farrell at feetapparel hotmail.com wrote:
)
) This book seems very hard to come by for a text book. It does not appear at
) Amazon not at the Australian University library catalogs I consulted.
) Evidently it is not in great demand. I have serious doubts that the
) differentiating features of Biodynamic agriculture from organic agriculture
) have been scientifically proven.
Sharon: Check this site out! Amazing BD claims by a New Zealand group of BD
farmers. Cow horns are antenna attracting forces for preparation 500!
http://rimu.orcon.net.nz/garuda/books/cowhorns.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:56:15 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: On Richard Noll
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3125980575_196010_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
on 1/20/03 7:29 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
Brad speaking.
To Sharon: You are embarking upon a sharing on WC, excerpts from the books
on CG Jung written by Richard Noll. There is much more objective academic
scholarship available on Jung. I have read both of Noll's books. My opinion
is that his work is the equivalent of a second rate investigative reporter
trying to dig out the sensationalist dirt to discredit the subject while
having minimal comprehension of the larger view. If the reader has no other
knowledge on the subject, he/she buys into it; hook, line and sinker. Brad
Sharon: I just think there are two camps, I'm in Noll's camp, you and Noll's
critics aren't. Thanks for passing that along, critique is always a good
thing. It's ok to have differing opinions.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:36:51 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: was: nationalism
Interesting you jumped on that. Why is it so important there be racial
differences?
I hope someone like Peter F. will take this over for me? :) I'm over my
head discussing genetics. Quickly typing "genetics differences race" into
google yields a gazillion things that look as if they would support what I
said, but I don't have time to go into it.
Presumably by "phenotic" you mean "phenotypic"?
Percedol wrote:
)One should be careful about how scientific data are presented. Man and
woman are quite )different since one entire chromosome is different (Y) and
women are a mosaic of two X )chromosome (one paternal and one maternal, only
one being active in each cell). Therefore, you )may say that two man from
different races have more in common genetically than a man and a )woman
within the same race. Also, it is not just the number of genes that count
for a difference )but their place in the hierarchy of functions. For
example hox genes control a lot of other genes )and just a little difference
at their level can cause a lot of differences at the phenotic level. To
)mesure the differences in terms of percentages is deceptive.
)You wrote:
) Science shows now that you can easily have more in common genetically
)with someone of a different "race" than you have with someone with skin
)as peachy as your own.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:49:18 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
David:
)My own teacher read us Roald Dahl's "The Marvelous story of Henry Sugar"
)aloud, and my younger sister's class was read Winnie-The-Pooh, both in
)Waldorf.
It is often a question of age. I believe you told us you started Waldorf in
fifth grade? Ten year olds (probably a lot of 11 year olds). I was reading
Roald Dahl to my son when he was 4 or 5. James and the Giant Peach was
beloved at that age, then Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and the sequel
and several others.
Ironically, we found the stories in the Henry Sugar book a little too
freaky/creepy. A couple of things in that book are really disturbing and are
really stories for adults if you ask me. As always Waldorf seems to have
things turned 180.
A good rule of thumb (according to reading specialists, children's
librarians and their ilk) is to read somewhat above a child's reading level
in choosing what to read aloud, as children can often understand things at a
higher level than they can read. Fifth graders should have been reading
Roald Dahl on their own years since. Waldorf usually aims to dumb down and
infantilize, unless something really frightening can be found, then it seems
appropriate for all ages.
Winnie the Pooh? Probably okay after adolescence. :)
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:07:44 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3125981264_237453_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
on 1/20/03 10:05 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, 209 Curtiss Hall,
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-1050 PH: (515)294-3711
http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/
Sharon: Wow, BD farming taught right there at Moo U! I've seen everything
now! I bet they teach pupils how to make preparation 500. I wonder if they
side or disagree with the New Zealander BD apostates?
Now there's a great research project. Funnily enough, I noticed that many
restaurants I've visited in Iowa serve BD eggs! I always wondered why.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:23:47 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
on 1/21/03 12:02 AM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
)
)
) I have noticed a method on Waldorf Critics. There seems a tendency to find a
) snippet of information that appears weak, extract it, and use it to
) castigate the whole. For example, assuming the book referenced, "Biodynamic
) Farming Practice", was indeed a scholarly treatment, a WC activist would
) comb through it try to find a comment to attempt a justification for their
) pre-existing bias. Sigh.
Sharon: This is such nonsense Brad, you make me smile. You don't read the
books yet you make such assertions. I have read most of the books from which
I quote. Get your hands on Elizabeth Vreede's "Anthroposophy and Astrology".
It's pretty clear, and Steiener supposedly said Vreede knew his work better
than anyone else. Vreede describes all the laggard beings that supposedly
live on the material sun etc. I found it very informative. Steiner actually
reworked astrology a little, you can learn about that in Vreede's book. The
book was published recently by an Anthro press so you can rest assured that
it's "kosher". Too bad one cannot quote an entire book, if I could I would
post all the books, in full, from which I quote for you to read.
Unfortunately, I miss so many juicy tidbits because Anthro books tend to be
so loaded that I can't possibly quote it all! The snippets I post often
summarize Steiner's teachings.
Did you read the link I sent on BD farming? That is wacky Brad, and I did
not extract a single snippet did I?
Don't feel bad about your religion, it's OK if you want to follow Steiner.
Just don't palm it off surreptitiously on the unsuspecting, that's all.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:06:11 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: was: nationalism
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Percedol wrote: It is not just the number of genes that
count for a difference but their place in the hierarchy of functions.
For example hox genes control a lot of other genes and just a little
difference at their level can cause a lot of differences at the
phenotic level. To mesure the differences in terms of percentages is
deceptive. (BR)(/P)
(P)Nicole: Are you suggesting that there are significant
differences between high level regulatory genes in people of
different 'races' that actually lead to more than superficial
differences at the phenotypic level? If so, what evidence do you have
for this? I can see how your argument could be applied to the
differences between humans and apes, which share
some 95-99% of their genetic material and yet have
significant phenotypic differences due to differences in regulatory
genes (humans are neotonous primates, in other words they
structurally resemble the juvenile primate form more than the adult
form due to regualtory gene changes). That same argument seems to
have no applicability to the minute genetic and superficial
phenotypic differences between members of (EM)Homo sapiens
sapiens(/EM).(/P)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)Protect your PC - (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMUEN/2024")Click here(/a) for McAfee.com
VirusScan Online
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:57:59 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: the case for anthrop.
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Diana wrote: Fifth graders should have been reading Roald
Dahl on their own years since. (BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)Nicole: I think people worry too much about what
children can read at what age and put too much pressure on young
children to achieve early literacy. I personally don't know all
that many fifth graders (Waldorf or public school, now or when I
was at school) who were reading Roald Dahl 'years since', and I
certainly wouldn't suggest that to be able to do so is something they
'should' aspire to. Too much pressure at too young an age, from
school or from home can lead to needless anxiety, and doesn't
seem to result in long term educational benefits.(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)Most of the children I know seem to start reading novels
somewhere between the ages of eight and eleven, whatever their
educational background. They read for pleasure when they are ready
to, whatever age that may be. My daughter, who would have had trouble
reading an Archie comic at nine (after 5 years of full-time public
school in England), has just finished The Lord of the Rings at
eleven, the same age as I was when I read it. My son, who wasn't
interested in reading at eight, was inspired by Harry Potter at
nine. Each of them began to read when something came along that took
their fancy, and they've never looked back. Why do we, as a
society, put so much emphasis on what children 'should' be
doing at each age, and why are we so quick to pass judgement on those
who choose a different route?(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)Help STOP
SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMTEN/2016")get 2 months FREE*(/a)
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:32:04 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C2C149.1AAE5040
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Nicole
)I think people worry too much about what children can read at what
age and put too much )pressure on young children to achieve early
literacy. I personally don't know all that many fifth )graders
(Waldorf or public school, now or when I was at school) who were
reading Roald Dahl )'years since', and I certainly wouldn't suggest
that to be able to do so is something they 'should' )aspire to. Too
much pressure at too young an age, from school or from home can lead
to )needless anxiety, and doesn't seem to result in long term
educational benefits.
Nicole, I apologize, I shouldn't have phrased that so baldly or
prescriptively, that fifth graders "should" have read Roald Dahl
years earlier. It was not well stated. They "shouldn't" necessarily
read something like that at a particular age, any more than they
"should" read any particular author. Obviously to say "fifth graders
should" does not take individual differences, abilities and
preferences, etc. into account at all.
But don't you think a class teacher has to work with some kind of
idea of norms? Frankly, I do know a lot of fourth graders (my son's
age, so I know fewer fifth graders) who could read things like
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in second or third grade, though I
recognize that it is not abnormal for some to not be able to or be
interested, and it is not a reflection of their intelligence.
Perhaps it is more to the point that when the teacher *reads aloud*
he or she should be reading to - or even slightly above - the level
of understanding, which is totally separate from reading ability.
Roald Dahl is *very* easily understood and enjoyed by most 5 or 6
year olds, regardless of whether they can read a single word. This is
not a prescriptive thing, just taking stock of where the kids are at.
In general Waldorf ALWAYS AIMS LOW; they would always rather err on
the side of pretending a bunch of 10 or 11 year olds are cognitively
where most 5 or 6 year olds are. A parallel example is the
6-year-olds in the kindergarten who are going nuts listening to "The
Little Red Hen" or "Sweet Porridge" or "Goldilocks" for the 600th
time, which of course delights the 3- and 4-year-olds. It is not to
say a 6 year old might not enjoy these occasionally, but it is,
really, a wrong choice as a major staple of the curriculum. The
curriculum should *challenge*. This is an idea I will st!
aunchly defend; it is not about judging or pressuring anybody.
(snip what your kids read) - since mine reads mostly junk, I'm
certainly not judging. :) Captain Underpants, Calvin and Hobbes, and
pores over his Lego "magazine" which is really just a catalog, for
hours. Literature? What's that? :)
)Why do we, as a society, put so much emphasis on what children
'should' be doing at each age, )and why are we so quick to pass
judgement on those who choose a different route?
I wasn't *at all* in any way shape or form, I can't say that strongly
enough, passing judgment on *anybody''s* child. I was passing
judgment on the Waldorf delaying trend. The teacher not the students!
Furthermore Roald Dahl may have been an excellent choice for that
fifth grade, for all I know. I was commenting on Waldorf's generally
skewed sense of age-appropriateness, in my opinion. There's a Waldorf
student reading list somewhere that I once saw, I'll try to find this
- I remember generally thinking the selections were at least 2 years
off (i.e., if it said 4th grade, I had probably read it to my 2nd
grader). And I don't have one of these gifted genius kids here
either. :) I have a squirmy tomboy. Though my child definitely has a
fabulous attention span for being read to, we've done 6 million hours
of it. I use it very deliberately to expose him to things he wouldn't
undertake on his own. Often, he reads them to himself later - I
highly recommend this approach!
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:33:51 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Sharon:
)Get your hands on Elizabeth Vreede's "Anthroposophy and Astrology".
) It's pretty clear, and Steiener supposedly said Vreede knew his work
better
) than anyone else.
Brad:
I will use the term Flake Quotient FQ for someone's work. Vreede clearly has
a high FQ. She has a germ of a good idea in terms of attempting to determine
'spirituality' as a larger understanding of the universe from the science of
Astronomy. Fair marks for a century ago. Poor marks for 2003. Spiritual is a
term used for the higher order good. See below from AN Whitehead.
The knowledge of the universe ascends through three degrees: from Astronomy
to Astrology, and from Astrology to Astrosophy. But every one of these
realms of knowledge is today more or less bewitched. Astronomical science is
devoid of spirituality, but must once again be permeated with it. Astrology
preserves an ancient spirituality that no longer has the same value for our
own times. True Astrosophy is at present surely not to be found outside
Rudolf Steiner's spiritual science. Astrosophy is at one and the same time
the goal of an anthroposophical science of the cosmos and its starting
point. Elisabeth Vreede, Anthroposophy and Astrology: The Astronomical
Letters of Elisabeth Vreede, Anthroposophic Press, 2001, p. xxii. See also
Diagram 1, Appendix A.
If you are going to quote someone, it ought to be from someone with a low
FQ. You had given me, G. Ahern's "Sun at Midnight", which I am
investigating. It appears Owen Barfield has academic standing. No one on WC
informed me about Barfield when I asked for someone who was ferreting out
the insights from the nonsense. One of the important tasks in life for each
of us relates to the insight from Somerset Maugham's 'Of Human Bondage',
"Life is like the Paris flea market. You must find the gold among the
dross."
) Did you read the link I sent on BD farming? That is wacky Brad, and I did
) not extract a single snippet did I?
Yes, I did, very wacky, 100% FQ. I think I will mount some 15 foot elephant
tusks on my office wall and tune it to the galaxy far, far away. Maybe this
will aid in my energy level. Let's think big, not cow. This is from the
website from a fellow in New Zealand, Glenn Atkinson. http://get.to/garuda
He appears to have a 90% FQ. I give him 10% for at least trying to
understand nature, the soil, agronomy. However, loaded with the usual high
FQ baggage. You extracted a snippet to support what seems to be your view
that biodynamics is 100% wacko.
I extracted a snippet from the WWW to find the gold from the dross. A bit of
gold is the biodynamic/organic farmer from Iowa and the agronomy work at the
Univ. of Iowa. Agronomy is the application of the various soil and plant
sciences to soil management and crop production; scientific agriculture.
This farmer Kirschenmann, after reading a couple of his speeches, has a very
low FQ. To be human includes a bit of FQ. Have to have a bit to add some
fun. A task in life is to minimize it. It is called becoming wise.
Sharon, your comment on 'Moo U' and 'Preparation 500' about a U. S.
university is neither becoming nor objective. Kirschenmann +"preparation
500" in Google does not produce a result. However, they use Preparation 500
at Joseph Phelps Vineyards in St. Helena, CA.
http://www.jpvfreestone.com/ I should call and interview Tom Shelton,
President and CEO of the the Vineyards to determine if he is anti-semitic,
racist and a cultist. If so, I could have a sensationalist story for the
Sacramento Bee reporter WC has used.
WHAT IS BIODYNAMIC AGRICULTURE? (from the Vineyard site)
Biodynamic agriculture was put forth by Rudolf Steiner in 1924 and is one of
the oldest forms of organic agriculture used today. Biodynamic farming is a
system of agriculture in which the farm is designed to be a self-contained
organism. Combining natural farming practices with biodynamic preparations
and the farm's own resources creates a modern and ecologically sound system
tailored to the specific conditions of its locale. This approach is
excellent for utilizing and enhancing the unique capacities of the terroir
of each site.
By Philippe Pessereau, Viticulturist (I would interview this fellow, as
well. Force a confession perhaps on his occult views.)
) Don't feel bad about your religion, it's OK if you want to follow Steiner.
) Just don't palm it off surreptitiously on the unsuspecting, that's all.
Oh, Sharon, you wound me!. You have not been grokking my posts. I do not
follow Steiner/anthroposophy, Blavatsky/Besant/theosophy or Gurdjieff/Fourth
Way. Steiner/anthro has never been my interest. And, certainly not a
religion. I had said the 'three rascals' offered me a modest diversion
while reading over the past 30 years on the Wisdom Tradition in the West.
The Wisdom Tradition is what I call those Minds of Synthesis who have a low
to zero FQ.
Leading the group with a 0 FQ for a base standard would be Alfred North
Whitehead. A major website is
http://www.alfred.north.whitehead.com/IPN/ipn_home.htm Try some Whitehead,
not Vreede. This would hardly be a 'palming off', but a gift and sharing of
knowledge. From Brad to Sharon. I would recommend at the top of the list,
Whitehead's 'Adventures of Ideas'. From Stanford University is a one
page summation of Whitehead's oeuvre.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/
Whitehead on Spiritual:
http://www.alfred.north.whitehead.com/ANW/WitWisdom/witwis7.htm
'In ethical ideals we find the supreme example of consciously formulated
ideas acting as a driving force effecting transitions from social state to
social state. Such ideas are at once gadflies irritating, and beacons
luring, the victims among whom they dwell. The conscious agency of such
ideas should be contrasted with senseless forces, floods, barbarians, and
mechanical devices. The great transitions are due to a coincidence of forces
derived from both sides of the world, its physical and its spiritual
natures. Mere physical nature lets loose a flood, but it requires
intelligence to provide a system of irrigation. (A.I. p. 21)' AN Whitehead
This is exactly what I have been saying. Irrigating the intelligent mind
with one's spiritual nature. Both sides of the world. To become wise. To be
dominated by one's physical nature risks the barbaric, of which history is
replete.
Encouraging irrigation of the intelligent mind, gold not dross,
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 00:36:38 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
)Brad: I was trying very hard to find evidence of
)cultish, anti-semitic, racist, anthroposopical behavior among
)biodynamic farmers in Iowa. No luck.
Who accused that group of racism or anti-Semitism? We're not talking
about the days of Rudolf Hess and Walter Darre.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:39:43 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: wear peat!
Inmates at Camphill Village, Copake, NY, are busy weaving peat sweaters:
"We cannot escape the contamination of our environment by exhaust
gases, pesticides, radio waves, electro and magnetic fields from high
tension lines, from auto and air travel, from cell phones and
radiation from nuclear power plants and other sources. Even if we are
not personally using these devices, the fields and waves are all
around us and running through us.
"What to do? Wear peat. Healing peat fibers come from the leaf blade
of cotton grass (Eriophorum Saginatum) which grows in the raised bogs
of the north. They are several centuries old, preserving life forces
from a time when the earth was cleaner and healthier. By raising the
elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
"Tanning produces melanin to protect us from short wave and
radioactive radiation. Likewise the brown humus substances in peat
transform short wave UV energy into long wave warmth energy. Also,
like our skin, cotton grass contains silica. Doctors have prescribed
peat products for the natural responses to 'life in the fast lane':
nervousness, restlessness, insomnia, headaches, hardening, joint
pain, rheumatism, cancer and for general convalescence.
"Peat itself does not cure us. But coming as it does from a
centuries-long slow ripening process, it forms a protective layer
around us, allowing our own life forces to sustain, strengthen and
heal us. Many people feel a new sense of well being when they wear
peat. John Carlson, our first customer, says he feels 'hugged by
angels.'"
[Hasse, Jonitha. "The Power of Peat: Work in the Weavery." Village
View: A Newsletter from Camphill Village USA, Inc. Fall 2002. Copake,
NY: Camphill Village USA, Inc., p. 7.]
Raise fear of modern life. Raise money by selling magic cures.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:21:54 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad, you wrote,
)Dr. Frederick Kirschenmann, biodynamic farmer
)in Iowa, looks to me to be quite a serious, no nonsense fellow. I wager that
)he could give a very adequate discussion of the deeper meaning of it all and
)able to dismiss the flake quotient. He could make the correlations between
)organic and biodynamic. He could tell us where Steiner had insight and how
)it correlated to the flake quotient.
How about inviting him to join us here for a discussion of biodynamic
agriculture?
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:51:48 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: religious observances at Camphill
Another article in the Camphill newsletter details the religious
observance of "The Michaelmas Festival." This is of particular
interest because Camphill presents itself to the government as a
secular organization so that it can get AmeriCorps scholarship
workers. Excerpts:
"As winter is now upon us, it is a good time to look back on our
Michaelmas Festival....There was also the Redemption of the Earth,
especially around the Hall after all the pain it had suffered through
the re-building...Wednesday afternoon started with an official
offering in the Hall with everyone....On Friday evening, Penelope
spoke about Archangel Michael, his mission, and the meaning of
Michaelmas. The evening was framed by the Foundation Stone Meditation
of Rudolf Steiner in Eurythmy spoken by Reg Bould....In the evening,
almost everyone was invited to go to different houses for the Bible
Evenings. Michaelmas Day started with a service followed by a
wonderful harvest meal...through all this was the weaving of light,
life, wisdom and joy, to the appearance of angelic beings who brought
the waking of consciousness in our troubled world and faced it with
courage and peacefulness...."
[Bould, Christina. "A Look Back at the Michaelmas Festival." Village
View: A Newsletter from Camphill Village USA, Inc. Fall 2002. Copake,
NY: Camphill Village USA, Inc., p. 10.]
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:20:17 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: wear peat!
From Dan:
By raising the
) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
Brad:
Maybe I can sell them Viking helmets with cow horns to gather elemental
forces to neutralize the bad forces. Would be a nice fashion touch to go
with the peat sweaters.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:27:21 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Great idea. Let me work on it.
Brad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Dugan" (dan dandugan.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:21 AM
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
) Brad, you wrote,
)
) )Dr. Frederick Kirschenmann, biodynamic farmer
) )in Iowa, looks to me to be quite a serious, no nonsense fellow. I wager
that
) )he could give a very adequate discussion of the deeper meaning of it all
and
) )able to dismiss the flake quotient. He could make the correlations
between
) )organic and biodynamic. He could tell us where Steiner had insight and
how
) )it correlated to the flake quotient.
)
) How about inviting him to join us here for a discussion of biodynamic
) agriculture?
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:11:09 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad:
)I will use the term Flake Quotient FQ for someone's work. Vreede clearly
has
)a high FQ. (snip) and
)To be human includes a bit of FQ. Have to have a bit to add some
)fun. A task in life is to minimize it. It is called becoming wise.
This sounds like you are trying terribly hard to be balanced, but you know,
it is actually extremely easy to find people whose work has a 0% FQ, and it
is even easier to completely avoid any FQ at all in one's own statements.
Simply do not make claims that you cannot provide any kind of evidence for.
Brad quotes from some vineyard's web site:
)WHAT IS BIODYNAMIC AGRICULTURE? (from the Vineyard site)
)Biodynamic agriculture was put forth by Rudolf Steiner in 1924 and is one
of
)the oldest forms of organic agriculture used today. Biodynamic farming is a
)system of agriculture in which the farm is designed to be a self-contained
)organism. Combining natural farming practices with biodynamic preparations
)and the farm's own resources creates a modern and ecologically sound system
)tailored to the specific conditions of its locale. This approach is
)excellent for utilizing and enhancing the unique capacities of the terroir
)of each site.
I would suggest, Brad, that this is extremely clear cut. Whether this makes
any sense whatsoever, or has any practical use whatever (whether it is gold
or dross) depends entirely on whether the "biodynamic preparations" actually
do anything. Can you provide, from your searchings on the Web, any evidence
that they do so? If these practices have the effects the believers claim why
are they utterly ignored outside these cult circles?
)By Philippe Pessereau, Viticulturist (I would interview this fellow, as
)well. Force a confession perhaps on his occult views.)
I do not think you need to go about "forcing confessions." He put it on his
website, didn't he? He is telling you his occult views, he believes that
these potions have magical effects.
Brad, have you considered my idea that you simply ask to observe your
niece's class? You might find this saves time in all the gold and dross
sorting.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:46:03 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: AFF meetings news
AFF is the only remaining nonsectarian anti-cult organization in the
U.S. since Scientology destroyed the Cult Awareness Network.
If your Waldorf experience continues to trouble you, you might
consider the AFF ex-member workshop listed below. The California and
Connecticut conferences feature academic papers studying cults, very
interesting. I will attend the California one in June.
A video of Sharon and Dan's presentation to the 2002 AFF conference
in Orlando is available. Ordering information is at the end of the
"2002 conference" pages linked below.
If the links don't work for you, use:
http://www.cultinfobooks.com/pub_affnb/idx_affnb.htm
-Dan Dugan
***
AFF News Briefs 2003, No. 1 is Now Available
We have posted our latest e-newsletter-
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/pub_affnb/idx_affnb.htm)click here.
This hyperlink takes you to the index page of our newsletters, so, if
you are new, you can review past newsletters as well as the current
one.
The current newsletter directs you to detailed information on the
2003 AFF conferences and ex-member workshop:
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_events/2003/aff_conference_2003_06ca_events.htm)Southern
California (June 13-14)
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_events/2003/aff_workshop_2003_07co_events.htm)Ex-member
Workshop at Estes Park, Colorado (July 11-13)
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_events/2003/aff_conference_2003_10ct_events.htm)Hartford,
Connecticut (October 17-18)
The newsletter also directs you to a detailed report on AFF's
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/pub_affnb/affnbsubscribers/Conference_2002_Report.htm)2002
conference, which took place in Orlando, Florida last June. Those who
have never attended an AFF conference will get a sense of the quality
and breadth of AFF conferences from this report. The report also
lists available videos from the 2002 conference.
We offer early registration discounts, so please visit these pages
and register now.
We also have hyperlinks to on-line forms that you can print and use
to fax or mail your registration, should you not want to use our
secure-pay online bookstore:
(http://www.cultinfobooks.com/)www.cultinfobooks.com
Regards,
Michael Langone, Ph.D.
Editor
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:47:17 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad Martin wrote:
I have noticed a method on Waldorf Critics. There seems a tendency to find a
)snippet of information that appears weak, extract it, and use it to
)castigate the whole. For example, assuming the book referenced, "Biodynamic
)Farming Practice", was indeed a scholarly treatment, a WC activist would
)comb through it try to find a comment to attempt a justification for their
)pre-existing bias. Sigh.
)
Peter responds:
This attitude about which you are complaining seems to me to be about as
close a description of the scientific method as you might write in a few
words. This is just about exactly how a scientist reads a scientific paper
by someone else. "What have these people done incorrectly" might be a good
paraphrase. You are right when you suggest that removing the "flakiness"
makes whatever is left behind more valuable. The question with Steiner is
"do you have anything which remains."
Peter.
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:58:03 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad Martin wrote:
)I extracted a snippet from the WWW to find the gold from the dross. A bit
)of
)gold is the biodynamic/organic farmer from Iowa and the agronomy work at
)the
)Univ. of Iowa.
Peter responds:
I would assert once again that if you extract the dross from Biodynamic you
are left with nothing other than standard organic farming. All of the "gold"
is not unique to Biodynamic agriculture. What is unique and differentiates
it from more standard practice is dross. You have already agreed that the
differentiators are flakey.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:24:52 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: wear peat!
) From Dan:
) By raising the
)) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
)) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
)) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
)
) Brad:
) Maybe I can sell them Viking helmets with cow horns to gather elemental
) forces to neutralize the bad forces. Would be a nice fashion touch to go
) with the peat sweaters.
)
Lisa here: They would probably buy them, too! (g) Such headwear would
undoubtedly be the perfect complement to the requisite Birkenstock footwear
and whatever anthro-recommended organic fibers are worn in between.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:11:06 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: wear peat!
Dan Dugan quoted:
) "What to do? Wear peat. Healing peat fibers come from the leaf blade
) of cotton grass (Eriophorum Saginatum) which grows in the raised bogs
) of the north.
Cotton grass is in latin "Eriophorum vaginatum"
look here:
http://www.naturpark-hohesvenn-eifel.de/images/bilder/hvEriVag.jpg
) They are several centuries old, preserving life forces
) from a time when the earth was cleaner and healthier. By raising the
) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
Why anthros are not talking so nicely about raw oil and refinerying it
lovingly to give mankind forces to utilize?
) "Peat itself does not cure us. But coming as it does from a
) centuries-long slow ripening process, it forms a protective layer
) around us, allowing our own life forces to sustain, strengthen and
) heal us.
Rudolf Steiner announced that peat-clothes will protect us from
radioactive radiation.
German engineer Johannes Kloss started to study same items about 40
years ago. He moved to Sweden and started there company "?lma
Torvtextil" (peat-textile in English). He made studies and after that he
told that studies have shown that peat-textile protects against
radioactive radiation. Maybe he studied only Doctor Steiner's books.
I know that in many anthro-groups they are producing peat-textiles.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:11:10 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: wear peat!
Dan Dugan quoted:
) "What to do? Wear peat. Healing peat fibers come from the leaf blade
) of cotton grass (Eriophorum Saginatum) which grows in the raised bogs
) of the north.
Cotton grass is in latin "Eriophorum vaginatum"
look here:
http://www.naturpark-hohesvenn-eifel.de/images/bilder/hvEriVag.jpg
) They are several centuries old, preserving life forces
) from a time when the earth was cleaner and healthier. By raising the
) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
Why anthros are not talking so nicely about raw oil and refinerying it
lovingly to give mankind forces to utilize?
) "Peat itself does not cure us. But coming as it does from a
) centuries-long slow ripening process, it forms a protective layer
) around us, allowing our own life forces to sustain, strengthen and
) heal us.
Rudolf Steiner announced that peat-clothes will protect us from
radioactive radiation.
German engineer Johannes Kloss started to study same items about 40
years ago. He moved to Sweden and started there company "?lma
Torvtextil" (peat-textile in English). He made studies and after that he
told that studies have shown that peat-textile protects against
radioactive radiation. Maybe he studied only Doctor Steiner's books.
I know that in many anthro-groups they are producing peat-textiles.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:42:49 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)(BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(P)Diana wrote: But don't you think a class teacher has to work
with some kind of idea of norms? Frankly, I do know a lot of fourth
graders (my son's age, so I know fewer fifth graders) who could read
things like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in second or third
grade, though I recognize that it is not abnormal for some to not be
able to or be interested, and it is not a reflection of their
intelligence. (/P)
(P) (/P)
(P)Nicole: I also know some that age who could read such
things, indeed I know a very few who could have done so at the age of
4 or 5, but this is unusual. I do think teachers need an idea of the
range of what could be considered 'normal' for a particular age in
order to know if some form of remedial assistance or advancement
would be appropriate.(/P)
(P) (/P)
(P)Diana wrote: Perhaps it is more to the point that when the
teacher *reads aloud* he or she should be reading to - or even
slightly above - the level of understanding, which is totally
separate from reading ability. Roald Dahl is *very* easily understood
and enjoyed by most 5 or 6 year olds, regardless of whether they can
read a single word. (/P)
(P) (/P)
(P)Nicole: I agree with you completely. My son is utterly
absorbed in The Lord of the Rings, which I am reading to him, at
the moment. I don't think he would be able to read it for himself yet
(it would certainly be heavy going at best and that would spoil it
for him), but he is perfectly able to understand and enjoy it. It
challenges him in the best possible way. My youngest, who cannot yet
read at all, loves listening to Roald Dahl story tapes sent over from
England.(/P)
(P) (/P)
(P)Diana wrote: In general Waldorf ALWAYS AIMS LOW; they would
always rather err on the side of pretending a bunch of 10 or 11 year
olds are cognitively where most 5 or 6 year olds are. The curriculum
should *challenge*. This is an idea I will staunchly defend; it is
not about judging or pressuring anybody. (/P)
(P) (/P)
(P)Nicole: I haven't noticed this at our school. My son's class
really enjoyed being read Farmer Boy (one of the Laura Ingalls Wilder
Little House series) last year. At the moment they are reading
Charlotte's Web themselves and will be doing a book report on it.
They have all writen several book reports already this year on books
of their own choice (my son did Shiloh by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor).
(/P)
(P)My older daughter's class did Tales of Troy, the Labours of
Hercules, Lost in the Barrens (by Farley Mowatt), Where the Red Fern
Grows (by Wilson Rawls I think) and The Root Cellar (by Janet
Lunn) last year. This year they have done Shadow on
Hawthorne Bay (also by Janet Lunn) and Tuck Everlasting (by Natalie
Babbitt). The school arranged for Janet Lunn to come and
talk to the children about her books. It was a highlight of
their year so far. They are now studying, and writing about, books by
Rosemary Sutcliffe (on Roman Britain), Gary Paulsen and Farley
Mowatt. I would say the curriculum is suitably challenging and age
appropriate.(/P)
(P) (/P)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)MSN 8 helps (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMSENCA/2743")ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. (/a)
Get 2 months FREE*.
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:33:04 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
) Peter responds:
) This attitude about which you are complaining seems to me to be about as
) close a description of the scientific method as you might write in a few
) words.
Brad: When I see a reductionist science mindset, I call it out. If I see
systems science thinking I applaud. What I have perceived on WC is more of
the reductionist. Once the larger issue of science is agreed upon, then can
be the focus on how it applies to Waldorf/holistic and conventional
eduction. "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is
blind." Einstein
Peter: You are right when you suggest that removing the "flakiness"
) makes whatever is left behind more valuable. The question with Steiner is
) "do you have anything which remains."
Brad: Right on, Peter!!! That is a major question. Again, my perception is
that the principal attitude of those currently active on WC is that there
are no remains of Steiner/Anthro. Dead. Nada. An empty shell.
I disagree. I am seeing a core of value. Further, I do not see Steiner
inventing new ideas. The fundamental ideas are perennial. There are numerous
others I am finding out there who see core value.
From Ullrich on Nordwall site: (This seems a decent summary on the issue.
Brad)
"Rudolf Steiner?s reforming ideas still have an exceptionally strong,
practical impact today in many spheres, especially in education, medicine,
agriculture and the pictorial arts. On the other hand, his theoretical
scientific and philosophical writings have so far met with little interest
and still less acceptance in academic circles. When his thinking does
attract attention it becomes the subject of passionate controversy.
Uncritical identification by his followers contrasts with polemic and
sweeping criticism by the representatives of academic research. There seems
to be no golden mean in the appraisal of Steiner?s conceptual world."
Peter responds:
I would assert once again that if you extract the dross from Biodynamic you
are left with nothing other than standard organic farming. All of the "gold"
is not unique to Biodynamic agriculture. What is unique and differentiates
it from more standard practice is dross. You have already agreed that the
differentiators are flakey.
Peter
Brad:
Peter, excellent!!! That thought occurred to me, as well, as I was reading
Kirschenmann. And others. Again, the various mature voices can give some
credit to a historical source or influence such as Steiner, and move on into
the 21st century without the rhetorical excess norm of the time. Waldorf
Critics seem obsessed with finding no value. ie, can't see or acknowledge
the gold from the dross. In my observation.
Dan Dugan just did an insightful move. He cut right to the core of my post
on Kirschenmann and said, "Let's see if he will appear on line on WC." If I
am able to do this, I would hope that those on WC would take the attitude
that they might learn something from this fellow, not be looking for a
comment to pounce upon to feed into their bias. From my read on him, I would
be bringing to you a credible voice. Can he educate us from biodynamic
theory that may differentiate from organic???
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:24:56 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0077_01C2C1A4.4ECA18E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Brad: Just because Sharon was naughty with her snarky comment on
BD500, she gets to study this paper and report back to us.
*Objectively* The report is a collaboration between Australian and
Southern Indian farmers. There is an historical reference to Steiner.
Title: Utilization of local alternative materials in Cow Horn Manure
(BD 500) Preparations: A case study on Biodynamic vegetable
cultivation*
Excerpt from the Abstract:
"The studies on biodynamic agricultural practices with scientific
observation, identification of microbial diversity and its
interaction in soil with different vegtable crop cultivation was
undertaken in a model farm at Sevapur."
This is the website of biodynamics in Austrailia: links. Then click
on the paper of the name above.
http://www.biodynamics.net.au/html/links.html
*I was on the track of any substantive differentiation between
organic and biodynamic. Not enough evidence yet to report. Brad
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:08:58 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
Brad Martin :
When I see a reductionist science mindset, I call it out. If I see
systems science thinking I applaud. What I have perceived on WC is more of
the reductionist. Once the larger issue of science is agreed upon, then can
be the focus on how it applies to Waldorf/holistic and conventional
eduction. "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is
blind." Einstein
Peter responds:
The funny thing about claims claim of holism and system orientation is that
they seem to be unproductive compared to the reductionist approach.
Reductionism is not a mind set. It is a method. It is a method for finding a
way into a whole or a system which is otherwise impregnable. Reductionism
does not deny the whole or the system. I have the opposite opinion to that
expressed by Brad. If hear someone talking about holism I call it out,
because it most cases the claim of holism is fraud pure and simple.
I assert that nothing has been learnt via so called holistic methods.
Everything which has been learnt has been learned by a reductionist approach
followed by some integration of the outcome of that reductionist approach.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:29:13 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
Brad, you wrote,
)*I was on the track of any substantive differentiation between
)organic and biodynamic. Not enough evidence yet to report. Brad
It's simple: BD is organic farming plus magic and an unjustified
attitude of superiority.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 947
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: was: nationalism
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: wear peat!
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Charlie...?
By charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk
Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Charlie...?
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
RE: Charlie...?
By valslavnijinsky shaw.ca
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
catching up
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: wear peat!
By willow.firesong creative-interweb.com
biodynamics
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:03:47 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Peter wrote: The funny thing about claims claim of holism
and system orientation is that they seem to be unproductive compared
to the reductionist approach. Reductionism is not a mind set. It is a
method. It is a method for finding a way into a whole or a system
which is otherwise impregnable. Reductionism does not deny the whole
or the system. I have the opposite opinion to that expressed by Brad.
If hear someone talking about holism I call it out, because it most
cases the claim of holism is fraud pure and simple. I assert that
nothing has been learnt via so called holistic methods. Everything
which has been learnt has been learned by a reductionist approach
followed by some integration of the outcome of that reductionist
approach. (BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)Nicole: As someone interested in emergent properties, I
take issue with the assertion that nothing is learned by taking a
holistic/top-down/big-picture/systemic approach. Much information can
be lost when one employs only a reductionist/bottom-up strategy. The
reductionist approach has led to the pigeon-holing of academics into
fields so specialized that they can't see the wood for the trees.
There is now generally no room in academia for interdisciplinarians,
and it is much the poorer for it. You could know everything there is
to know about a cell, and that would tell you little or nothing about
a body despite its being made up of cells. You could also know
everything there is to know about a body and still have little or no
knowledge of population dynamics. At each additional level of
organization, there emerge distinct properties which one could not
predict or determine even from complete knowledge at the level below.
One must have a synthesis of both approaches !
in order to fully understand something. Reductionism on its own is
never enough.(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)STOP MORE SPAM with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMOENCA/2728")the new MSN 8 (/a) and get 2
months FREE*
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:06:11 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
on 1/21/03 9:33 AM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
)
) Brad:
) I will use the term Flake Quotient FQ for someone's work. Vreede clearly has
) a high FQ. She has a germ of a good idea in terms of attempting to determine
) 'spirituality' as a larger understanding of the universe from the science of
) Astronomy. Fair marks for a century ago. Poor marks for 2003. Spiritual is a
) term used for the higher order good. See below from AN Whitehead.
(snip)
)
) If you are going to quote someone, it ought to be from someone with a low
) FQ.
Sharon: Now you give me such power, I am able to sit in judgement of the
Anthroposophic Press and determine what is high or low flakiness? That means
I can pack up and move on with my life because Steiner gets such a high
Flake Quotient I can't quote a single line from him.
Regarding Vreede's book...hello Brad!!! Wakey wakey! I didn't go get her
book out of a dark, dusty corner of a dead Rosicrucian's closet and blow the
dust and cob webs off. The Anthros themselves spent big bucks translating
the thing and publishing the book in *****2001*****!!!! *2001* Brad! On the
back of the modernized book cover, with no Anthro font and beautiful glossy
color cover the Anthro Press prints:
"Elizabeth Vreede, Ph.D., (1879-1943) a native of the Netherlands, was a
close and trusted student and associate of Rudolf Steiner. She was appointed
by him to be head of the Mathematical-Astronomical Section of the School of
Spiritual Science. Steiner is reputed to have said that Dr. Vreede
understood his work more deeply than anyone else".
Vreede gets a very high Flake Quotient because she bases her work on
Steiner's. Her entire book is flakey Brad, it is choc full of
flakiness--nice and clearly put--which is why I highly recommend it to those
wanting a quick, short cut into Steiner's religion. Steiner is a waffler of
flakiness, Vreede cuts to the quick with nice clear info, the kind I urge
Waldorf to be open about. Wouldn't it be great if Waldorf would tell parents
that the reason they celebrate the festival of St. Michael each year is
because "Michael, the messenger of the Sun and of the Christ, has very
special functions in the celestial worlds. When he wields his starry sword
the dragon of the summer's heat vanishes. When a human being is born, the
word-will of Michael dwells in the constellation ruling at birth. If it were
not for Michael's activity, humanity and the world of the stars would have
been parted asunder. He works in such a way through astrology, and he gave
us astrosophy, in as much as as spiritual science was able to arise during
this era" (xxii, Vreede, Elizabeth. Anthroposophy and Astrology,
Anthroposophic Press, 2001). Wouldn't it be great if Waldorf schools printed
in their brochures that they are parochial schools for Anthroposophy and
that their child development model is based on Steiner's scheme of
reincarnation called "The True Nature of Man"?! What if Waldorf brochures
would just say, "your children will pray each morning to Christ the Sun
Being"? That would be a perfect world, a world devoid of PLANS.
I'm crazy about Vreede's book because she goes into blow by blow details of
the laggard beings that dwell on the physical sun, she also tells us nice
and plainly about the second sun and the beings that live there. Also the
third Sun, Christ the Sun Being, the one Waldorf kids pray to.
Brad: Sharon, your comment on 'Moo U' and 'Preparation 500' about a U. S.
university is neither becoming nor objective. Kirschenmann +"preparation
500" in Google does not produce a result. However, they use Preparation 500
at Joseph Phelps Vineyards in St. Helena, CA.
http://www.jpvfreestone.com/ I should call and interview Tom Shelton,
President and CEO of the the Vineyards to determine if he is anti-semitic,
racist and a cultist. If so, I could have a sensationalist story for the
Sacramento Bee reporter WC has used.
Sharon: Preparation 500 is wacky Brad, because the underlying doctrine is
wacky. Prep. 500 is a BD *standard*. Just because a search doesn't show it,
doesn't mean religious pseudo science is not being taught at a State
university. My sister used to work for "Moo U" and that is what people in
Iowa call the place. I don't see what is wrong with the term since the
University is famous for agriculture. I've never heard of Tom Shelton, so
how can you accuse me of calling him racist, etc? I say *Steiner* was
anti-Semitic, a cultist and a racist. A Waldorf child I know spits water to
the east or west to cure headaches because her mother told her to do so,
people do lots of silly things all the time, I'm not surprised Shelton uses
BD farming.
) Don't feel bad about your religion, it's OK if you want to follow Steiner.
) Just don't palm it off surreptitiously on the unsuspecting, that's all.
Brad: Oh, Sharon, you wound me!. You have not been grokking my posts. I do
not
follow Steiner/anthroposophy, Blavatsky/Besant/theosophy or Gurdjieff/Fourth
Way. Steiner/anthro has never been my interest. And, certainly not a
religion. I had said the 'three rascals' offered me a modest diversion
while reading over the past 30 years on the Wisdom Tradition in the West.
The Wisdom Tradition is what I call those Minds of Synthesis who have a low
to zero FQ.
Sharon: I only wound you because I poke fun at your religion Brad. The
religious always have a need to convert, but I think the Wisdom Tradition is
loony, sorry, you'll never convert me. But I'm trying to let you know that I
could care less if you worship Rudy, Rael, Regardie or Ron, just don't palm
Anthroposophy off on me or my family in the guise of an art-based,
nonsectarian school. Transcendentalists tried the same game in the 1970s,
they pretended that they weren't a religion but instead a science, and
weaseled their way into the public coffers. Christians took them to court,
bent out of shape because they also want public money, especially if other
religions are tapping in, and sure enough, TM is a religion. PLANS case is
very similar. Anthro couldn't possibly be anything BUT a religion Brad,
that is my main point, whether you are a believer or not. My point is this
simple: if you are a religious organization, be one openly and on your own
dime. Church and State, keep them separate.
PS: Brad, you're alright, at least you have a sense of humor, you just need
to learn to embrace your religion, don't be like Peter, denying Christ (G).
(I'm just ribbing you).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:35:40 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: was: nationalism
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3126072941_708120_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
on 1/21/03 8:06 AM, Nicole Foss at nmfoss hotmail.com wrote:
Percedol wrote: It is not just the number of genes that count for a
difference but their place in the hierarchy of functions. For example hox
genes control a lot of other genes and just a little difference at their
level can cause a lot of differences at the phenotic level. To mesure the
differences in terms of percentages is deceptive.
Sharon: Mitochondria DNA show there is more genetic diversity among African
lineage than between or within other populations. A Berkeley team of
geneticists showed that more gene variation was found among indigenous
people in Africa than among non-Africans. The mtDNA of someone born in
England and someone born in New Guinea was more alike than that of two
Nigerians. Luigi Cavalli-Sforza and his team of geneticists from Stanford
and Yale used fossils, genes and language to determine that modern humans
originated in Africa, and their descendants populated the rest of the world.
We come from Africans Percedol.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:46:31 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: wear peat!
on 1/21/03 2:24 PM, Lisa D. Ercolano at momof2gals mindspring.com wrote:
)) From Dan:
)) By raising the
))) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
))) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
))) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
Sharon: I wonder if this is a Masonic thingy? Sounds more and more like
Mormon sacred underwear by the minute. That is also for protection from evil
spirits.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:40:17 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: What "should" 5th graders read? (was the case for anthrop.)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C2C20B.0985FD00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Nicole, what are the ages of your children again, and which ones
are in Waldorf? I can't quite get a handle on what they are reading
in what grades. And I wasn't clear which ones the children read
versus things the teacher read aloud.
My son's 4th grade teacher is currently reading Tuck Everlasting
aloud to the class. (I love that book, it's a great book as is
anything by Natalie Babbitt. Kneeknock Rise is another favorite of
ours.) Both of these are certainly appropriate for children younger
than this (we read these aloud at home when he was about 8), but I
think the teacher looks for things that have recently come out as
movies (as has Tuck), hoping to interest the less-enthusiastic
readers this way.
Nicole:
) I haven't noticed this at our school. My son's class really
enjoyed being read Farmer Boy )(one of the Laura Ingalls Wilder
Little House series) last year. At the moment they are )reading
Charlotte's Web themselves and will be doing a book report on it.
They have all )writen several book reports already this year on books
of their own choice (my son did )Shiloh by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor).
)My older daughter's class did Tales of Troy, the Labours of
Hercules, Lost in the Barrens )(by Farley Mowatt), Where the Red Fern
Grows (by Wilson Rawls I think) and The Root )Cellar (by Janet Lunn)
last year. This year they have done Shadow on Hawthorne Bay )also by
Janet Lunn) and Tuck Everlasting (by Natalie Babbitt). The school
arranged for )Janet Lunn to come and talk to the children about her
books. It was a highlight of their year )so far. They are now
studying, and writing about, books by Rosemary Sutcliffe (on Roman
)Britain), Gary Paulsen and Farley Mowatt. I would say the curriculum
is suitably )challenging and age appropriate.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:30:04 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Diana wrote: Nicole, what are the ages of your children
again, and which ones are in Waldorf? I can't quite get a handle on
what they are reading in what grades. And I wasn't clear which ones
the children read versus things the teacher read aloud. (BR)(/P)
(P)Nicole: All three of my children are presently enroled in
Waldorf. My older daughter (age 11)is in grade 6 this year. My
son (age 10 next month) is in grade 4. My youngest (age 7) is in
grade 1.(/P)
(P)My older daughter's class almost always reads for themselves
(sometimes aloud if the class is studying something together, and
sometimes silently), although they have things read to them
occasionally, such as the Tales of Troy or Lost in the Barrens (both
last year). They read the Janet Lunn books themselves this year and
last, along with Tuck Everlasting (which would work for a wide range
of ages - I loved it myself) this year and Where the Red Fern Grows
last year. They're now doing regular independent novel studies, but
they're free to chose any work by certain authors (Rosemary
Sutcliffe, Gary Paulsen, Farley Mowatt, Natalie Babbitt and
several others recently added to the list whose names escape me).(/P)
(P)My son's class is read to more often, although they are now
choosing their own books to read (silently, in their own time as well
as class time) and writing book reports on them. Shiloh was the one
my son chose to do most recently. Last year the teacher read Farmer
Boy to them and told them lots of Norse myths (he's a storyteller par
excellence). The children are now reading Charlotte's Web themselves
(aloud I think, but I'm not sure).(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)Protect your PC - (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMNENCA/2755")Click here (/a) for McAfee.com
VirusScan Online
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:09:20 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
) Brad, you wrote,
)
) )*I was on the track of any substantive differentiation between
) )organic and biodynamic. Not enough evidence yet to report. Brad
)
) It's simple: BD is organic farming plus magic and an unjustified
) attitude of superiority.
)
) -Dan Dugan
Brad: I am looking for evidence of magic and an unjustified attitude of
superiority among the farmers in Australia. Their mission statement and a
defintion is below. I did not find any magical type language or an attitude
of superiourity on this line.
http://www.biodynamics.net.au/html/bdfgaa.html
OUR MISSION
To foster and promote:
a.. Growth in the number of commercial Biodynamic farmers and an increasing
range and quantity of certified Biodynamic produce for the domestic and
international market.
a.. The application of Biodynamic methods in community cultural activities
eg. Biodynamic farming, Biodynamic horticulture, home gardening and
environmental care.
a.. To establish and support standards for the certification of Biodynamic
produce in order to protect the interests of producers and consumers.
We fulfill this mission by providing:
a.. Workshops and field days on a local and national level, for beginners
and specific groups.
a.. Biodynamic preparations, and guidelines on how to use and manufacture
them.
a.. Biodynamic Phone Advisory Service.
a.. Various books and guides to Biodynamics.
a.. Advice to NASAA and BFA on Biodynamic Certification Standards.
http://www.biodynamics.net.au/html/biodynamics.html
What is Biodynamics?
A healthy, well-structured soil-rich in humus and high in biological
activity-is a prerequisite for any sustainable agricultural system.
Decades of experience with the Biodynamic (BD) method on Australian farms
have shown that these soil qualities can be promoted, and degradation
reversed by the correct application of BD techniques.
Mixed farms practising the Biodynamic method have been in existence for over
65 years with none showing any evidence of loss of fertility or
productivity.
Biodynamic practitioners seek to understand and work with the life processes
as well as enhance their understanding of the mineral processes used in
conventional agriculture. Healthy soil is a prime basis for healthy plants,
animals and people.
BD farming practices are of an organic nature, not relying on bringing
artificial fertilisers on to the farm, although some organic or natural
mineral fertiliser may be necessary during the establishment phase.
On Biodynamic farms we seek instead to enhance the soil's structure and
nutrient cycles as well as plant growth and development with the use of
specific Preparations which are made from farm-sourced materials.
These are the Biodynamic Preparations numbered 500 to 507 used in
conjunction with established agricultural practices such as composting and
manuring, crop and pasture rotations, tree planting, the integrated use of
livestock, etc. As the name suggests, these Preparations are designed to
work directly with the dynamic biological processes and cycles which are the
basis of soil fertility.
Pest and disease control is generally managed by developing the farm as a
total organism. However, BD practitioners may make use of specific products
for weed and pest control, which they make from the weeds and pests
themselves.
Weeds and pests are very useful indicators of imbalances in soil, plants and
animals; and the aim in the Biodynamic method is to use such indicators in a
positive way.
The Biodynamic Preparations were developed out of indications by Dr Rudolf
Steiner in 1924. They are not fertilisers themselves but greatly assist the
fertilising process. As such they only need to be used in very small
amounts.
Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it the
root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water hold
ing capacity.
Horn Silica Preparation (501) enhances the light and warmth assimilation of
the plant, leading to better fruit and seed development with improved
flavour, aroma, colour and nutritional quality.
Compost Preparations (502 to 507), known collectively as the compost
preparations, help the dynamic cycles of the macro- and micro-nutrients, via
biological processes in the soil and in material breakdown.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_5126_7c5a_1188
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
G'day Nicole,
I didn't say "nothing is learned". I said "nothing has been learned". Your
description of a better approach matches my term "integration" in my
original approach. What I am saying is that you can't have holism without
reductionism. This idea that you can just be holistic and all will be
revealed is what I was railing against.
See you, Peter.
)From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
)Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:03:47 +0000
)
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------=_NextPart_000_5126_7c5a_1188
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Received: from out003.tpca.net ([66.180.244.23]) by
mc8-f40.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600);
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 05:06:16 -0800
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:03:47 +0000
Message-ID: (434301848-1463792382-1043240769 topica.com)
Errors-To:
(blst-errors.1700032592.1711778652.1724143004.007.0.0 boing.topica.com)
Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
X-Topica-Id: (1043240761.inmta002.14010.1003416)
List-Help: (http://topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/)
List-Unsubscribe: (mailto:waldorf-critics-unsubscribe topica.com)
X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to (http://www.habeas.com/report/);.
Return-Path: (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Received: (qmail 4464 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2003 13:06:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 4457 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jan 2003 13:06:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (64.4.17.26)
by 0 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2003 13:06:00 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 05:03:48 -0800
Received: from 209.226.122.176 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:03:47 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [209.226.122.176]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 13:03:48.0332 (UTC)
FILETIME=[B3E9FAC0:01C2C216]
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Peter wrote: The funny thing about claims claim of holism
and system orientation is that they seem to be unproductive compared
to the reductionist approach. Reductionism is not a mind set. It is a
method. It is a method for finding a way into a whole or a system
which is otherwise impregnable. Reductionism does not deny the whole
or the system. I have the opposite opinion to that expressed by Brad.
If hear someone talking about holism I call it out, because it most
cases the claim of holism is fraud pure and simple. I assert that
nothing has been learnt via so called holistic methods. Everything
which has been learnt has been learned by a reductionist approach
followed by some integration of the outcome of that reductionist
approach. (BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)Nicole: As someone interested in emergent properties, I
take issue with the assertion that nothing is learned by taking a
holistic/top-down/big-picture/systemic approach. Much information can
be lost when one employs only a reductionist/bottom-up strategy. The
reductionist approach has led to the pigeon-holing of academics into
fields so specialized that they can't see the wood for the trees.
There is now generally no room in academia for interdisciplinarians,
and it is much the poorer for it. You could know everything there is
to know about a cell, and that would tell you little or nothing about
a body despite its being made up of cells. You could also know
everything there is to know about a body and still have little or no
knowledge of population dynamics. At each additional level of
organization, there emerge distinct properties which one could not
predict or determine even from complete knowledge at the level below.
One must have a synthesis of both approaches !
in order to fully understand something. Reductionism on its own is
never enough.(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)STOP MORE SPAM with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMOENCA/2728")the new MSN 8 (/a) and get 2
months FREE*
(/html)
------=_NextPart_000_5126_7c5a_1188--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:51:23 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence of cultish behavior among the biodynamicists
G'day Brad,
when you said you didn't find any magical language you did not realise that
the claimed efficacies of the biodynamic preparations are essentially based
on magic.
All of this quoted below is magical language in those terms.
See you, Peter
The Biodynamic Preparations were developed out of indications by Dr Rudolf
Steiner in 1924. They are not fertilisers themselves but greatly assist the
fertilising process. As such they only need to be used in very small
amounts.
Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it the
root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water hold
ing capacity.
Horn Silica Preparation (501) enhances the light and warmth assimilation of
the plant, leading to better fruit and seed development with improved
flavour, aroma, colour and nutritional quality.
Compost Preparations (502 to 507), known collectively as the compost
preparations, help the dynamic cycles of the macro- and micro-nutrients, via
biological processes in the soil and in material breakdown.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Peter wrote: Your description of a better approach matches
my term "integration" in my original approach. What I am saying is
that you can't have holism without reductionism. This idea that you
can just be holistic and all will be revealed is what I was railing
against.(/P)
(P)Nicole: What I was getting at amounts to more than just
integration, since the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
(for instance, a population is more than just multiple single
individuals, it has its own dynamic that you could not predict even
from perfect knowledge of a single individual). There are many
thing that cannot be understood merely by taking them apart and
putting them back together again, because they are properties of a
particular level of organization (of molecules, cells, people etc).
Reductionism is useful and necessary as a means of discovering
knowledge, but it is not enough on its own.(/P)
(P)I used to find it very strange when I was at university studying
evolution that the biologists never seemed to talk to the geologists
about the subject and vice versa. I was one of very few to have
lectures in both departments and the lack of communication was
painfully obvious. Both sides could have increased their
understanding of the subject by simply talking to each other. This
would count as integration in the sense that I understand you to mean
it, and yes it would be valuable, but I still don't think it's
necessarily enough. (/P)
(P)Reductionism seeks to simplify, but loses a great deal of
information in the process, information that may remain lost
when the whole is reassembled from its component parts. There are
many situations which have to be understood in all their complexity
if they are to be understood meaningfully at all. The top-down
approach is equally necessary to a true understanding, indeed the two
methods are complementary.(BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)MSN 8 with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMMENCA/2740")e-mail virus protection
service: (/a) 2 months FREE*
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:46:37 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charlie morrison5.fsnet.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C2C278.E2D57820
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Walden,
You ask:
What positive advice has he given you and how does it outweigh the
negative aspects of his words?
Charlie:
First he advises never to just accept what he says as true. I think
this is good advise for anything of a deep or philosophical nature we
read or hear. I make a conscious effort to understand the subject and
its source before deciding the truth or falsity of it.
He advises anyone to read books such as "The Imitation of Christ",
"The Gospel of St John" and "The Bhagavad Gita". I'm glad that I took
his advise here. I've received no end of inspiration from these books.
You ask:
How can one *not* experience things for oneself? Is this not what we
do every second of every day?
Charlie:
Steiner said that much of what he says has been obtained by him, not
through speculation or theorizing, but by way of experience. If I do
not have similar experiences I can't be certain if what he is saying
is true or not. To give an example from a recent thread, I cannot be
certain whether men have walked on the moon or not. From what I know
personally, I'm pretty sure that it did happen, but in order for me
to be totally convinced I would have to go to the moon and see the
evidence for myself. People could then dispute the fact that I had
been to the moon, but this wouldn't affect my own certainty.
You continue:
And if we "take every single one of Steiner's lectures away....we are
still left with everything?" Is this a trick question, Yoda? Please
explain - as I seem to be lost. Really.
Charlie:
Steiner directed his lectures to specific audiences. When we read
these lectures we are evesdropping on conversations that weren't
primarily meant for us. We can get all that he wanted to say to the
general public from his basic books. The way I see things, when
Steiner speaks about "higher worlds" it's as if he were speaking
about a foreign country. He can tell you as much as he likes about
that country, but you would have to take it on faith that his
descriptions are accurate. But if he also tells you how you can get
to that country, and you really want to go there, then this
information is far more helpful to you than his descriptions ever
could be.
You continue:
I mean - how do you feel about Steiner's Aryans, races on their way
up and those on their way down, Darwin (Steiner believed he had it
wrong), etc.? Is it all about the Christ impulse and ignore the rest
or does it go deeper? I would dearly love to see you elaborate on
this, Charlie.
Charlie:
Some of the things that Steiner supposedly said does make me feel
uncomfortable, the reason that some things were said I can
understand, and some of the things leave me clueless. Race is a very
difficult and emotive subject and not something that should be used
to judge any individual in my opinion.
It's okay to accept that there are physical differences between some
races in general, because these are easily observable, but if, as
Steiner suggests, that there are also other more subtle differences,
this is very much frowned upon. Personally I don't know if there are
any other differences, but if we accept that evolution is a fact,
then it is only logical to accept that other differences are a
possibility. If you believe that adaptive radiation produced the
observed differences, then is it not possible that it produced other
differences that are harder to spot. I prefer to plead ignorance,
keep an open mind, and do my best to treat everyone equally.
Once again, sorry for the delay Walden.
Warm regards,
Charlie.
PS For anyone who is interested, I am going to try to reply to
everyone that responded to this thread.
----- Original Message -----
From: walden
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
Hi Charlie,
Thanks for finally finding the time to deal with my questions.
Charlie wrote: (snip)
So, given my own position, and the fact that Steiner was writing
and speaking in a time when political correctness was unheard of, and
that none of us are perfect, I'm not going to judge him too harshly.
Words and phrases that were acceptable to most of the population 10
years ago, never mind in Steiner's time, become unacceptable to us
today. Things have to be put into perspective. On balance, I've
received far more benefit from the positive advice he has given than
from any negative aspects of his words.
Walden: What you wrote (above) is fascinating. I am not here to
judge you and do not expect you to judge Steiner. Who cares about
political correctness - at the turn of the century or now? This
discussion has nothing to do with *was Steiner politically correct*
and are we taking his words *out of context?* What positive advice
has he given you and how does it outweigh the negative aspects of his
words? That interests me.
Charlie:You say there's not much left without his lectures on race.
I say that if you take every single one of Steiner's lectures away we
are still left with everything. The lectures may satisfy the
curiosity of the reader but they are really not what is important.
Followers of Anthroposophy won't get much out of it if they are just
looking to fill their minds up with information that they can
probably only accept initially as a matter of faith. Better to take
Steiner's advice and make the effort to experience things for
yourself before judging the truth in them. It's up to everyone to
search and find the truth for themselves, and naively believing
everything someone says or writes will stop anyone's search dead in
its tracks.
Walden: "Better to take Steiner's advice and make the effort to
experience things for yourself before judging the truth in them. It's
up to everyone to search and find the truth for themselves, and
naively believing everything someone says or writes will stop
anyone's search dead in its tracks...?" What? How can one *not*
experience things for oneself? Is this not what we do every second
of every day? And if we "take every single one of Steiner's lectures
away....we are still left with everything?" Is this a trick
question, Yoda? Please explain - as I seem to be lost. Really.
Charlie wrote:
I've always felt drawn to Christianity, but, had niggling doubts
about the way it has been and is portrayed by the official church. I
did not have nearly the same doubts when reading Steiner's accounts
of Christ, which, if you want to understand anthroposophy, is central
to it.
Walden:
OK - I might get this... is it safe to assume that Steiner's
theories on Christ (mystery of Golgotha, etc.) are what brought you
to Anthroposophy - as opposed to eastern spiritual thought and
Blavatsky's root races? I mean - how do you feel about Steiner's
Aryans, races on their way up and those on their way down, Darwin
(Steiner believed he had it wrong), etc.? Is it all about the Christ
impulse and ignore the rest or does it go deeper? I would dearly
love to see you elaborate on this, Charlie. I was guilty of picking
and choosing Steiner for years so if this is the case for you - I can
relate. After much thought, however, I do not believe we can pick
and choose our favorite Steiner quotes to suit our own (healing,
enlightening) purposes. IMO - *that* would be considered taking
something out of context.
I will not respond to each of your subsequent points right now.
Again - thanks for taking the time.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:09:58 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
Peter said:
) G'day Nicole,
) I didn't say "nothing is learned". I said "nothing has been learned". Your
) description of a better approach matches my term "integration" in my
) original approach. What I am saying is that you can't have holism without
) reductionism. This idea that you can just be holistic and all will be
) revealed is what I was railing against.
) See you, Peter.
Brad:
This is truly a good exercise in communicating and rhetoric. I have not said
'holism without reductionism'. Holism expands upon the foundation of
reductionism. Holism is the more complete understanding.
The history of science is discussed endlessly today, by many writers. The
history is well told online when the right words are put in the browser. In
general, Cartesian/Newtonian/reductionist/classical science dates back 300
years. At that time, our 'good friends' the Church, felt it was invading
their turf. It was. Remember, that was the time period when invading turf
meant you had a choice, the stake or the guillotine. Today, fortunately, you
only get pilloried and vilified by those *nice* folks, the fundamentalist
groups in America. In the Mideast you still lose your life. The fundamentals
of Cartesian science are that we will investigate by breaking down the
object being examined into it's component parts. In the biological and human
sciences, this usually means the clinical double bind trials with
publications in peer reveiwed journals. The truly extraordinary results of
classical science are clear and obvious. We are the beneficiaries of the
Industrial Revolution and the amazing endless variety of goods and services
available to us.
However, this has not answered the question, What is Life? An excellent
example is in the brain. In neuroscience in classical science, the synapse
in the brain is an on and off switch. A 1/0 operation. This model of the
brain remains the model used in much of today's research. However, it has
become clear that this is an incomplete model. The brain and the mind are
not equivalent. 100 years ago were the discoveries in particle physics.
Einstein, Bohr, Schroedinger, Heisenberg, et al. Their work expanded the
world of science. In essence, the classical method was found to be
inadequate. They had discovered realms that could not be measured, repeated
and verified. Terms for the more complete understanding of science are
modern, systems and quantum. Holistic is a synonym for systems. The whole is
larger than the sum of it's parts. In scientific investigation, if you take
a whole (the human system is a good example) and attempt to break the whole
into it's component parts, you destroy the functioning operation of the
system. They use the term, 'life cannot be found in a petri dish'. I would
not want them to take one of my parts to examine that would also entail the
end of my living.
So, no longer are we able to use the standard clinical trials to attempt to
understand life. Microdynamics and macrodynamics are directily related
terms. The small and the large. What is going on now in science is the
development of a gradation of empirical testing methods. An heirarchy of
evidence. An accumulation of evidence such that when all the data is
collected, the conclusion is overwhelmingly understood by one's peers that
it is most probably correct. Evolutionary theory is a good example. The
religious fundamentalists, of course, will have none of it. Humans are not,
repeat, not, a part of nature, but were created out of whole cloth 6000
years ago by the Good Gentleman in the Sky. Sigh. *Triple Sigh* However, the
operations in one biological cell number in the tens of thousands. The
plant, the animal and the human all share the same essential cellular
operations. On a macro scale, we are quite different.
An outsanding relevant example in mind science is at the synapse of the
brain. Science has been very busy in the past 300 years. What they call the
'Hard Problem' of the mind/consciousness can no longer be put off. The
on/off switch model is known to be incomplete. It has remained a 'black
box'. We know there is something inside that box, but we do not know exactly
what. One of the leading theories into this black box is the work of Roger
Penrose in the UK and Dr. Stuart Hameroff at the Univ of Arizona. See next
paragraph.
http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/hameroff/Ham/Interest/interest_in_consc
iounsess.htm
Hameroff: "In the early 1990's the study of consciousness became
increasingly popular and I was strongly influenced by Roger Penrose's The
Emperor's New Mind (and later Shadows of the Mind, Oxford Press, 1989 and
1994). Quite famous for his work in relativity, black holes, and quantum
mechanics, Roger had turned to the problem of consciousness and concluded
the mind was more than complex computation. Something else was necessary,
and that something, he suggested, was a particular type of quantum
computation he was proposing ('objective reduction' - a self-collapse of the
quantum wave function due to quantum gravity). He was linking consciousness
to a basic process in underlying spacetime geometry - reality itself! It
seemed fascinating and plausible to me, but Roger didn't have a good
candidate biological site for his proposed process. I thought, could
microtubules be quantum computers? I wrote to him, and we soon met in his
office in Oxford in September 1992. Roger was struck by the mathematical
symmetry and beauty of the microtubule lattice and thought it was the
optimal candidate for his proposed mechanism. Over the next few years
through discussions at conferences in Sweden, Tucson, Copenhagen and
elsewhere, and a memorable hike through the Grand Canyon in 1994, we began
to develop a model for consciousness involving Roger's objective reduction
occurring in microtubules within the brain's neurons. Because the proposed
microtubule quantum states were 'tuned' by linking proteins, we called the
process 'orchestrated objective reduction' - 'Orch OR'."
Su has asked, what does this have to do with Waldorf/hoistic education? The
answer is both nothing and everything. What does this have to do with
whether Anthroposophy is a religon? The answer is both nothing and
everything.
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 02:15:04 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_55c1_475b_57e7
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
G'day Nicole,
I just don't accept your version of this. It is quite true that the whole is
greater than the sum of the parts. The whole is the sum of the parts plus
the interactions between those parts. I object to new agers making this
story something more than it is and suggesting particularly that scientists
are unaware of it and don't take it into account. That's simple nonsense. It
is true that Universities are divided into departments but it is not true
that those departments do not interact. I think you are wrong, for example,
that the biologists do not talk to the geologists and so on. In my former
life as an academic physicist I was involved in lots of cross fertilisation
like this, and cross discipline projects, particularly with engineers and
mathematicians (not so unusual) but also with biologists and chemists.
Despite the rhetoric from the pro holism new age camp this kind of
interaction is not unusual, and is encouraged if anything.
On the other hand I see a lot of people who claim "holism" and then simply
take some pseudo spiritual, pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo and make
outlandish claims about greater understanding with no evidence to support
the claims whatsoever. What's worse is that often the claims made are
completely at odds with undertanding which has been hard won via a
combination of reductionist method followed by integration. Homeopathy is
one of my favourite examples of this.
See you, Peter
)From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
)Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
)
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------=_NextPart_000_55c1_475b_57e7
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Received: from out003.tpca.net ([66.180.244.23]) by
mc1-f1.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600);
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:14:31 -0800
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
Message-ID: (2097685225-1463747838-1043276559 topica.com)
Errors-To:
(blst-errors.1700032592.1711782687.1724143004.007.0.0 boing.topica.com)
Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
X-Topica-Id: (1043276557.inmta007.1093.1020249)
List-Help: (http://topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/)
List-Unsubscribe: (mailto:waldorf-critics-unsubscribe topica.com)
X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to (http://www.habeas.com/report/);.
Return-Path: (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Received: (qmail 4364 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 4359 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (64.4.17.166)
by 0 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:02:37 -0800
Received: from 216.209.223.40 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [216.209.223.40]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37.0239 (UTC)
FILETIME=[5B361C70:01C2C26A]
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Peter wrote: Your description of a better approach matches
my term "integration" in my original approach. What I am saying is
that you can't have holism without reductionism. This idea that you
can just be holistic and all will be revealed is what I was railing
against.(/P)
(P)Nicole: What I was getting at amounts to more than just
integration, since the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
(for instance, a population is more than just multiple single
individuals, it has its own dynamic that you could not predict even
from perfect knowledge of a single individual). There are many
thing that cannot be understood merely by taking them apart and
putting them back together again, because they are properties of a
particular level of organization (of molecules, cells, people etc).
Reductionism is useful and necessary as a means of discovering
knowledge, but it is not enough on its own.(/P)
(P)I used to find it very strange when I was at university studying
evolution that the biologists never seemed to talk to the geologists
about the subject and vice versa. I was one of very few to have
lectures in both departments and the lack of communication was
painfully obvious. Both sides could have increased their
understanding of the subject by simply talking to each other. This
would count as integration in the sense that I understand you to mean
it, and yes it would be valuable, but I still don't think it's
necessarily enough. (/P)
(P)Reductionism seeks to simplify, but loses a great deal of
information in the process, information that may remain lost
when the whole is reassembled from its component parts. There are
many situations which have to be understood in all their complexity
if they are to be understood meaningfully at all. The top-down
approach is equally necessary to a true understanding, indeed the two
methods are complementary.(BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)MSN 8 with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMMENCA/2740")e-mail virus protection
service: (/a) 2 months FREE*
(/html)
------=_NextPart_000_55c1_475b_57e7--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:54:18 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Charlie...?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C2C260.CFE908C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Charlie:
)Steiner directed his lectures to specific audiences. When we
read these lectures we are )evesdropping on conversations that
weren't primarily meant for us.
It isn't possible to "eavesdrop" on published material, Charlie,
unless we are eavesdropping any time we read any book. A strange
idea, I suppose from occult traditions, that only a select few are
the intended audience and others have neither the ability nor the
right to try to understand.
Steiner's publishers and translators try all kinds of special
pleading like this, inserting "disclaimers" and "publisher's notes"
and little explanatory blurbs that make things all the more confusing
until you understand that they are simply special pleading.
DIana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:04:23 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Peter F. wrote ( a lot of things that made me sigh with relief; the
self-righteousness of the proponents of "holism" is just way, way out of
control these days - I think the tide is beginning to turn as people begin
to see the damage they can do).
)It is quite true that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. The
whole is the sum of the parts )plus the interactions between those parts. I
object to new agers making this story something )more than it is
Kind of like the Gaia theories, remember those?
I wondered too about Nicole's statement that interdisciplinary stuff is
discouraged; totally a layperson here but I had *quite* the opposite
impression and am glad to hear Peter confirm this.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:14:17 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
Brad:
)I am looking for evidence of magic and an unjustified attitude of
)superiority among the farmers in Australia. Their mission statement and a
)defintion is below. I did not find any magical type language or an attitude
)of superiourity on this line.
(quotes:)
)Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
)microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it the
)root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
)the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water
)hold ing capacity.
Brad - let us spell it out for you. *That's* the magic. The claim that "horn
manure preparation enlivens the soil" is a magical claim. How can we make
this clearer? Snake oil is not usually advertised with "magical language" -
they want paying customers, they need to sound credible. This is what Peter
is talking about - simple fraud walking around calling itself "holism." A
scam. Sucker born every minute. (Thinking maybe one of these cliches will
jog something in your brain.) :)
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 03:41:39 +0000
From: David Gill (valslavnijinsky shaw.ca)
Subject: RE: Charlie...?
charles morrison wrote:
) It's okay to accept that there are physical differences between some
) races in general, because these are easily observable, but if, as
) Steiner suggests, that there are also other more subtle differences,
) this is very much frowned upon. Personally I don't know if there are any
) other differences, but if we accept that evolution is a fact, then it is
) only logical to accept that other differences are a possibility. If you
) believe that adaptive radiation produced the observed differences, then
) is it not possible that it produced other differences that are harder to
) spot. I prefer to plead ignorance, keep an open mind, and do my best to
) treat everyone equally.
)
) Once again, sorry for the delay Walden.
)
) Warm regards,
) Charlie.
)
Here's an interesting resource which discusses race and its relationship
to science through the years, and how modern genetics disproves the
existence of "races" as such:
http://www.racesci.org/
In particular:
What DNA Says About Human Ancestry?and Bigotry
Part 3, The Myth of Race
Village Voice
Mark Schoofs
http://www.racesci.org/in_media/what_dna_says_about_human/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:28:40 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad here: to Peter
I wrote/posted just now on the history of science before I read Nicolle's
comments. Nicolle, I am profoundly impressed by your analysis. There is no
correction to your thought. Peter, Nicolle is living and operating in 2003
and has full comprehension of the issue. Your logic, however, is subject to
at least two shortcomings: 1. You are operating in the reductionist
mode/mindset, which has been and continues to be dominant in the sciences
and the acadamies. You have a choice, bring yourself up to speed and learn
from the pioneers of 100 years ago or remain mired in mechanistic science.
The term integration is a partial development of your progress. Those who
are so mired go to elaborate pains to rationalize the terminology they use.
You have permission to extend your mind into the terminology of modern
science. Holistic, in the context of modern science, is a completely valid
term. Get used to it. 2. You are making the same error as the general
discussion on PLANS. That is, seeing only the literalist nonsense and
flailing away with their own incomplete understanding of the larger issues.
The term New Age has two basic components. One is the workings of the
superstitious mind. The frivolous mind. Here is the concretizing of the
metaphor with crystals, things that go bump in the night and galaxies and
planets far, far away. It is the direct complement to religious
fundamentalism. Both are superstitious minded. All you can see and comment
upon is this area. The term New Age is seen only as a pejorative, a red flag
in front of the bull.
The other useage is quite valid with terminology used be the intelligent
Minds of Synthesis over the aeons. This other has gone by several names in
Western Civilization. The Perennial Philosophy is one. The Wisdom Tradition
is another. You spend so much time focused on the one, you do not see the
other. PLANS is not seeing the other, for all the pride in Free Thinking.
Forest for the trees. (Diana, you have not understood what I am saying at
all. I will try to bring in the good farmer, Dr. Kirschenmann, to educate
you.) Holistic is a valid scientific term. You can examine the systems work
of Bertalanffly, Prigogine, Nobel Award Winner, von Foerster, von Neumann
(of computer fame), Wiener (of cybernetics fame), Ashby, Atlan, Bateson,
Beer, Campbell, Chekland, Forrester, Klir, Juhmann, Maturana, McCulloch,
Miller, Morin, Odum, Pask, Pattee, Powers, Rosen, Shannon, Simon, Varela,
Glasersfeld, Watzlawick. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/CSTHINK.html This
should keep you busy for a while and bring you up to date.
All of the symbolism on the back of the United States currency, the dollar
bill, is of the second of these useages. Metaphors of the Wisdom Tradition
in the West.
You can also trace the history of the term from it's orginator, Jan Smuts.
http://www.isss.org/smuts.htm "The South African J.C. Smuts (1870 -
1950 ) is well remembered as a statesman but only few people know that he is
also the founding father of holism, the word he coined from the Greek Holus
meaning Whole. Nowadays Smuts the politican is history but his holistic
vision is more actual than ever. That is why we first present a short
introduction in the development of Smut's holistic vision." ISSS is the
International Society for the Systems Sciences.
Become wise,
Brad
) G'day Nicole,
) I just don't accept your version of this. It is quite true that the whole
is
) greater than the sum of the parts. The whole is the sum of the parts plus
) the interactions between those parts. I object to new agers making this
) story something more than it is and suggesting particularly that
scientists
) are unaware of it and don't take it into account. That's simple nonsense.
It
) is true that Universities are divided into departments but it is not true
) that those departments do not interact. I think you are wrong, for
example,
) that the biologists do not talk to the geologists and so on. In my former
) life as an academic physicist I was involved in lots of cross
fertilisation
) like this, and cross discipline projects, particularly with engineers and
) mathematicians (not so unusual) but also with biologists and chemists.
) Despite the rhetoric from the pro holism new age camp this kind of
) interaction is not unusual, and is encouraged if anything.
)
) On the other hand I see a lot of people who claim "holism" and then simply
) take some pseudo spiritual, pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo and make
) outlandish claims about greater understanding with no evidence to support
) the claims whatsoever. What's worse is that often the claims made are
) completely at odds with undertanding which has been hard won via a
) combination of reductionist method followed by integration. Homeopathy is
) one of my favourite examples of this.
)
) See you, Peter
)
)
)
)
) )From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
) )Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) )To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) )Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
) )Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
) )
)
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
) http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:57:26 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
BRAD
) ) )*I was on the track of any substantive differentiation between
) ) )organic and biodynamic. Not enough evidence yet to report. Brad
DUGAN
) ) It's simple: BD is organic farming plus magic and an unjustified
) ) attitude of superiority.
)Brad: I am looking for evidence of magic and an unjustified attitude of
)superiority among the farmers in Australia. Their mission statement and a
)defintion is below. I did not find any magical type language or an attitude
)of superiourity on this line.
Do you expect occultists to talk about their practices openly? That
goes against the tradition. From the text you quoted, they are
obviously orthodox BD practitioners, and that means magic.
)a.. Biodynamic preparations, and guidelines on how to use and manufacture
)them.
And at the bottom:
)The Biodynamic Preparations were developed out of indications by Dr Rudolf
)Steiner in 1924. They are not fertilisers themselves but greatly assist the
)fertilising process. As such they only need to be used in very small
)amounts.
)
)Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
)microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it the
)root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
)the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water hold
)ing capacity.
)
)Horn Silica Preparation (501) enhances the light and warmth assimilation of
)the plant, leading to better fruit and seed development with improved
)flavour, aroma, colour and nutritional quality.
)
)Compost Preparations (502 to 507), known collectively as the compost
)preparations, help the dynamic cycles of the macro- and micro-nutrients, via
)biological processes in the soil and in material breakdown.
Magic, Brad.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:05:43 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
To Diana,
See my most recent post on Systems Science, including Sharon's countryman,
Jan Smuts, the orginator of the term holistic. If you read these systems
folks, perhaps you will expand your mind.
I have no idea what BD 500 is, whether it has efficacy, such as silicacious
material for soils and agronomy, or is it material flown in from
Extraterrestrial Airlines, as you are so quick to assume from your own
incomplete understandingj of the larger issues. I will try to bring in the
biodynamic/organic farmer, Dr. Kirchenmann from Moo U., to educate you.
Agronomy is the application of the various soil and plant sciences to soil
management and crop production; scientific agriculture. To suggest that
Rudolf Steiner had no insight or knowledge along these lines is naive. Was
he incomplete in his science? Of course. So were many eccentric geniuses
before their time.
Become wise,
Brad
PS As the Irishman said, walking into the brawl going on in the bar: "Is
this a private fight, or can anyone join in?"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Winters" (Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
) Brad:
) )I am looking for evidence of magic and an unjustified attitude of
) )superiority among the farmers in Australia. Their mission statement and a
) )defintion is below. I did not find any magical type language or an
attitude
) )of superiourity on this line.
)
)
) (quotes:)
)
) )Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
) )microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it
the
) )root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
) )the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water
) )hold ing capacity.
)
) Brad - let us spell it out for you. *That's* the magic. The claim that
"horn
) manure preparation enlivens the soil" is a magical claim. How can we make
) this clearer? Snake oil is not usually advertised with "magical
language" -
) they want paying customers, they need to sound credible. This is what
Peter
) is talking about - simple fraud walking around calling itself "holism." A
) scam. Sucker born every minute. (Thinking maybe one of these cliches will
) jog something in your brain.) :)
) Diana
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:10:11 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: catching up
Hello everybody,
I've been busy finishing a long article and have neglected my
waldorf-critics correspondence. As I try to work my way through the
accumulated email, I wanted to thank Peter Farrell for bringing our
attention to two very interesting articles, one on the biology and sociology
of race at
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0002A353-C027-1E1C-8B3B809EC588EEDF&catID=2
and one on notions of progressive evolution at
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v420/n6916/full/420611a_fs.html
I heartily second Peter F's recommendation in both cases. The first article
is mostly a profile of sociologist Troy Duster, whose book Backdoor to
Eugenics I also recommend (especially to Percedol, who could maybe use a
little brushing up on the topic). The second article gives a brief overview
of Goethe and Haeckel, two of the most important influences on Steiner, and
surveys the idea of progressive evolution, which plays such a central role
in Steiner's racial doctrines.
I'll try to make a few more replies to recent posts soon.
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:11:25 +1030
From: Willow Firesong (Willow.Firesong creative-interweb.com)
Subject: Re: wear peat!
At 21-01-03 05:24 PM Tuesday, you wrote:
) ) From Dan:
) ) By raising the
) )) elemental forces up again to the light and working with the peat
) )) lovingly, respectfully and thankfully as we do in Camphill workshops,
) )) we free them; they in turn protect and heal us when we wear peat.
) )
) ) Brad:
) ) Maybe I can sell them Viking helmets with cow horns to gather elemental
) ) forces to neutralize the bad forces. Would be a nice fashion touch to go
) ) with the peat sweaters.
Willow:
Please, noooooooo!!! The FQ, as you would put it, Brad, on running around
in horned viking helmets is VERY VERY VERY high - and while it might be a
tempting idea to "bell the cat" and make the flakes more visible from a
distance, so that one can avoid them, I cannot think that adding that to
the total amount of flakiness in the world is a good thing! FQ, Brad,
FQ! (winks)
)Lisa here: They would probably buy them, too! (g) Such headwear would
)undoubtedly be the perfect complement to the requisite Birkenstock footwear
)and whatever anthro-recommended organic fibers are worn in between.
Oh, I know *far* too many people who would buy them, wear them to go
grocery shopping, etc... (shudders) The list of names started scrolling
by in my mind when I saw this post, and it hasn't run out yet!
I like my Birkenstocks, but if anyone ever made them required, I'd probably
pull out my black thigh-high leather boots, and get them re-soled, just to
be stubborn. I don't take well to sumptuary laws. I love organic fabrics,
and I'll wear them for my own reasons, but I admit that being prescriptive
at me without good reason is one VERY reliable way to make me go into
Tennessee mule mode.
Well, at least I know what tonight's nightmares are going to be
about... (wry sigh)
Willow
(resumes lurking and recovering from a series of health problems)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:58:19 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: biodynamics
Hi Brad,
I apologize in advance for lumping together a half-dozen of your recent
posts. Like I said earlier, I'm trying to catch up (before my inbox
bursts...). You wrote:
)Brad: I was trying very hard to find evidence of cultish, anti-semitic,
)racist, anthroposopical behavior among biodynamic farmers in Iowa. No luck.
That's not surprising, since you're looking in the wrong place and at the
wrong time. If you want to find evidence of antisemitism and racism among
biodynamic farmers, you'd do a lot better to look at Germany in the 1930's
and 1940's, when BD was all the rage with quite a few of the Nazis. And
since you're interested in holistic science, I'd like to recommend an
article by historian of science Anne Harrington: "Metaphoric Connections:
Holistic Science in the Shadow of the Third Reich", Social Research vol 62
no 2. I also recommend her book Reenchanted Science: Holism and German
Culture from Wilhelm II to Hitler.
You also wrote:
)If someone is consulting an astrology chart on when to
)plant, then there is a problem. However, what legitimate deeper concerns
)arethere in agriculture, soils, etc., that need to be understood? Loading
)on chemicals and depleting the soil is not a long term solution. By no
)means am I an expert on the subject. My observation on all this is that
)beneath all the flakiness of the Steiner/anthropop phenom of 100 years ago,
)are some very legitimate contributions.(
I'm not sure how you managed to get the opposite impression, but a number of
anthroposophy's harsher critics largely agree with your last sentence. The
point is that Steiner's teachings are where all the flakiness comes from,
while the legitimate contributions were and are present in many other
movements that aren't built around an occult worldview. Biodynamics is a
perfect example: as several other listmates have been trying to explain to
you, the only thing that distinguishes BD agriculture from plain old organic
agriculture is its anthroposophical trappings. Consulting astrological
charts is a central component of this approach.
Elsewhere you noted that you "have no idea what BD 500 is". That's part of
the problem here. If you'd take a moment to find out the basics about BD,
some of the criticisms you've read here wouldn't sound so outlandish
anymore. BD farmers make Preparation 500 by packing cow manure into a
steer's horn, burying it in the ground, leaving it there over the winter,
digging it up and mixing the manure with water, and stirring it for an hour
in a specific prescribed rhythm to make a spray which is applied to the
topsoil. Steiner taught that this practice will channel "radiations which
tend to etherealize and astralize" and thus "gather up and attract from the
surrounding earth all that is ethereal and life-giving". You can learn most
of the basic ideas of BD simply by reading Steiner's course on agriculture,
and there are hundreds of other sources out there by BD practitioners as
well.
You've also said that you're looking for "objective" studies of Steiner and
his followers. I think you'll find this search somewhat frustrating, and I
recommend that you start instead by taking a closer look at the original
sources, namely the works of Steiner and other anthroposophists. Then you
can make your own judgements about the flake quotient at work, and compare
your assessment with those put forward by various critics. But in order to
do this, you'll need to pay closer attention to who's who. For example, you
complained recently:
)It appears Owen Barfield has academic standing. No one on WC
)informed me about Barfield when I asked for someone who was ferreting out
)the insights from the nonsense.
That's because Barfield was an anthroposophist. You need only type his name
into a search engine to find that out (I just did so at google, and the very
first page that came up describes itself as "The personal home page of the
late anthroposophist Owen Barfield"). I can't resist noting, on a similar
point, that you replied to Sharon's mention of Richard Noll's critical work
on C.G. Jung by citing the indignant responses of several well-known
Jungians. That devotees of Jung are distressed by Noll's work is hardly
shocking news. I think you'd do well to keep the same thing in mind while
perusing anthroposophists' replies to critics of Steiner.
Respectfully,
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:16:44 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
) BRAD
) ) ) )*I was on the track of any substantive differentiation between
) ) ) )organic and biodynamic. Not enough evidence yet to report. Brad
)
) DUGAN
) ) ) It's simple: BD is organic farming plus magic and an unjustified
) ) ) attitude of superiority.
) Do you expect occultists to talk about their practices openly? That
) goes against the tradition. From the text you quoted, they are
) obviously orthodox BD practitioners, and that means magic.
) Magic, Brad.
)
) -Dan Dugan
Brad: As I just said, I have no idea what BD 500 is, or how effective. There
is probably some modest value in silicaceous materials, the silicas. I
am seeing online that there are some serious folks using the term
biodynamic. I will guarantee you they are not all of the superstitious New
Age mind as PLANS is trying to paint the picture. I am looking for those who
have a grasp of the big picture. I would like to hear what Kirschenmann has
to say. I will be trying to contact him for an invite. Good idea.
I read one of Kischenmann's speeches where he cited the current dead zone in
the Gulf of Mexico being half the area of the state of Iowa. This is the
area at the mouth of the Mississippi that has endured decades of runoff from
chemicals and pesticides. This has killed the soil microorganisms in 8500
square miles of the Gulf, called the Dead Zone. Sobering. He is clearly a
mentor for the next generation of agronomists who are trying to reverse the
trend for future generations.
There is a large difference between -some witch's coven gathering at
the full moon intoning incantations to summon the various entities to cure
the hangnail of the cat of the head witch and -coming out of the
opera house from experiencing a Strauss, a Puccini, a Verdi, and exclaiming
as I have done and heard others, "That was pure magic."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:29:33 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
) ) Magic, Brad.
) )
) ) -Dan Dugan
)
PS If the head witch is Kim Novak from the film 'Bell, Book and Candle', I
will don my cape, peaked hat with the stars and the moon, plunge right in to
the ceremony and lead the show. When this young kid saw her in Picnic I
couldn't sleep for a week. Brad
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:11:53 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
Brad Martin, you wrote,
)See my most recent post on Systems Science, including Sharon's countryman,
)Jan Smuts, the orginator of the term holistic. If you read these systems
)folks, perhaps you will expand your mind.
I checked out that site, and the Systems Science "First International
Electronic Seminar on Wholeness." This is fringe nonsense, Brad,
people who haven't the guts to practice real science, so they pretend
they have some superior method. Good luck in that company, Brad.
)I have no idea what BD 500 is, whether it has efficacy, such as silicacious
)material for soils and agronomy, or is it material flown in from
)Extraterrestrial Airlines, as you are so quick to assume from your own
)incomplete understandingj of the larger issues.
If you don't know what BD 500 is, I'd say you were the one with the
incomplete understanding.
)I will try to bring in the
)biodynamic/organic farmer, Dr. Kirchenmann from Moo U., to educate you.
Maybe we'll educate him.
)Agronomy is the application of the various soil and plant sciences to soil
)management and crop production; scientific agriculture. To suggest that
)Rudolf Steiner had no insight or knowledge along these lines is naive.
He was the naive one. Steiner didn't know much about agriculture, but
of course his followers hung on his every word because of his
supposed access to higher sources.
)Was
)he incomplete in his science? Of course. So were many eccentric geniuses
)before their time.
It isn't a matter of being incomplete; it's a matter of going off in
the wrong direction, of being dead wrong.
)Become wise,
)Brad
Wise up!
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:04:53 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Thanks Brad for the lengthy reply. I have to admit that I have not read many
of the people on the list you provide below. However I am very familiar with
the works of Prigogine, Shannon, von Neumann, and Wiener. I am less familar
with the works of Varela, Maturana (whom I had the pleasure of meeting once)
and Bateson, and hardly or not familar at all with the work of the rest. In
so far as Prigogine, Shannon, von Neumann, and Wiener, I don't believe their
positions are enormously different from mine, despite their appearance in
this list. I am not saying that holism is not a valid scientific term. I am
saying that the claims made by most who talk about holism are grossly
overstated. I believe that many who make claims about holism are simple
frauds.
The issue here is not one of a lack of awareness on my part. I know what it
is that you are speaking of, and I don't beleve there is good evidence to
show that anything special is happening. Some people with a vested interest
different to mine might be saying so, but that don't make it so, nor does it
make what I say so.
Show me something tangible that has come out of the approach you are talking
about that is not exlainable by the reductionist/integrationist approach I
outlined. That is the sort of evidence that would make me look again at this
issue.
That evidence does not appear to me be at the sites you sent.
See you, Peter
)From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
)Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:28:40 -0600
)
)Brad here: to Peter
)I wrote/posted just now on the history of science before I read Nicolle's
)comments. Nicolle, I am profoundly impressed by your analysis. There is no
)correction to your thought. Peter, Nicolle is living and operating in 2003
)and has full comprehension of the issue. Your logic, however, is subject to
)at least two shortcomings: 1. You are operating in the reductionist
)mode/mindset, which has been and continues to be dominant in the sciences
)and the acadamies. You have a choice, bring yourself up to speed and learn
)from the pioneers of 100 years ago or remain mired in mechanistic science.
)The term integration is a partial development of your progress. Those who
)are so mired go to elaborate pains to rationalize the terminology they use.
)You have permission to extend your mind into the terminology of modern
)science. Holistic, in the context of modern science, is a completely valid
)term. Get used to it. 2. You are making the same error as the general
)discussion on PLANS. That is, seeing only the literalist nonsense and
)flailing away with their own incomplete understanding of the larger issues.
)
)The term New Age has two basic components. One is the workings of the
)superstitious mind. The frivolous mind. Here is the concretizing of the
)metaphor with crystals, things that go bump in the night and galaxies and
)planets far, far away. It is the direct complement to religious
)fundamentalism. Both are superstitious minded. All you can see and comment
)upon is this area. The term New Age is seen only as a pejorative, a red
)flag
)in front of the bull.
)
)The other useage is quite valid with terminology used be the intelligent
)Minds of Synthesis over the aeons. This other has gone by several names in
)Western Civilization. The Perennial Philosophy is one. The Wisdom Tradition
)is another. You spend so much time focused on the one, you do not see the
)other. PLANS is not seeing the other, for all the pride in Free Thinking.
)Forest for the trees. (Diana, you have not understood what I am saying at
)all. I will try to bring in the good farmer, Dr. Kirschenmann, to educate
)you.) Holistic is a valid scientific term. You can examine the systems
)work
)of Bertalanffly, Prigogine, Nobel Award Winner, von Foerster, von Neumann
)(of computer fame), Wiener (of cybernetics fame), Ashby, Atlan, Bateson,
)Beer, Campbell, Chekland, Forrester, Klir, Juhmann, Maturana, McCulloch,
)Miller, Morin, Odum, Pask, Pattee, Powers, Rosen, Shannon, Simon, Varela,
)Glasersfeld, Watzlawick. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/CSTHINK.html This
)should keep you busy for a while and bring you up to date.
)
)All of the symbolism on the back of the United States currency, the dollar
)bill, is of the second of these useages. Metaphors of the Wisdom Tradition
)in the West.
)
)You can also trace the history of the term from it's orginator, Jan Smuts.
)http://www.isss.org/smuts.htm "The South African J.C. Smuts (1870 -
)1950 ) is well remembered as a statesman but only few people know that he
)is
)also the founding father of holism, the word he coined from the Greek Holus
)meaning Whole. Nowadays Smuts the politican is history but his holistic
)vision is more actual than ever. That is why we first present a short
)introduction in the development of Smut's holistic vision." ISSS is the
)International Society for the Systems Sciences.
)
)Become wise,
)Brad
)
)
) ) G'day Nicole,
) ) I just don't accept your version of this. It is quite true that the
)whole
)is
) ) greater than the sum of the parts. The whole is the sum of the parts
)plus
) ) the interactions between those parts. I object to new agers making this
) ) story something more than it is and suggesting particularly that
)scientists
) ) are unaware of it and don't take it into account. That's simple
)nonsense.
)It
) ) is true that Universities are divided into departments but it is not
)true
) ) that those departments do not interact. I think you are wrong, for
)example,
) ) that the biologists do not talk to the geologists and so on. In my
)former
) ) life as an academic physicist I was involved in lots of cross
)fertilisation
) ) like this, and cross discipline projects, particularly with engineers
)and
) ) mathematicians (not so unusual) but also with biologists and chemists.
) ) Despite the rhetoric from the pro holism new age camp this kind of
) ) interaction is not unusual, and is encouraged if anything.
) )
) ) On the other hand I see a lot of people who claim "holism" and then
)simply
) ) take some pseudo spiritual, pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo and make
) ) outlandish claims about greater understanding with no evidence to
)support
) ) the claims whatsoever. What's worse is that often the claims made are
) ) completely at odds with undertanding which has been hard won via a
) ) combination of reductionist method followed by integration. Homeopathy
)is
) ) one of my favourite examples of this.
) )
) ) See you, Peter
) )
) )
) )
) )
) ) )From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
) ) )Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) ) )To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) ) )Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
) ) )Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
) ) )
) )
) )
) ) _________________________________________________________________
) ) MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
) ) http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
) )
) )
)
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:40:54 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
I should say that Prigogine really does think more along the lines of what
Brad is proposing. One might read some of the criticisms of this that appear
in the links at the Website Brad sent.
I have a further question for Brad. You discounted the claims I made about
my own experience in academia and as a scientist in my response to Nicole.
Do you think I was I cannot recognise the details of my own experince in
this regard or do you think I was misrepresenting that experience?
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:53:49 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_255f_2678_5c8
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Nicole Foss wrote:
Reductionism seeks to simplify, but loses a great deal of information in the
process, information that may remain lost when the whole is reassembled from
its component parts. There are many situations which have to be understood
in all their complexity if they are to be understood meaningfully at all.
The top-down approach is equally necessary to a true understanding, indeed
the two methods are complementary.
G'day Nicole,
I would appreciate it if you would give me an example of this top down
approach, preferably in the sciences, that has led to true understanding.
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------=_NextPart_000_255f_2678_5c8
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Received: from out003.tpca.net ([66.180.244.23]) by
mc1-f1.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600);
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:14:31 -0800
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
From: Nicole Foss (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 +0000
Message-ID: (2097685225-1463747838-1043276559 topica.com)
Errors-To:
(blst-errors.1700032592.1711782687.1724143004.007.0.0 boing.topica.com)
Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
X-Topica-Id: (1043276557.inmta007.1093.1020249)
List-Help: (http://topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/)
List-Unsubscribe: (mailto:waldorf-critics-unsubscribe topica.com)
X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to (http://www.habeas.com/report/);.
Return-Path: (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Received: (qmail 4364 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 4359 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (64.4.17.166)
by 0 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:02:37 -0800
Received: from 216.209.223.40 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:02:35 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [216.209.223.40]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 23:02:37.0239 (UTC)
FILETIME=[5B361C70:01C2C26A]
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Peter wrote: Your description of a better approach matches
my term "integration" in my original approach. What I am saying is
that you can't have holism without reductionism. This idea that you
can just be holistic and all will be revealed is what I was railing
against.(/P)
(P)Nicole: What I was getting at amounts to more than just
integration, since the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
(for instance, a population is more than just multiple single
individuals, it has its own dynamic that you could not predict even
from perfect knowledge of a single individual). There are many
thing that cannot be understood merely by taking them apart and
putting them back together again, because they are properties of a
particular level of organization (of molecules, cells, people etc).
Reductionism is useful and necessary as a means of discovering
knowledge, but it is not enough on its own.(/P)
(P)I used to find it very strange when I was at university studying
evolution that the biologists never seemed to talk to the geologists
about the subject and vice versa. I was one of very few to have
lectures in both departments and the lack of communication was
painfully obvious. Both sides could have increased their
understanding of the subject by simply talking to each other. This
would count as integration in the sense that I understand you to mean
it, and yes it would be valuable, but I still don't think it's
necessarily enough. (/P)
(P)Reductionism seeks to simplify, but loses a great deal of
information in the process, information that may remain lost
when the whole is reassembled from its component parts. There are
many situations which have to be understood in all their complexity
if they are to be understood meaningfully at all. The top-down
approach is equally necessary to a true understanding, indeed the two
methods are complementary.(BR)(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)MSN 8 with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMMENCA/2740")e-mail virus protection
service: (/a) 2 months FREE*
(/html)
------=_NextPart_000_255f_2678_5c8--
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 948
-- Topica Digest --
Re: holism and reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By bradmartin sbcglobal.net
biodynamics again
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
By dan dandugan.com
Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
By Diana.Winters worldnet.att.net
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Steiner's nationalism
By pstaud hotmail.com
More about preparation 500
By klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: Holism versus Reductionism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: More about preparation 500
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
By nmfoss hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:15:41 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: holism and reductionism
Peter has placed a number of responses into this post by Brad.
Brad Wrote:
Peter said:
G'day Nicole,
I didn't say "nothing is learned". I said "nothing has been learned". Your
description of a better approach matches my term "integration" in my
original approach. What I am saying is that you can't have holism without
reductionism. This idea that you can just be holistic and all will be
revealed is what I was railing against.
See you, Peter.
Brad:
This is truly a good exercise in communicating and rhetoric. I have not said
'holism without reductionism'. Holism expands upon the foundation of
reductionism. Holism is the more complete understanding.
The history of science is discussed endlessly today, by many writers. The
history is well told online when the right words are put in the browser. In
general, Cartesian/Newtonian/reductionist/classical science dates back 300
years. At that time, our 'good friends' the Church, felt it was invading
their turf. It was. Remember, that was the time period when invading turf
meant you had a choice, the stake or the guillotine. Today, fortunately, you
only get pilloried and vilified by those *nice* folks, the fundamentalist
groups in America. In the Mideast you still lose your life. The fundamentals
of Cartesian science are that we will investigate by breaking down the
object being examined into it's component parts. In the biological and human
sciences, this usually means the clinical double bind trials with
publications in peer reveiwed journals. The truly extraordinary results of
classical science are clear and obvious. We are the beneficiaries of the
Industrial Revolution and the amazing endless variety of goods and services
available to us.
However, this has not answered the question, What is Life? An excellent
example is in the brain. In neuroscience in classical science, the synapse
in the brain is an on and off switch. A 1/0 operation. This model of the
brain remains the model used in much of today's research. However, it has
become clear that this is an incomplete model.
Peter responds at this point:
Who ever claimed it was a complete model? It is the beginning of a long road
of discovery and undertanding.
Brad continues:
The brain and the mind are
not equivalent. 100 years ago were the discoveries in particle physics.
Einstein, Bohr, Schroedinger, Heisenberg, et al. Their work expanded the
world of science. In essence, the classical method was found to be
inadequate. They had discovered realms that could not be measured, repeated
and verified.
Peter responds:
Absolute crap. They did no such thing. The simple fact is they discovered
realms that enabled measurement and verification to be extended orders of
magnitude beyond that available to classical physics. Here's a simple
example. Go down to your local electronics shop and buy yourself a hand held
GPS device for a few hundred dollars. It will tell you where you are to
within a hundred metres or thereabouts. That's a realm that can't be
measured repeated or verified. This is my area of research Brad. This
characterisation is absolutely false.
Brad continues:
Terms for the more complete understanding of science are
modern, systems and quantum. Holistic is a synonym for systems. The whole is
larger than the sum of it's parts. In scientific investigation, if you take
a whole (the human system is a good example) and attempt to break the whole
into it's component parts, you destroy the functioning operation of the
system. They use the term, 'life cannot be found in a petri dish'.
Peter responds:
Actually it can.
Brad continues:
I would
not want them to take one of my parts to examine that would also entail the
end of my living.
So, no longer are we able to use the standard clinical trials to attempt to
understand life.
Peter responds:
This is what is termed a non sequitor. Not only are many of the premises you
have claimed earlier to this point simply wrong, this wouldn't follow from
them even if they were right.
Brad continues:
Microdynamics and macrodynamics are directily related
terms. The small and the large. What is going on now in science is the
development of a gradation of empirical testing methods. An heirarchy of
evidence. An accumulation of evidence such that when all the data is
collected, the conclusion is overwhelmingly understood by one's peers that
it is most probably correct. Evolutionary theory is a good example. The
religious fundamentalists, of course, will have none of it. Humans are not,
repeat, not, a part of nature, but were created out of whole cloth 6000
years ago by the Good Gentleman in the Sky. Sigh. *Triple Sigh* However, the
operations in one biological cell number in the tens of thousands. The
plant, the animal and the human all share the same essential cellular
operations. On a macro scale, we are quite different.
Peter responds:
I' don't understand your point here. In a sense plant animal and human are
different, in another they are not.
Brad continues:
An outsanding relevant example in mind science is at the synapse of the
brain. Science has been very busy in the past 300 years. What they call the
'Hard Problem' of the mind/consciousness can no longer be put off.
Peter responds:
Actually it can be put off. It is not clear to me that enough is known to
answer this question but I could be wrong.
Brad continues:
The
on/off switch model is known to be incomplete. It has remained a 'black
box'. We know there is something inside that box, but we do not know exactly
what. One of the leading theories into this black box is the work of Roger
Penrose in the UK and Dr. Stuart Hameroff at the Univ of Arizona. See next
paragraph.
http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/hameroff/Ham/Interest/interest_in_consc
iounsess.htm
Hameroff: "In the early 1990's the study of consciousness became
increasingly popular and I was strongly influenced by Roger Penrose's The
Emperor's New Mind (and later Shadows of the Mind, Oxford Press, 1989 and
1994). Quite famous for his work in relativity, black holes, and quantum
mechanics, Roger had turned to the problem of consciousness and concluded
the mind was more than complex computation. Something else was necessary,
and that something, he suggested, was a particular type of quantum
computation he was proposing ('objective reduction' - a self-collapse of the
quantum wave function due to quantum gravity). He was linking consciousness
to a basic process in underlying spacetime geometry - reality itself! It
seemed fascinating and plausible to me, but Roger didn't have a good
candidate biological site for his proposed process. I thought, could
microtubules be quantum computers? I wrote to him, and we soon met in his
office in Oxford in September 1992. Roger was struck by the mathematical
symmetry and beauty of the microtubule lattice and thought it was the
optimal candidate for his proposed mechanism. Over the next few years
through discussions at conferences in Sweden, Tucson, Copenhagen and
elsewhere, and a memorable hike through the Grand Canyon in 1994, we began
to develop a model for consciousness involving Roger's objective reduction
occurring in microtubules within the brain's neurons. Because the proposed
microtubule quantum states were 'tuned' by linking proteins, we called the
process 'orchestrated objective reduction' - 'Orch OR'."
Peter responds:
Penrose could be right of course but he managed to convince few quantum
physicists or computer scientists. I loved his book, but i don't believe he
made his argument.
Brad continues:
Su has asked, what does this have to do with Waldorf/hoistic education? The
answer is both nothing and everything. What does this have to do with
whether Anthroposophy is a religon? The answer is both nothing and
everything.
Brad
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:34:58 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
)
)) Brad: I am looking for evidence of magic and an unjustified attitude of
)) superiority among the farmers in Australia. Their mission statement and a
)) defintion is below. I did not find any magical type language or an attitude
)) of superiourity on this line.
Sharon: LOL! You haven't done your homework Brad, because you've just posted
something chock full of magic and you don't even know it! You are way up on
the surface, like the ignorant prospective parent I once was. You haven't
read enough Steiner. You are on the outside I am under the veil. You are
only on Steiner's surface layer of occultism, you need to start burrowing.
Dan, I and many others have penetrated deeply into Steiner's "mysteries",
and yes there is more, but there's a wall to guard the core secrets. That is
the wall I want to climb over. I want to find the core, the actual system of
magic. If I trained as a curative Eurythmist or Anthro doctor, I would be
privy to some of the core.
)) The Biodynamic Preparations were developed out of indications by Dr Rudolf
)) Steiner in 1924. They are not fertilisers themselves but greatly assist the
)) fertilising process. As such they only need to be used in very small
)) amounts.
Sharon: They are not fertilizers themselves, rather cosmic being attracters.
))
)) Horn Manure Preparation (500) is used to enliven the soil, increasing the
)) microflora and availability of nutrients and trace elements. Through it the
)) root growth, in particular, is strengthened in a balanced way, especially
)) the fine root hairs. Develops humus formation, soil structure and water hold
)) ing capacity.
Sharon: You post a mention of standard BD practice--preparation 500--pure
magic. Stirring manure in a specific way for a specific time, at a specific
time to create a vortex. Then stuffing horns (in which Moon Beings live)
with the "preparation" plus nettles and who knows what else. Then burying
the horns to "suck down" other cosmic beings for better fertility. After
winter, you dig up the horns.
PS: Gnomes make the roots grow.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:43:27 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
on 1/22/03 8:28 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
)
) You can also trace the history of the term from it's orginator, Jan Smuts.
) http://www.isss.org/smuts.htm "The South African J.C. Smuts (1870 -
) 1950 ) is well remembered as a statesman but only few people know that he is
) also the founding father of holism, the word he coined from the Greek Holus
) meaning Whole. Nowadays Smuts the politican is history but his holistic
) vision is more actual than ever. That is why we first present a short
) introduction in the development of Smut's holistic vision." ISSS is the
) International Society for the Systems Sciences.
Sharon: Well remembered for racial segregation, and stripping Africans of
the vote in 1936. Because of him, Africans were left with 13 percent of the
land. He lost the 1948 election to the white supremacists, the Afrikaner
Nationalists, who had once supported him. After Smuts came the infamous
Apartheid regime. Smuts the founder of Holism? Now this I have to see.
holism = fascism
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:43:27 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
) Sharon: You post a mention of standard BD practice--preparation 500--pure
) magic. Stirring manure in a specific way for a specific time, at a
specific
) time to create a vortex. Then stuffing horns (in which Moon Beings live)
) with the "preparation" plus nettles and who knows what else. Then burying
) the horns to "suck down" other cosmic beings for better fertility. After
) winter, you dig up the horns.
)
) PS: Gnomes make the roots grow.
Brad:
Sharon, what are you doing up so early? I will call on my favorite witch,
Kim Novak. I think she has retired to the SF Bay Area, noted for such
things. I think she married a veterinarian. Perhaps she helps him stuff
horns.
You are missing my point. I have no interest in BD 500, etc. Looking under
the veil has to do with the question, "What is the psychological inference
and metaphorical reference of the term?" We are making the point that the
term as used by Steiner 100 years ago, (and I assume others, which is an
interesting historical question) may be modern day organic agriculture. That
is why I was doing a bit of surfing on the WWW to farmers using the term.
Who are legitimate farmers with an interest in natural soil enrichment and
who are the flakes. I have found over the years that it is
relatively easy to distinguish between those with what I am calling a high
and a low flake factor. If a biodynamic/organic farmer is anti-semitic,
racist and talking to Moon Beings, then he is a flake. If he is not, then he
has picked up on some core insights that Steiner, and I am sure jillions of
others, over the years, had on the efficacy of natural farming. What did
they do before Monsanto? We know that Steiner had the 'baggage'. It is now
2003. Is WC now going to go after all university agronomy departments on
sustainable agriculture to lobby taking away their government funding? WC
can expand their business of witch hunting.
I will go outside, dig into the grass, plants and bushes, and see if I can
find some gnomes at work. Smile.
Become wise,
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:06:18 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
on 1/22/03 8:28 PM, Brad Martin at bradmartin sbcglobal.net wrote:
)
) You can also trace the history of the term from it's orginator, Jan Smuts.
) http://www.isss.org/smuts.htm "The South African J.C. Smuts (1870 -
) 1950 ) is well remembered as a statesman but only few people know that he is
) also the founding father of holism, the word he coined from the Greek Holus
) meaning Whole. Nowadays Smuts the politican is history but his holistic
) vision is more actual than ever. That is why we first present a short
) introduction in the development of Smut's holistic vision." ISSS is the
) International Society for the Systems Sciences.
Sharon: I just read this Brad and I'm laughing out loud. Man are you
gullible! I hope every one on list reads that. I'll thankfully remain in
Popper's company and leave you to embrace the likes of Smuts and his holism.
Towards the bottom that "thing" you posted says....
"For a moment it seemed that Smuts took holism with him into the grave.
Especially when Karl Popper in 1957 in his book The property of historicism,
used the world holism wrongly to describe such collective systems as Marxism
and fascism. But in the eighties holism underwent a remarkable rebirth.
Marilyn Ferguson`s Aquarian Conspiracy and Fritjof Capra`s The turning point
were million-sellers and proclaimed the holistic vision. These authors
recognised Smuts as the founding father of holism. Holism gained more and
more influence in the last twenty years including in the different branches
of science. Smuts`program is ambitious. He wanted nothing less but a new
outlook in life. In his own life he worked hard in favour of his new vision.
He tried to inspire people by his book Holism and Evolution and used his
qualities as a statesman and a general to serve his holistic vision. Whether
or not he was successful time will show".
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:00:14 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Sharon: Smuts the founder of Holism? Now this I have to see.
)
) holism = fascism
)
Brad: If you are not going to read into the history of science there is a
problem. Within modern systems science is the inquiry into chaos and
complexity. Becoming aware of non-linear macrodynamics. The whole is greater
than the sum of it's parts. You cannot isolate an independent from the
controlled variable in systems science without affecting the whole.
Wholistic/holistic is a valid term when used in it's proper context. If you
persist in it's useage in the frivolous/flake context, there is no gain.
Sharon, please! Whatever Smuts did as a politician does not detract from his
recognition of the term holism. If this line starts going into the question
of whether Smuts was a good guy or a bad guy, and miss the point over the
larger issue of modern systems science is yet again evidence of it's style
of argument. To say that holism = fascism is to speak with blinders. It is
like saying Celtic and Northern European mythology directly caused Naziism
and the Holocaust.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:10:58 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
)To Diana,
)See my most recent post on Systems Science, including Sharon's countryman,
)Jan Smuts, the orginator of the term holistic. If you read these systems
)folks, perhaps you will expand your mind.
Brad, like virtually everyone who got a liberal arts education after about
1975, "holism" and "systems theory" are not something I have never heard of
before. They have permeated virtually every discipline for at least the last
quarter century. You seem to think it is something shiny new.
I think part of the problem is that people in the humanities and social
sciences are even more besotted with these ideas than scientists, and have
this romantic and very confused notion that all the gaps in our knowledge
can now be filled in (by the Great Minds of Synthesis, I guess) - science
and religion finally reconciled - questions like, What is Life, answered
once and for alll. These ideas are not radical, Brad, they have long since
filtered into popular culture (i.e., we've all watched Joseph Campbell on
PBS).
)I have no idea what BD 500 is, whether it has efficacy,
But *I* should expand my mind eh? You are here defending BD 500 without even
knowing what it is. You are inadvertently offering proof of Peter's comment
that "holism" seems to be a justification for making completely unsupported
claims. You are not the least bit fazed, rattling on about agronomy and soil
improvement, apparently taking it as self-evident that if these folks have
nice web sites and use professional sounding language, their preparations
must actually do something for the soil. The facts are different.
Your every post adds more proof of the problems with holism.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:11:14 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad to Peter (after a lot of condescending nonsense implying Peter couldn't
possibly have gone to school in the past quarter century):
)2. You are making the same error as the general discussion on PLANS. That
)is, seeing only the )literalist nonsense and flailing away with their own
)incomplete understanding of the larger issues.
This is where I become incensed. You are talking to people who "flailed
away" trying to make a Waldorf school work for their children. We are
interested in the "literalist nonsense" because the literalist nonsense is
applied in the classroom, Brad, applied to our children, and it is
*damaging*. We talk to trauma survivors at PLANS, people whose children
became very ill or lost valuable years of schooling as a result of Waldorf.
Have you read Sharon's story on the PLANS web site? I urge you to do so.
) You spend so much time focused on the one, you do not see the other. PLANS
)is not seeing the other, for all the pride in Free Thinking. Forest for the
)trees.
I would urge Waldorf teachers to put away their arcane Steiner, interest
themselves less in the Perennial Philosophies and Wisdom Traditions that you
find so fascinating Brad, and learn that in other schools, mouths are not
washed out with soap, left-handed children not forced to write with their
right hands, parents are not told that reading will damage children before
puberty, and playground fights are not supervised by angels.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:20:06 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad:
)Whatever Smuts did as a politician does not detract from his
)recognition of the term holism. If this line starts going into the question
)of whether Smuts was a good guy or a bad guy, and miss the point over the
)larger issue of modern systems science
This again is where I have big problems, Brad - it is so much fun, isn't it,
to look around the Web at all the lovely sounding holistic projects going
on, it is so much less pleasant to look at what some of these people have
actually done with their lives, how they have affected the people around
them.
Have you made an appointment yet to visit your niece's class?
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:18:55 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
) Sharon: I just read this Brad and I'm laughing out loud. Man are you
) gullible! I hope every one on list reads that. I'll thankfully remain in
) Popper's company and leave you to embrace the likes of Smuts and his
holism.
)
) Towards the bottom that "thing" you posted says....
)
) "For a moment it seemed that Smuts took holism with him into the grave.
) Especially when Karl Popper in 1957 in his book The property of
historicism,
) used the world holism wrongly to describe such collective systems as
Marxism
) and fascism. But in the eighties holism underwent a remarkable rebirth.
) Marilyn Ferguson`s Aquarian Conspiracy and Fritjof Capra`s The turning
point
) were million-sellers and proclaimed the holistic vision. These authors
) recognised Smuts as the founding father of holism. Holism gained more and
) more influence in the last twenty years including in the different
branches
) of science. Smuts`program is ambitious. He wanted nothing less but a new
) outlook in life. In his own life he worked hard in favour of his new
vision.
) He tried to inspire people by his book Holism and Evolution and used his
) qualities as a statesman and a general to serve his holistic vision.
Whether
) or not he was successful time will show".
Brad: The subgroups on ISSS are below. You just did what I expected you
would do. Popper is well respected. I am not embracing Smuts but pointing
out the long history of science to become wise. If you would like to email
this list, interview them, and determine if they are anti-semitic, racist
and cult followers, then you would have a sensationalist story for the
Sacramento Bee reporter in the misguided efforts of PLANS to discredit
Waldorf. The proper strategy it to assist them in teaching the
metaphorical/allegorical knowledge. You have full evidence that some
teachers and trainers do not have this skill. I return again to my question.
What is the strategy of the leadership of the Waldorf organization in the
United States? If they get it, help them. If they don't, go after them.
After these threads of discussion die down, I will investigate that one.
1.. Critical Systems Theory & Practice -- Ken Udas, Ph.D., Rudolf
Zellergasse 48 B/3, 1230 Vienna, Austria, Tel: 0043 1 887 2370 --
KenUdas acm.org
2.. Designing Educational Systems -- Dr. Patrick Jenlink, Dept. of
Educational Leadership, Austin State University, 1936 North Street, Rm 404,
3.. Nacogdoches, Texas 75962-3018, USA -- PJenlink sfasu.edu
4.. Duality Theory -- Vitaly Dubrovsky, School of Business, Clarkson
University, Potsdam, NY 13699-5795, USA, Tel: 1-315-268-1314 --
dubrovvj clarkson.edu
5.. Evolution and Complexity (Epic of Evolution Society) -- Larry Edwards,
1855 Branciforte Dr., Santa Cruz, CA 95065, USA, Tel: 1-831-425-2079, Fax:
1-831-460-0204 -- ledwards sasq.net
6.. Evolutionary Learning Community (Syntony Quest) -- Kathia and
Alexander Laszlo, 1761 Vallejo Street, Suite 302, San Francisco, CA
94123-5029 - Syntony.Quest usa.net
7.. Futurism and Change -- Curt McNamara, 4010 Hayes St. NE, Mpls., MN
55421, USA -- curtm dgii.com, curt scribmail.com
8.. Hierarchy Theory -- Prof. Pierre Auger, UMR CNRS 5558, Universite
Claude Bernard Lyon 1 43. Boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne
cedex, France -- pauger bioserv.univ-lyon1.fr
9.. Human Systems Inquiry -- Arne Collen, Ph.D., P O Box 4950, Walnut
Creek, CA 94596, USA, Fax: 1-925-930-9779 -- acollen saybrook.edu
10.. Information Systems Design and Information Technology -- Bela Antal
Banathy, 38 Seca Place, Salinas, CA 93908, USA, Tel: 1-831-375-7614, --
BABanathy worldnet.att.net
11.. Living Systems Analysis -- James R. Simms, 9405 Elizabeth Ct.,
Fulton, MD 20759, USA, Tel: 1-301-498-5927 -- jrsimms juno.com
12.. Medical and Health Systems -- Gyorgy Jaros, Ph.D., Dept. Of
Anaesthesia, The University of Sydney, 2006 NSW, Australia, Tel:
+61-2-9351-5573, Fax: +61-2-9519-2455 -- gjaros med.usyd.edu.au
13.. Modeling and Metamodeling -- J.P. van Gigch, 1219 La Sierra Drive,
Sacramento, CA 95864-3049, USA -- vangigchjp csus.edu
14.. The ISSS Primer -- Tom Mandel -- ThomMandel aol.com
15.. Processes and Human Processes -- Hector Sabelli, 2400 North Lakeview,
Suite 2802, Chicago, IL 60614, USA, Fax: 1-312-348-4499 -
hsabelli rpslmc.edu
16.. Research Toward a General Theories of Systems -- Helmut (Ken)
Burkhardt, Adjunct Professor of Physics, Ryerson Polytechnic University, 350
Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 2K3, Tel: 1-416-979-5079,
x7246, Fax: 1-416-698-1214 -- burkhard acs.ryerson.ca
17.. Spirituality and Systems -- Charles Smith, Hofstra University, c/o
235 E. 22nd. St., #2V, New York, NY 10010. 212-532-2584, e-mail
c.h.smith verizon.net
18.. Survival of Evolving Systems -- Bryan Bergson, 27020 Cedar Road,
#104-1, Beachwood, Ohio 44122, USA -- bbergson aol.com
19.. Systems Application to Business and Industry -- Enrique G. Herrscher,
Dean, Graduate Business School, IDEA (Management Development Institute of
Argentina), Moreno 1850, (1094) Buenos Aires, Argentina, Tel:
+54-1-372-7667, x205/239, Fax: +54-1-373-6944 -- eherrsch ideamail.com.ar
20.. Systems Modeling and Simulation -- Dr. Robert A. Orchard, Prof.
Computer Science, City University of New York, at College of Staten Island,
New York, and Institute for Advanced Systems, P. O. Box 640, Indian Rocks
Beach, Fl. 33785, USA -- orchard acm.org
21.. Systems Philosophy and Systems Ethics -- Dr. Sytse Strijbos, Faculty
of Philosophy, Vrije Universiteit De Boelelaan 1105, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The
Netherlands, Tel: +31-20-4446692/4446620 (Office Univ.), +31-346-580695
(Office Home), Fax: +31-842-137061 -- strijbos cs.vu.nl
22.. Systems Psychology and Psychiatry --Dr. Robert A. Orchard, Prof.
Computer Science, City University of New York, at College of Staten Island,
New York, and Institute for Advanced Systems, P. O. Box 640, Indian Rocks
Beach, Fl. 33785, USA -- orchard acm.org
23.. Systems Studies of Climate Change -- Fred Bernard Wood, 2346 Lansford
Ave., San Jose, CA 95125, USA, Tel: 1-408-723-7818, Fax: 1-408 723-7045 --
csiri igc.apc.org
24.. Thermodynamics and Systems -- Peter Corning, Ph.D., Institute for the
Study of Complex Systems, 119 Bryant Street, Suite 212, Palo Alto, CA 94301,
USA, Tel: 1-650-325-5717, Fax: 1-650-325-3775 - ISCS aol.com Organizer for
1999-2000: Eli Berniker - bernike plu.edu
25.. What is Life/Living? -- John Jay Kineman, The Nexial Institute, 1101
Bison Dr. Boulder, CO, 80302. USA, Tel: 1-303-443-7544 email contact:
jjk nexial.org, Website and discussion list: www.nexial.org/WILL
26.. Women and Children in Community Systems -- Anne Nelson, 2442 N.W.
Market St. #112, Seattle WA. 98107. nelsongroup worldnet.att.net.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:25:29 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad:
)The proper strategy it to assist them [Waldorf teachers] in teaching the
)metaphorical/allegorical knowledge.
That would be difficult for Sharon or other Waldorf parents to do, since
they are often not allowed in the classrooms, or if they are, they are
requested to be very quiet and knit or peel fruit.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:21:36 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Diana,
) This again is where I have big problems, Brad - it is so much fun, isn't
it,
) to look around the Web at all the lovely sounding holistic projects going
) on, it is so much less pleasant to look at what some of these people have
) actually done with their lives, how they have affected the people around
) them.
The problems I have with what people have actually done with their lives
are:
1. The millions of people killed in the name of organized religion.
2. The millions of people killed in total misappropiration of the local
mythologies, along with all the other factors that are being studied in the
genesis and actualization of the Holocaust.
3. The millions of dollars spent on therapy and psychiatry and drugs from
'exit counseling' from the orthodox/fundamentalist strains of religion.
4. The taking over of the Southern Baptist Convention by the right wing
extremists. (I followed that issue out of curiosity)
5. The excessive incursion of the legitimate wing of the Grand Old Party by
the right wing fundamentalist extremists. Ike Eisenhower would give them two
minutes, shake their hand, smile and show them the door.
6. The jillions of dollars of Saudi money financing the Wahabbi strain of
Islam that is funding future Kamikazi pilots/terroroists that could show up
at our door with a suitcase.
7. The 3000 killed when fundamentalist religion drove airplanes into the
World Trade Center.
I attended a lecture recently at the local Holocaust museum. The subject was
on the Psychology of Evil. The speakers were the Director of the local Jung
Center and a former Dean of the Church for ten years of a local very
establishment Episcopal Church. He is now a Jungian analyst. During Q and A,
an older fellow stood up and spoke of his willingness to go to jail
protestng the war planning into Iraq. No preemptive action. I felt like
standing up in the lecture hall of the Holocaust Museum and saying that in
the 1930's there were many in America who saw the present danger in Europe
with Hitler. If pre-emptive action had been taken by those coutries who
becamse allies, "We would not be here tonight because this museum would not
be here."
I will ask both of these gentleman whom I know personally and respect, if
they are anti-semitic, racist, and cult followers of this so called cultist
Steiner, who I claim was 100 years ahead of this time in modern depth
psychology. Even if they aren't, I can ask questions in such a way, that I
can select the information that could gin up a good sensationalist story on
CG Jung for PLANS to give to various reporters in the country.
Become wise,
Brad
) Have you made an appointment yet to visit your niece's class?
) Diana
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:36:49 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
) Brad:
) )The proper strategy it to assist them [Waldorf teachers] in teaching the
) )metaphorical/allegorical knowledge.
)
)
) That would be difficult for Sharon or other Waldorf parents to do, since
) they are often not allowed in the classrooms, or if they are, they are
) requested to be very quiet and knit or peel fruit.
) Diana
)
Brad:
I hear the pain from the bad experiences. Like I said about mother bears,
'You mess with my kids, you are in deep doo doo, if not a barrel of BD 500.'
(Now that is good for just off the cuff) Also, only a parent can understand
the immediacy of the the child on a 24/7 basis. I can only feel the pain of
my niece who has some dyslexia, who went into major self esteen reaction and
fell way behind and bullying from the other kids for not being able to read
in this upper middle class highly competitive local school. According to my
sister, she is thriving in the local Waldorf school. Life has returned to
some normalcy from the family dysfunction over it with husband, wife, the 10
year old girl and a five year old boy who is being a five year old boy. It
has been a bitch. A neighbor with two identical aged kids ostricized them
over it. My sister has had to try to explain to the boy why he cannot play
with his friend. (A tear)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:18:09 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad:
)I hear the pain from the bad experiences.
Well, thank you. But the point was not really to get you to feel our pain.
:) The point is you seem to think that because you can find a lot of
high-falutin' rhetoric about holism and Wisdom Traditions on the websites
of Waldorf schools and proponents of other anthroposophical projects like
biodynamics, a + b = c and Waldorf must be good stuff. It's simple Brad,
what we are saying to you: maintain your skepticism toward these claims *in
real life* - not just what Waldorf looks like from its websites and
brochures and open houses - this is the PR. Every parent here went into
Waldorf dreaming the same dreams you are now dreaming.
)my niece who has some dyslexia, who went into major self esteen reaction
and
)fell way behind and bullying from the other kids for not being able to read
)in this upper middle class highly competitive local school.
I'm sorry to hear she has dyslexia. It is possible her self-esteem will
improve from being in Waldorf where reading is not emphasized. It will be
good if she can get positive feedback for other abilities, like handwork or
recitation. On the other hand this may be a short-term solution, because
Waldorf will not help her with her dyslexia, and she may suffer more in the
long run from not learning to read well. Have they tried to get professional
help for the dyslexia? Is there anyone on the faculty of this Waldorf school
who is qualified to help with dyslexia?
I sympathize with her family's situation, however; it is agonizing to watch
your child being made fun of or ostracized for anything, I fully understand
the urge to yank the kid and run to somewhere where people are saying this
is not a problem, she will fit in because no one cares if she has dyslexia.
Do you get what I'm saying? Am I being too subtle?
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:25:31 -0600
From: Brad Martin (bradmartin sbcglobal.net)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Peter F. said:
) I should say that Prigogine really does think more along the lines of what
) Brad is proposing. One might read some of the criticisms of this that
appear
) in the links at the Website Brad sent.
)
) I have a further question for Brad. You discounted the claims I made about
) my own experience in academia and as a scientist in my response to Nicole.
) Do you think I was I cannot recognise the details of my own experince in
) this regard or do you think I was misrepresenting that experience?
) See you, Peter
My hat is off to you for your work in academia and as a scientist. I hope it
has been fruitful for you with a minimum of the politics and publish or
perish I have read so much about over the years. Thank you for sharing about
your on attempts at cross discipline communications. My aplogies to you for
being on the front lines.
In the history of science there is much discussion on the specialization
that Nicolle mentioned. You probably encountered some of it. The necessity
to succeed in one's specialty over time has created this huge imbalance in
all of applied science.
I recently feasted upon Erich Jantsch, "Self Organizing Universe". He
dedicated his book to Prigogine. As so often happens, when you see the same
name pop up in bibliographies of respected books, you pay attention. Jantsch
and Prigogine are seminal thinkers. They are at the end of the line in
writing on the larger, more complete view. The key insight is understanding
patterns in the field. In this case, patterns in the 'stuff' of the universe
that Hameroff and Penrose discuss. The collapsing of the wave. This, I
think, will be a strong candidate to modify Darwin. Within the pure
randomness is the 'pattern' which is manifested in structures by positive
feedback non-linear dynamics of the system. This is not purposeful but an
innate feature of the universe. I think that is what Einstein was about when
he said, "God does not play dice." Gregory Bateson said, "The pattern which
connects." Jantsch is a book to read numerous times for gaining insight.
My background is BSEE 63, Univ. of Illinois with a career in systems
engineering and management. I have had endless seminars, meetings, post grad
course work, etc. My specialty has been in automatic feedback control
systems. This brought me to Norbert Weiner and cybernetics. Given the
infinitude of systems on the planet, they discovered the similarities
between straight electromechanical systems and the bilogical which included
the human. Thus evolved the field of Second Order Cyberntics which includes
the field of the human. I backed in to depth psychology through this avenue.
My one college course on psychology was a very behaviorist one on rats, eyes
and birds. I was duped, as Sharon says. The knowledge of depth psychology
was hidden from me. From astronomy comes the term occulted, as in part of
the moon is occulted. Occultatio from Latin. (But, we all know what occult
means. Snigger, snigger.)
Dare I breath on this line that the human is a Whole system in constant
process. The child does so at a faster rate. And, it begs the question how
all this will modify the pedagogical systems over time. The Holistic
Educational groups are pioneers of it. The parents of these schools will
just have to contend with the pickets from PLANS and the fundies when their
turf continues getting smushed. Smushed by gnomes I reckon.
Become wise,
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:01:23 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: biodynamics again
Brad yesterday:
)I have no idea what BD 500 is, whether it has efficacy, such as silicacious
)material for soils and agronomy, or is it material flown in from
)Extraterrestrial Airlines, as you are so quick to assume from your own
)incomplete understandingj of the larger issues.
Brad today:
)You are missing my point. I have no interest in BD 500, etc.
And:
)As I just said, I have no idea what BD 500 is, or how effective.
Hi again Brad,
You're right, I for one am very much missing your point. Perhaps you could
make your point clearer by answering a couple of blunt questions. First, why
do you still have no idea what BD 500 is, since several of us have just
explained it to you? Second, if you have no interest in the topic, why do
you seem rather preoccupied by it? And third, since you don't know much
about the topic, how did you reach the conclusion that those of us who are
critical of biodynamics have an incomplete understanding of it?
From your last few posts I get the distinct impression that you have mixed
up biodynamic agriculture with organic agriculture. The two are absolutely
not identical. Biodynamics is, in simple terms, organic agriculture plus
anthroposophy. There are very many organic growers who have nothing to do
with biodynamics, and a number of them are highly critical of Steiner's
ideas, which biodynamics enthusiasts follow to the letter. Some of the most
active participants in the natural farming and sustainable agriculture
movements, themselves committed organic growers and permaculturists, are
well aware of what distinguishes biodynamics from other organic approaches
and have an attitude of bemused tolerance, at best, toward its
anthroposophical foundations. Would you like me to put you in touch with
some of these folks, to help clear up your apparent confusion on the matter?
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:28:19 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Holistism versus Reductionism
)Peter wrote: The funny thing about claims claim of holism and
)system orientation is that they seem to be unproductive compared to
)the reductionist approach. Reductionism is not a mind set. It is a
)method. It is a method for finding a way into a whole or a system
)which is otherwise impregnable. Reductionism does not deny the whole
)or the system. I have the opposite opinion to that expressed by
)Brad. If hear someone talking about holism I call it out, because it
)most cases the claim of holism is fraud pure and simple. I assert
)that nothing has been learnt via so called holistic methods.
)Everything which has been learnt has been learned by a reductionist
)approach followed by some integration of the outcome of that
)reductionist approach.
A strong statement. I couldn't agree more. Holism is a smorgasbord of
fuzzy thinking.
)Nicole: As someone interested in emergent properties, I take issue
)with the assertion that nothing is learned by taking a
)holistic/top-down/big-picture/systemic approach. Much information
)can be lost when one employs only a reductionist/bottom-up strategy.
And I suppose much information can be lost when one employs only a
holistic/top-down/everything-wonderful approach, also.
)The reductionist approach has led to the pigeon-holing of academics
)into fields so specialized that they can't see the wood for the
)trees.
As a person who practices several very narrow specialties, I'd like
to remind you that there wouldn't be specialists if there wasn't work
to be done. I can't judge myself, but most other specialists I know
seem quite capable of taking a whole-system view when they want to.
I read that the earliest human settlements show evidence of
specialization in the population.
)There is now generally no room in academia for interdisciplinarians,
)and it is much the poorer for it.
If that's true, it is unfortunate.
)You could know everything there is to know about a cell, and that
)would tell you little or nothing about a body despite its being made
)up of cells. You could also know everything there is to know about a
)body and still have little or no knowledge of population dynamics.
)At each additional level of organization, there emerge distinct
)properties which one could not predict or determine even from
)complete knowledge at the level below. One must have a synthesis of
)both approaches !
I think you are building a straw man of what you would like to hate.
The scientists I know are certainly concerned with how their
specialized work affects the world in general.
) in order to fully understand something. Reductionism on its own is
)never enough.
Reductionism is a main tool of civilization as we know it, I don't
think it's a problem. Anti-moderns like Steiner preach against
reductionism because scientific method shows some of their fond
beliefs to be false. It's personal. They haven't the strength to face
facts. Anthroposophical medicine, for example.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:30:50 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
)Nicole: All three of my children are presently enroled in
)Waldorf. My older daughter (age 11)is in grade 6 this year. My son
)(age 10 next month) is in grade 4. My youngest (age 7) is in grade 1.
)
)My older daughter's class almost always reads for themselves
)(sometimes aloud if the class is studying something together, and
)sometimes silently), although they have things read to them
)occasionally, such as the Tales of Troy or Lost in the Barrens (both
)last year). They read the Janet Lunn books themselves this year and
)last, along with Tuck Everlasting (which would work for a wide range
)of ages - I loved it myself) this year and Where the Red Fern Grows
)last year. They're now doing regular independent novel studies, but
)they're free to chose any work by certain authors (Rosemary
)Sutcliffe, Gary Paulsen, Farley Mowatt, Natalie Babbitt and several
)others recently added to the list whose names escape me).
)
)My son's class is read to more often, although they are now choosing
)their own books to read (silently, in their own time as well as
)class time) and writing book reports on them. Shiloh was the one my
)son chose to do most recently. Last year the teacher read Farmer Boy
)to them and told them lots of Norse myths (he's a storyteller par
)excellence). The children are now reading Charlotte's Web themselves
)(aloud I think, but I'm not sure).
Sounds like a good school to me. What are the teachers' backgrounds
in 6, 4 and 1? Is there a College?
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:05:56 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters worldnet.att.net)
Subject: Re: What "should" 5th graders read?
))Nicole: All three of my children are presently enroled in
))Waldorf. My older daughter (age 11)is in grade 6 this year. My son
))(age 10 next month) is in grade 4. My youngest (age 7) is in grade 1.
))
))My older daughter's class almost always reads for themselves
Sorry Nicole, I didn't mean to drop this - I'm looking around for reading
lists to compare Waldorf with other schools, and will try to pick it up.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:32:11 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
Brad, you asked,
)Is WC now going to go after all university agronomy departments on
)sustainable agriculture to lobby taking away their government funding? WC
)can expand their business of witch hunting.
-My- intention, after Waldorf is out of public schools, is to expose
Anthroposophical Medicine for the fraud that it is. It does real
harm. BD Agriculture is relatively harmless nonsense. The only social
problem with BD that I know of is a takeover of British organic
standards organizations by BD'ers, to the detriment of non-BD organic
farmers.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:43:55 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Holism versus Reductionism
Brad, you wrote,
)I hear the pain from the bad experiences. Like I said about mother bears,
)'You mess with my kids, you are in deep doo doo, if not a barrel of BD 500.'
)(Now that is good for just off the cuff) Also, only a parent can understand
)the immediacy of the the child on a 24/7 basis. I can only feel the pain of
)my niece who has some dyslexia, who went into major self esteen reaction and
)fell way behind and bullying from the other kids for not being able to read
)in this upper middle class highly competitive local school. According to my
)sister, she is thriving in the local Waldorf school. Life has returned to
)some normalcy from the family dysfunction over it with husband, wife, the 10
)year old girl and a five year old boy who is being a five year old boy. It
)has been a bitch. A neighbor with two identical aged kids ostricized them
)over it. My sister has had to try to explain to the boy why he cannot play
)with his friend. (A tear)
Sounds like a bad scene. I don't understand why the friend's family
ostracized them, can you explain?
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 14:57:27 -0600
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner's nationalism
Hi Charlie,
thanks for your reply. I'm glad you're making the time to respond to this
thread. You wrote:
)Charlie: He believed that since the Mystery of Golgotha it is possible for
)any individual, no matter who or where they are, can overcome nationalistic
)tendencies.
Not quite. It's true that he held open this possibility for his audience
(virtually all of whom were European), but even here Steiner drew some
essential distinctions. As I've pointed out before, he taught that Jews were
especially nationalistic, indeed he equated Jewishness as such with narrow
nationalism. You don't have to take my word on that; it's all over his
books. Take a look, for example, at The Challenge of the Times, especially
chapter 5, whose title is "Specters of the Old Testament in the Nationalism
of the Present". There Steiner describes Jewish culture as "a folk culture,
not an individualized culture of humanity." (p. 166) Because Jews reject
"the Christ Being" and "the Christ wisdom" and "the Christ impulse", they
rely solely on "bonds of blood" etc etc. To Steiner, Jews represented the
negation of individuality. I also recommend reading the first chapter of the
book, where Steiner has a lot to say about "the Mystery of Golgotha" and how
those who are not "permeated by the Christ" are condemned to spiritual
decline; see especially pp. 29-30.
)Maybe some of the things you see as fundamental assumptions I see as
)objective observations.
Yes, that is in large part what troubles me about your interpretation of
Steiner. There is nothing objective about a German declaring Germans to be
the highest stage of cultural-spiritual evolution and so on and so forth.
Why is it hard for you to grasp that this is an obvious instance of
nationalism?
)At this moment in history I would say that the European culture, for good
)or bad, has done most to shape the way people in general live. Are my views
)ethnocentric or are they based on objective facts?
Both. We live in a Eurocentric world. If you don't stop to ask yourself why
that is the case, and how it came about historically, but instead simply
celebrate it as a proper and fitting part of the grand cosmic plan, then
you're certainly not being objective.
))Peter:
) ) Throughout his career, including his anthroposophist phase, Steiner was
)so
) ) deeply immersed in German nationalist thinking that he never even
)realized
) ) that his position was in fact nationalist. He saw his own position as
) ) universalist. This is a classic example of a phenomenon that is at least
)as
) ) widespread as false nationalism and false socialism: namely false
) ) universalism.
)
)Charlie: You read Steiner and judge him to be confused about his position,
)that's your prerogative.
I seem to be having a hard time conveying a simple idea here. My point is
not that Steiner was "confused" in the usual sense. His position was
internally consistent and he defended it at great length in a number of
mutually reinforcing ways. The problem is that this position itself was
anything but universalistic. Insisting, for example, that all believers in
any spiritual tradition must acknowledge the unique truth of one particular
religion, namely christianity, is self-evidently not a universalist stance.
)It's a strange sort of nationalistic thinking that considers Egyptian and
)Greek myths superior to Germanic myths.
No, it isn't. This sort of reasoning was extremely common among German
nationalist ideologues at the time. The line was basically that the whole
world had declined since the glorious days of the Greeks, and that the
Germans were the most pure representatives of this ancient magnificent
tradition etc etc. A very wide range of German nationalists believed in this
sort of thing.
)He explained ethnic differences as he saw them without making judgements
)about the rights and wrongs, superiority or inferiority.
"Superiority" and "inferiority" already are judgements, Charlie. Are you
trying to say that Steiner thought it was just fine and dandy to be racially
inferior, and that superior didn't really mean better??
)He saw a polarity between east and west with Germany in the middle.
Indeed he did. Many Germans perceive this polarity, and it makes perfect
sense to do so, from a German perspective. I have relied on this same
paradigm myself, especially in my political activism during the waning days
of the cold war (in the 1980's I did a lot of solidarity work on behalf of
dissident and oppositional groups in Eastern Europe). The point is that
Steiner's version of this polarity, and of Germany's anomalous position
within it, was decidedly nationalist. In fact this theme, much like the
ancient-Greeks-were-superior theme, was one of the fundamental unifying
factors within the German nationalist right wing. There is quite a bit of
excellent scholarship on this question, much of it by German historians. For
an overview, I recommend Lonnie Johnson's 1996 book Central Europe: Enemies,
Neighbors, Friends. Johnson gives a succinct depiction of the strand of
thinking I'm referring to: "Frequently based upon the idea of German
'colonization' on the continent, this version of Mitteleuropa appealed to a
broad spectrum of radical conservatives, romantic Pan-Germans, and
antimodern agrarianists in Wilhelmine Germany." (p. 170)
)Without our differences humankind cannot progress. A plant cannot grow
)without its parts developing in multiple ways. It would remain a seed if
)this did not happen.
I urge you to read the brief exposition of theories of progressive evolution
that Peter Farrell recommended. What you say above is exactly what the
contemporary European far right preaches in its doctrine of
"ethnopluralism". These are the folks who think that Fascism got a bad rap.
Humankind won't "progress" by making up artificial categories, pretending
they are biological, and investing them with spiritual significance. The
next time you read Steiner expounding the wonders of the Aryan root race,
please take the trouble to find out what the ideological origins of this
notion are.
)Charlie: I'm sure he wasn't the only one who was unhappy about the use of
)colonial troops by the French.
No, of course he wasn't. That is precisely my point: on this issue as on so
many others, Steiner made common cause with extremist German nationalists,
including the direct predecessors to the Nazis. The hysterical reaction to
the presence of African troops on German territory was possibly the number
one propaganda theme for the radical nationalists at the time that Steiner
made his racist remarks.
I'd like to ask you to think about your sentence above, Charlie. Why would
the use of colonial troops by the French make any non-racist unhappy? These
troops were French citizens (and colonial subjects, to be sure, but that was
hardly what upset folks like Steiner), and they were simply stationed in the
Rhineland along with vastly greater numbers of white French and Belgian
troops. What is upsetting about the black troops in particular? Unless one
believed, as Steiner did, that black people do not belong in Europe, what
about this situation would make someone unhappy? It is not simply the
occupation itself that Steiner criticized here; he could easily have done so
without even mentioning the irrelevant fact that a small proportion of the
occupying troops hailed from Africa. But in this passage Steiner doesn't
even criticize the occupation, he simply condemns the participation of black
soldiers. It was, in other words, the mere presence of Africans on German
soil that he objected to.
Lots of people, German and otherwise, opposed the occupation on principle
while simultaneously condemning the racist propaganda spread by people like
Steiner. For an American example, see the series of articles in The Nation
from 1921 on "The Black Troops on the Rhine"; the first one appears in the
March 9, 1921 edition. There are also a number of detailed historical
analyses of this issue; I recommend in particular Keith Nelson's article
"The 'Black Horror on the Rhine': Race as a Factor in Post-World War I
Diplomacy", Journal of Modern History vol 42 no 4.
)Charlie: Steiner didn't denounce all other nationalisms save his own.
You mean he didn't specifically denounce Venezuelan nationalism, for
example? What are you getting at? Have you found some denunciations of
German nationalism by Steiner that you'd like to share with us? I've come
across several myself; each of them turns out, in context, to be a defensive
recuperation of German nationalist convictions. His lectures on the Upper
Silesia agitation are particularly telling in this regard. Steiner's
denunciations of Jewish nationalism, Slavic nationalism, British and French
nationalism, on the other hand, fill volumes of his collected works and are
nearly uniformly vehement. If you could give an example of what you've got
in mind, I'd be interested to see it.
)He saw real communities of people forming to whom national boundaries were
)insignificant. The community of anthroposophists was and is one such
)community. Those at Dornach comprised individuals from several different
)nations; many of these nations on opposite sides of the conflict. He
)continued to lecture to these people throughout the period of the war. All
)were welcome.
Do you have any idea what Steiner actually *said* in those lectures,
Charlie? If I invite you to fly over the water and visit me here in
Wisconsin, and then spend days on end pontificating to you about the wonders
of American ingenuity and virtue while systematically denigrating all things
British, with a special venom reserved for those shifty Scots, would you
conclude that I was free of all nationalist sentiment because I had, after
all, welcomed you to my home?
)Charlie: From your first two sentences it would seem that you equate
)homeland with national boundaries. I don't for one minute believe that you
)do equate the two. But it shows how easy it is to take false meaning from
)someones words if so desired.
I think you've forgotten what you wrote in your original post. You were the
one who brought up "homeland" and argued that the lack thereof was some sort
of distinguishing mark of Jews. I reminded you that this is false. Are you
contesting that claim? It sounds to me like you have an uninformed view of
ethnic and national identity. Terms like "French" and "Spanish", when
applied to groups of people, are at least as fluid and shifting and
historically contested as terms like "Jewish".
)So very many national boundaries have been drawn up, usually by Western
)imperialists, with blatent disregard for ethnic groupings and local
)feeling. I don't think you are the type of person who would condone such
)things.
You're right about me and wrong about Steiner. Steiner's absolute rejection
of Jewish identity and his vitriolic condemnation of Slavic national
aspirations, to choose two obvious examples, are exactly the sort of
imperialist disregard for ethnic groups and local feeling that you just
described. Which raises the unavoidable question: are *you* the sort of
person who would condone such things?
)I consider one aspect of the term "Jewry" that Steiner is talking about is
)one that consists of those Jews who considered themselves as belonging to
)the Promised Land and being a distinct "chosen people". To these Jews
)salvation is a community affair.
If I understand you correctly, you mean Jewish religious nationalists. There
are a few such people in the Jewish diaspora, and somewhat more in Israel,
but even in Israel they are outnumbered by non-religious nationalists, not
to mention the significant number of religious anti-nationalists. Zionism is
a secular ideology, and many Orthodox religious Jews emphatically reject
Zionism even today. This was all the more true in Steiner's day.
But speaking of Steiner's day: You have misunderstood his 1888 remarks about
Jewry that sparked this part of the thread. There was no Zionist movement in
1888. The term wasn't even coined until the following decade. Thus he could
hardly have been criticizing the Zionists at that time (indeed Zionism
remained a distinctly minority viewpoint among German Jews throughout
Steiner's lifetime). Steiner was denouncing Jewry as such, not any
particular religious or political manifestations of Jewishness. He goes to
some lengths to make this clear himself. Why are you ignoring it?
)Ethnic groups are like rivers, they can't be defined in static, physical
)terms. I don't think Steiner failed to grasp this.
Whether or not he grasped this as a general principle, he explicitly
rejected it in the case of Jews. This really isn't that hard to comprehend,
Charlie. Steiner taught that Jews as an ethnic group *are* defined in
static, physical terms. That is quite false, and is moreover a standard
argument in the antisemitic repertoire. Steiner didn't challenge this view,
he promoted it.
)Any culture which dictates what its people must believe, what they can eat,
)how they live their lives, does not allow for the development of individual
)freedom.
That was precisely Steiner's point about Jewry. Will you try to get it
through your head that this portrait of Jewish reality is a caricature, and
an antisemitic one at that?
)He would have had no objection to any person, German or otherwise following
)the Jewish religion or adopting a Jewish way of life, if this was their own
)free decision as an adult.
That's preposterous. Over and over again Steiner stressed that Judaism and
Jewishness are obsolete forms of existence that belong to the past and that
anyone who clings to them is preventing themselves from making spiritual
progress. By the way, you seem to believe that Jews, unlike other peoples,
somehow frown upon people making their own free decisions as adults. Is this
really what you're suggesting?
)Charlie: You can't say that cultural bonds and blood ties are opposites for
)all situations. Would you say that these are opposites in the situation in
)the Scottish Highlands a few centuries ago?
Yes, of course. "Blood ties" are something you get on account of your
biological heritage. Cultural bonds are something you get on account of your
upbringing. In the world of behavioral explanations, these are opposing
factors, though many people are beginning to see that in fact they both play
some role. I have very little idea what you're getting at here.
)Charlie: I was just thinking aloud in suggesting that he was using the term
)"Jewry" as a metaphor. But I can see how it would have been possible for
)him to use it metaphorically.
I still don't see why that would make his comments more palatable.
Antisemites use Jewishness as a metaphor rather frequently. Had Steiner in
fact meant simply that "Jewry" was a convenient shorthand for all those
aspects of modern life that he disliked and warned against, this would
scarcely absolve him of the charge of antisemitism.
)Not having read the book, its condemnation, or Steiner's article, I can't
)really comment on this. I'll just ask one question. Would it be wrong for
)you to criticise me for being stuck in a particularist, anthroposophical
)world view, if that is your sincere opinion? Could someone think that the
)world would be a better place without anthroposophists but still defend
)their right to exist? I certainly hope so!
I don't see what sincerity has to do with it. Lots of false beliefs are
sincerely held. In any case, I have to second what Diana pointed out here:
critizing somebody's beliefs is nothing like rejecting the existence of
entire ethnic groups. You appear to be saying that Steiner defended Jews'
right to exist. If so, you need to re-read those passages one more time. He
rejects this right in the most explicit terms possible. There is absolutely
no ambiguity here. Jewry has no right to existence, plain and simple. Do I
need to remind you that with no Jewry there are no Jews?
)Charlie: If it's looked at objectively it would indeed have been best for
)the tens of millions of Jews who suffered at the hands of the Nazis if they
)had blended in. This is not blaming them in any way for what happened. I'm
)just stating a fact and wondering 'what if?'. Maybe what I can see with
)hindsight, Steiner had the foresight to see.
I am sorry to say that you are very much mistaken about this "fact". Indeed
I am more than a little taken aback by your historical naivete on this
point. The Nazis defined Jews biologically. They killed every Jew they could
get their hands on, regardless of whether these Jews had "blended in" even
generations earlier. The Nazis killed quite a few Catholic clergy whom they
considered Jewish because their ancestors were Jewish. This is the single
most important distinguishing characteristic of Nazi antisemitism, the thing
that differentiates it from all previous forms of antisemitism like
Steiner's. Assimilation didn't help any Jew who fell into Nazi hands. Surely
you must have some dim awareness of this?
)As I said before, I think that it's possible for someone to be opposed to
)the world outlook of others, think the existence of their society is based
)on a mistake, but would still defend their right to exist.
Of course that's possible. Steiner emphatically rejected this option, and
chose instead to *condemn* the Jews' right to exist. Did you think he was
speaking and writing in some sort of secret code about this matter?
)Steiner believed that the coming of the Messiah was the turning point in
)our history. It would have been inconsistent of him to regard those who
)still had messianic expectations as anything but an anachronism.
The Viennese Jews that Steiner attacked in his 1888 article harbored no
messianic expectations. They didn't even believe in god. They were utterly
irreligious. Steiner considered them an anachronism *not* on religious
grounds (recall that he says categorically "we do not mean the forms of the
Jewish religion") but on purely ethnic grounds: he rejects Jewry *as a
people*, not as believers in any specific belief of any kind.
)I think that the brunt of Steiner's arguements were directed against the
)politicians and decision makers of the time. This seems to have been
)justified.
Not the ones we were discussing. The 1888 article is directed against
journalists and literary critics, not politicians and decision makers. The
remarks about black people in Europe mention no politicans or even military
commanders, they are simply about black people, period.
)Was Steiner speaking out against the general presence of black people in
)Europe, or the fact that they were sent there by the French to risk their
)lives over a piece of land that was nothing to do with them? If it was the
)latter then I'm on his side.
Why are you confused about this question? You've read the full quotation and
we've given you the citation for the entire book as well. Is there some
ambiguity here? Could you point it out? Steiner says that black people do
not belong in Europe, with no qualifications whatsoever. He says nothing
about white Frenchmen being sent to western Germany to risk their lives over
a piece of land that has nothing to do with them. He talks only about the
black soldiers, and about them directly, not by reference to their superior
officers, who were presumably white.
But let's pretend that this were not, in fact, perfectly clear from the
published passage. Let's say that he was actually taking French politicians
or commanders to task for sending black troops to the Rhineland and thereby
unnecessarily risking their lives. Can you tell us why you would be "on his
side" in that case? Do you think there is some important difference between
white soldiers and black soldiers, such that only the presence of the latter
raises the concerns you mention? Do you think that the occupation itself was
business as usual, while the involvement of black troops was an
irregularity? Or do you mean that the participation of black troops made the
occupation worse? In what possible sense could you be "on Steiner's side"
regarding this question?
Yours for wisdom,
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:09:15 +0000
From: Klaudia (klaudiaypma1960 hotmail.com)
Subject: More about preparation 500
mysplum wrote:
)
) Sharon: You post a mention of standard BD practice--preparation
) 500--pure
) magic. Stirring manure in a specific way for a specific time, at a
) specific
) time to create a vortex. Then stuffing horns (in which Moon Beings live)
) with the "preparation" plus nettles and who knows what else. Then
) burying
) the horns to "suck down" other cosmic beings for better fertility. After
) winter, you dig up the horns.
)
Klaudia:
Otherwise OK, but sequence is different.
"Cow Horn Manure Prep or 500:The main preparation used is based on cow
dung. The numbering was purely for the sake of convenience.
To make preparation 500, fresh cow dung is stuffed into cow horns,
buried in the ground in autumn and dug up in spring. At this time, the
cow dung, which has changed completely into a substance like sweet
smelling colloidal soil, is removed form the horn. It is then stirred
into warm water and sprayed over the ground at the rate of about one
ounce per acre using about three gallons of water per ounce of
preparation. This is done once in autumn and again in spring each year
while the soil is moist.
The bacteria in the cow dung undergo a transformation while in the soil
over winter; changing from faecal bacteria to humus forming bacteria,
the same as found in earthworm castings. As the cow horn gets thinner
after each use, we presume that there is a catalytic reaction of some
kind going on between the substance of the horn and cow dung with a
subsequent bacterial change occurring. Naturally enough the earth makes
a great incubator.
Many people stumble over the fact that such a small amount is used. To
the person who usually puts on a tonne of fertilizer to the acre, an
ounce per acre can seem pretty ludicrous. However, if you consider that,
given the right conditions, one small phial of salmonella bacteria could
kill off the whole population of Auckland, or look at the even more
minute Aids virus proliferating like crazy, you're on the right track.
The difference is these bacteria are beneficial.
Cow horn silica prep or 501: The second preparation is actually a
mineral product and is not specifically bacterial in action but is more
concerned with the action of light. It is made form silica quartz
crystals which are ground finely until they resemble white flour. This
meal is stuffed into a cow horn and buried in spring to spend summer in
the ground before being dug up in the autumn. Only about one gram is
stirred into about three gallons of water and sprayed in a fine mist
over young foliage.
As the silica is absorbed by the plant and actually built into its
skeletal system, it is important to apply it in the early stages of the
plant's growth. In this way photosynthesis is aided and the plant builds
a strong cell wall which helps it to resist fungus diseases. It may be
applied once a month during the growing season or even every two weeks
on plants that are especially susceptible to attack."
Copied from here:
http://www.shellybeachfarms.org/articles/myth.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:06:34 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Evidence on biodynamics BD in India
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)Dan wrote: The only social problem wit