return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1017 --------------
001 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: we don't say that in public
002 - Kevin Houston (khouston o - Re: we don't say that in public
003 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: we don't say that in public
004 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: we don't say that in public
005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: we don't say that in public
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1017.1 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 10:41:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com) (199812311237.EAA12278 lists1.best.com)
I for one would like to thank Sune for the effort put forth in this post to
dispel the ignorant (in the literal sense) aspersions about Steiner's ideas with
regard to Aryanism (in the modern sense) cast mostly by Dan's posts, but
Herman's as well, and bringing some much needed illumination to the
'discussion'.
Dan, if Sune is correct about the true meaning of Aryan in the context of the
early 1900's, then perhaps your goal to have the offending (to you, but not the
Swedish Encyclopedia of 1924!(g)) books removed from the SFO school might have
been carried out with the best intentions (though had it been done, you might
have screamed 'conspiracy to deceive' the next day) but with incomplete
information? The passage about blondness might be used as a counter example,
but it is distinct in my mind from the general thread on Aryanism (though it is
usually brought up in this context).
Seems to me the meaning of Aryan in Steiner's paradigm is _significantly_
different from thine own (or the Nazis, while your on the subject). I should
add, however, my understanding of Teutonic is much closer to what I believe to
be the modern (and Dan's) conception of Aryan. Bringing up Aryan and then
substituting Teutonic might render the desired results(Steiner=Bad), but is
nothing more than semantic slight of hand.
Time to party like it's 1999!
e
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Steve Premo wrote:
)
) ) On 30 Dec 98, at 3:36, Sune Nordwall wrote:
) ...
) ) ) Trying to understand and discuss history with Dan feels like discussing
) ) ) the birds of the Class Aves, Order Falconiformes, or that part in plants
) ) ) that grows into the soil, or the geography of Sweden mentioning
) ) ) Goethaland, the name for the southern part of Sweden, or anything, with
) ) ) someone who everytime they were mentioned said "Zoundz pretti Naazi to
) ) ) me". The same type of purely reflexive birdlogic I assume also makes
) ) ) Penguin Books, having published the book mentioned a (at least
) ) ) microcrypto) nazi publishing company.
) )
) ) Yeah, right.
) )
) ) Frankly, I have no trouble discussing things with Dan. I often
) ) disagree with him, but I feel like we speak the same language.
) ) With many of the anthroposophists, though, I feel like we're
) ) speaking different languages.
)
) What I meant was:
)
) Dan quoted a post from the Anthroposophia list with a number of
) questions (my numbering):
)
) "A sincere seeker on the Anthroposophia list asked,
) )(1) How come our epoch does not have a name? We have the Ancient
) )Indian, the Ancient Persian, the Egypto-Chaldean and the
) )Graeco-Roman. Then we have "the Fifth Post-Atlantean" epoch.
) )(2) Who gave the others their name? (3) Did Steiner come up with
) )those? Maybe we ought to have a name-that-epoch contest.
) )(4) What might the prize be?"
)
) and then says:
) "There were several replies, but no one would tell her. She was referred
) to various Steiner texts. Nobody wanted to say "Aryan" out loud."
)
) Reading the questions, one sees that "Aryan" not is an answer neither to
) _any_ of the four explicit questions asked, nor the implicit question of
) a "name" for the present cultural epoch. Yet Dan writes as if it should
) be, an untruth given with the sole purpose of keeping his obsession with
) "race" boiling on this list, an obsession that goes way and far beyond
) the weight it is or ever has been given in different anthroposophical
) contexts.
)
) As I already tried to describe earlier, when the last round on "race"
) took place on this list, "Aryan" was a term generally used in the
) beginning of the century to describe _all_ the peoples belonging to the
) Indo-European language group, out of which the present world culture has
) mainly developed, not only what Dan repeatedly tries to limit it to;
) mainly and in principle probably the "Germanic" peoples.
)
) I wrote (11 Oct 1998):
) "According to a Swedish Encyclopedia from 1924 (Nordisk Familjebok) (in
) translation) describing the mainstream view and use of the word Aryan at
) about the time when anthroposophy first took on form:
)
) "Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is the name of those
) inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language belonging to the
) group of Indo-European languages. The word Aryan was earlier and is
) partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
) peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
) Persians. In this broad sense the word is used by for example Viktor
) Rydberg (famous Swedish author at that time, my comment S.N.) ... The
) word Aryan is derived from the Sanskrit word arya meaning noble, of
) noble origin. With this is also connected the word Iran (Eran)."
)
) As can be seen from this, "Aryan" was a common term used at the time for
) what also anthroposophy referred to as the seed to _whole_ present
) historical development from the last Ice age with its roots in the
) Aryan/Indo-European culture, with the Vedic culture, the Persian/Iranian
) culture, the Egyptian/Caldean/Babylonean culture and the Greek/Roman
) culture, and the present West-European dominated, a potential future
) "Slavic" dominated culture and an even more future potential "American"
) dominated culture as more global cultures."
)
) For about 7-8 years from 1902-1909-10 Steiner worked within and turned
) himself mainly to the peoples of the Theosophical tradition, using their
) language. Within that tradition they used the term "Aryan root race" to
) summarize _all_ the mentioned past, present and possibly future
) cultures, not only the present "cultural epoch".
)
) But if "Aryan" not is answer to the implicit question posed in the
) original post of this thread, what should one call the present "cultural
) epoch"?
) In an answer to the question I pointed to something I have written
) on the subject, as Steiner in all that I have read of his lectures and
) books from his "anthroposophical" time from about 1910-1925 never
) mentions a "name" for the present "cultural epoch", born with the 15th
) century, the Renaissance and later the reformation and spreading out
) around the globe out of the cultures of Western Europe.
) But what is "Europe"?
) In the last special issue of Time on Visions of Europe (winter
) 1998/1999), that I just bought and have not read quite yet, a Toni Judt
) has written an article; Europe: Still in search of a Definition, in
) which he describes how little agreement there still exists as to what it
) actually means, even though the idea of Europe has been around for more
) than a thousand years.
) The name as such is taken from Europa, one of the daughters of one
) of the heroes of the Trojan war and a queen of Phoenicia, and who
) according to a Greek myth was seduced by Zeus in the shape of a bull,
) later giving birth to Minos, who came to give the name to the Minoan
) culture of Crete.
) Because of the strongly Anglosachson dominance in this developing
) present world culture, some people I think would and do call it an
) "Anglosachson cultural epoch".
) If one follows the peoples out of which this "Anglosachson" world
) culture has been and is developing back in time, one at one stage comes
) to a people called "the Teutons", for a long time living in south
) western Scandinavia and northern Germany, that seems to be an important
) early seed for these later peoples and cultures.
) _One_ of the many possible answers to the central question in the
) original post, except "an Anglosachson cultural epoch" could therefore
) maybe be also be "a Teutonic cultural epoch", something that also
) Steiner at some time mentioned, but that I never else have heard anyone
) use in anthroposophical circles.
)
) After trying to develop this type of reasoning you write as answer:
) ) From Sune's web site, I take it that the current epoch is called the
) ) "Teutonic" epoch. Why not just say that? Could it be because the
) ) word "Teutonic" has become associated with Nazis?
) ) Sounds like Dan made a good point.
)
) To still be met with that type of simple reflexive word-association as a
) basis for a understanding and discussing different aspects of history
) after really having put an effort into understanding and describing it
) in a hopefully reasonably clear way ...
) well ... at times it makes me somewhat tired.
)
) ThatĄs what I meant.
)
) But Dan has his task and I still wish him a happy long holiday, even
) though I not may be able to pay for it!
)
) Sune Nordwall
) Stockholm, Sweden
)
) http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
) - a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
) EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1017.2 ---------------
From: Kevin Houston (khouston onel.com)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 12:52:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199812311237.EAA12278 lists1.best.com)
Comments embedded.
At 06:18 AM 12/31/98 , Sune wrote:
)
)What I meant was:
)
)Dan quoted a post from the Anthroposophia list with a number of
)questions (my numbering):
)
)"A sincere seeker on the Anthroposophia list asked,
))(1) How come our epoch does not have a name? We have the Ancient
))Indian, the Ancient Persian, the Egypto-Chaldean and the
))Graeco-Roman. Then we have "the Fifth Post-Atlantean" epoch.
))(2) Who gave the others their name? (3) Did Steiner come up with
))those? Maybe we ought to have a name-that-epoch contest.
))(4) What might the prize be?"
)
)and then [Dan] says:
)"There were several replies, but no one would tell her. She was referred
)to various Steiner texts. Nobody wanted to say "Aryan" out loud."
)
)Reading the questions, one sees that "Aryan" not is an answer neither to
)_any_ of the four explicit questions asked, nor the implicit question of
)a "name" for the present cultural epoch. Yet Dan writes as if it should
)be, an untruth given with the sole purpose of keeping his obsession with
)"race" boiling on this list, an obsession that goes way and far beyond
)the weight it is or ever has been given in different anthroposophical
)contexts.
I think that Dan has shown that the word "Aryan" is an answer to the
question (implied by the writer, although not explicitly stated), of what
the name of the Fifth Post-Atlantean (5th PA) period. Dan seems to have
found numerous quotes attributable to Steiner that used the word "Aryan".
I think that your definition of the word is more in line with what was
probably meant by Steiner at the time, that is, I find it plausible that he
did not mean Nazi Germanic, but Aryan in the broader sense.
)As I already tried to describe earlier, when the last round on "race"
)took place on this list, "Aryan" was a term generally used in the
)beginning of the century to describe _all_ the peoples belonging to the
)Indo-European language group, out of which the present world culture has
)mainly developed, not only what Dan repeatedly tries to limit it to;
)mainly and in principle probably the "Germanic" peoples.
)
)I [Sune] wrote (11 Oct 1998):
)"According to a Swedish Encyclopedia from 1924 (Nordisk Familjebok) (in
)translation) describing the mainstream view and use of the word Aryan at
)about the time when anthroposophy first took on form:
)
)"Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is the name of those
)inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language belonging to the
)group of Indo-European languages. The word Aryan was earlier and is
)partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
)peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
)Persians. In this broad sense the word is used by for example Viktor
)Rydberg (famous Swedish author at that time, my comment S.N.) ... The
)word Aryan is derived from the Sanskrit word arya meaning noble, of
)noble origin. With this is also connected the word Iran (Eran)."
)
)As can be seen from this, "Aryan" was a common term used at the time for
)what also anthroposophy referred to as the seed to _whole_ present
)historical development from the last Ice age with its roots in the
)Aryan/Indo-European culture, with the Vedic culture, the Persian/Iranian
)culture, the Egyptian/Caldean/Babylonean culture and the Greek/Roman
)culture, and the present West-European dominated, a potential future
)"Slavic" dominated culture and an even more future potential "American"
)dominated culture as more global cultures."
However, I still think it is an interesting point that no one wanted to
*say* the word "Aryan". This seems to indicate (to me anyhow) that it is a
sensitive subject amongst the AS supporters. Just as a child who is guilty
of breaking a lamp will not look at the lamp or otherwise acknowledge it's
broken state, I think that many in AS belive *in their own minds* that
there is a racist sub-text, are bothered by it, and therefore avoid using
any words that might be connected with racism, such as "Aryan" or "Teutonic".
I do think there is some racism in this religion / philosophy (AS), just as
there is in many religions / philosophies. The Jews consider themselves
the "chosen" people of G-d (with the un-stated implication that all the
rest are despised of G-d), many fundamentalist Christian religions have a
racist sub-text, the Mormons link skin color to sin, as do many other
religions. Hindus have a strict caste to their religion, many aspects of
which are racist. In short, AS is not the first religion / philosophy to
have racist leanings.
But many AS supporters won't acknowledge this sub-text, and defend, to the
death, *anything* that Steiner wrote. I think this is what Dan and others
are picking up on.
Kevin Houston (just my $0.02)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1017.3 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 18:42:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1296974719==_ma============"
References: (199812311237.EAA12278 lists1.best.com)
(199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199812311855.KAA24252 lists1.best.com)
--============_-1296974719==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Kevin Houston wrote earlier today:
)However, I still think it is an interesting point that no one wanted to
)*say* the word "Aryan". This seems to indicate (to me anyhow) that it is a
)sensitive subject amongst the AS supporters. Just as a child who is guilty
)of breaking a lamp will not look at the lamp or otherwise acknowledge it's
)broken state, I think that many in AS belive *in their own minds* that
)there is a racist sub-text, are bothered by it, and therefore avoid using
)any words that might be connected with racism, such as "Aryan" or "Teutonic".
This is certainly a valid possibility. I would also venture to guess that
any anthroposophist who spends time on the internet quickly becomes aware
of how charged these words have become, especially in the context of
mailing lists. One does not necessarily have to recognize a racist
subtext, but one might wish to distance oneself from potential controversy
in one's choice of labels. I think it's probably more accurate to describe
anthroposophists as "gun-shy" [jittery and anxious, if you're unfamiliar
with american idiom] in this realm.
"Nigger" was a generally accepted term in this country one-hundred years
ago. If "colored" was in common usage in the United States fifty years
ago, I would nonetheless find another term to use today, even if discussing
literature of that period. Since that time, "colored" has been supplanted
by "negro" and then by "black", and perhaps now "african american" is
ascendent.
The use of "colored" and "negro" today in this country would generally be
considered offensive and racist. However, when Thurgood Marshall argued
Brown v. Board of Education before the Supreme Court in 1953, he used both
terms freely. Do you rewrite Brown because of dated language which might
be offensive in another context? Do you imply that civil rights attorneys
are racist because they rely on Brown in their work, or fail to repudiate
its archaic language?
Most would recognize it as an artifact of the time, and focus on more
substantive issues.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1296974719==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
Kevin Houston wrote earlier today:
)However, I still think it is an interesting point that no one wanted
to
)*say* the word "Aryan". This seems to indicate (to me anyhow) that it
is a
)sensitive subject amongst the AS supporters. Just as a child who is
guilty
)of breaking a lamp will not look at the lamp or otherwise acknowledge
it's
)broken state, I think that many in AS belive *in their own minds*
that
)there is a racist sub-text, are bothered by it, and therefore avoid
using
)any words that might be connected with racism, such as "Aryan" or
"Teutonic".
This is certainly a valid possibility. I would also venture to guess
that any anthroposophist who spends time on the internet quickly
becomes aware of how charged these words have become, especially in the
context of mailing lists. One does not necessarily have to recognize a
racist subtext, but one might wish to distance oneself from potential
controversy in one's choice of labels. I think it's probably more
accurate to describe anthroposophists as "gun-shy" [jittery and
anxious, if you're unfamiliar with american idiom] in this realm.
"Nigger" was a generally accepted term in this country one-hundred
years ago. If "colored" was in common usage in the United States fifty
years ago, I would nonetheless find another term to use today, even if
discussing literature of that period. Since that time, "colored" has
been supplanted by "negro" and then by "black", and perhaps now
"african american" is ascendent.
The use of "colored" and "negro" today in this country would generally
be considered offensive and racist. However, when Thurgood Marshall
argued (italic)Brown v. Board of Education (/italic)before the Supreme
Court in 1953, he used both terms freely. Do you rewrite
(italic)Brown(/italic) because of dated language which might be
offensive in another context? Do you imply that civil rights attorneys
are racist because they rely on (italic)Brown (/italic)in their work,
or fail to repudiate its archaic language?
Most would recognize it as an artifact of the time, and focus on more
substantive issues.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1296974719==_ma============--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1017.4 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 12:03:25 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Without requoting what is mostly months old, I wrote the 2nd post referred to
by Sune, but not directly in answer to the question Sune (or Dan) quotes. My
posts are not kept for long enough to establish whether it was another
(similar) post or a different part of the one cited. If Steiner had called it
Aryan I would have said that. I dont honestly remember. If someone with a
better referencing system wants to quote who said Aryan and where it would be
helpful!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1017.5 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 12:03:27 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 30.12.98 07:41:45 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I'm suspecting that translators stopped using "Aryan" and invented the
euphemism "Fifth Post-Atlantean" after the war. I'll stand corrected if
someone comes up with it in a pre-war translation.
))
Thanks, Dan, for supplying the reference. How do you know when your reference
was translated? I am confused though. You come up with Aryan. Are you seeking
a pre-war Fifth Post-Atlantean translation? Steiner uses post-atlantean in
German in many references. Am I being very thick - it is Jan 1st - or have you
misphrased your question Dan?
Bruce
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1017 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1018 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Question
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: we don't say that in public
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: we don't say that in public
004 - SINGERCARP aol.com - Slipper Question
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: brev
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1018.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Question
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 23:30:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi all,
When my kids were in Waldorf, they were required to wear slippers or
Eurythmy shoes inside the classroom. Can anyone tell me if there is an
Anthroposophical reason for this practice?
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1018.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 17:10:53 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com) (199812311855.KAA24252 lists1.best.com)
Kevin Houston writes:
...
) I think that Dan has shown that the word "Aryan" is an answer to the
) question (implied by the writer, although not explicitly stated), of what
) the name of the Fifth Post-Atlantean (5th PA) period. Dan seems to have
) found numerous quotes attributable to Steiner that used the word "Aryan".
I notice that not even I ((g)!) after two long answers seem to have been
able to be clear enough in showing:
Steiner does _not_ in the quotes by Dan, and I have also never elsewhere
seen him do, use the term "Aryan" as a/the name for _the fifth_;
present, "post-Atlantean" cultural epoch (or 5th PACE in the spirit of
Kevin), that according to anthroposophy is developing from the beginning
of the 15th century, and that will last to about 3 600 A.C. if it
continues to follow the same pattern of having the length of "Platonic
world months" (about 2160 years) as at least the two preceding cultural
epochs seemed to have.
What Steiner used "Aryan" to term, when he addressed himself to his
Theosophical audience between about 1902 and 1910, was what he
considered (I think with some right) to be a specific _stream_ of
cultures. Using the convention and habit used for peoples (even used
today by some scattered remnants of European tribes living in Minnesota
and, they say, even California!) of describing them out of the place
where they were born, and used also by the Theosophical tradition, he
called this _stream_ of cultures, that the Theosophical tradition for
some reason called "Root race", "Aryan", out of its _birth_ place.
The cultures he, and theosophy, point to as part of the common
pattern of this _stream_ are a mythological Ur-Indian, an also
mythological Ur-Persian, a more historical Egyptian/Chaldean/Babylonean,
a Greek-Roman, the present, a future "Slavic" and an even more future
"American" cultural epoch.
The reason for using the term "Aryan" to describe this _stream_ of
cultures, was that it, according to him, took its start in the
"Ur-Indian" culture, according to anthroposophy developing between about
7 000 to 5 000 B.C. the mythical culture described by the much later
Vedic scriptures; especially Rig-Veda, Sama-Veda, Yajur-Veda and
Atharva-Veda, dated in their written form to about 1700 - 1500 B.C. and
"all showing evidence of the adaption of the native Indian tribal
beliefs ny the Aryan settlers" (coming from the "north" somewhere, the
land of the also mythical Shangri-La, my comment) (Shapiro M S,
Hendricks R A: A Dictionary of Mythologies. Paladin 1984, p 207).
Meeting a number of Norwegians (peoples born in Norway) on New Years
Eve, a number of which now since long live in Sweden, far from their
place of birth, some also having lived in other places around the world,
but still being called and calling themselves "Norwegians" for some
strange reason, I looked into a Norwegian Encyclopedia from 1959
(Gyldendals Konversationslexicon) for its description of Aryans.
It said:
"Aryans: Common name for those peoples who speak the Indian and
Iranian languages. It was originally a name of honor for those peoples
belonging the Indian cultural world. At present it is used as a term for
all those who speak Indo-European languages, which is somewhat
misleading. It is completely wrong to do, as the Nazi race theorists
did, to let Aryan stand as something opposite to Jews, which is a
religious category, or to mix Aryans with racial terms like for example
the Nordic race. This mixing of linguistic, religious and antropological
criterions, made the Germans try to exterminate the single people that
with any scientific right could call themselves Aryan in Europe, namely
the Gypsies, who speak an Indian language."
The problem is not "Aryan", but the strange theosophical terms
"Root race", to describe the whole stream of "post-Atlantean" _cultures_
and sub-races" to describe the _single_ sequential cultures that make up
the stream, terms that also I donĄt understand yet as to their origin,
used by the Theosophical but not the Anthroposophical tradition.
Why not ask the Thesosophists for a more detailed explanation of
their origin and meaning?
Dan writes:
"In denial, Sune? Call it "Teutonic" or "European" if you will" as an
answer to the question of a "name" for the present 5th PACE, and then
insists, continuing to mix the concepts, that "According to Steiner, we
are at present" living not only in the "Aryan root-race" but _also_ the
"Aryan sub-race of the Aryan root-race." quoting passages from two
lectures by Steiner in 1905, held to Theosophists.
He writes "Regarding the root-race:"
"We are within the great Root Race of humanity, which has peopled the
earth, since the land on which we now live rose up out of the
inundations of the ocean. Ever since the Atlantean Race began slowly to
disappear, the great Aryan ("Root"-, my comment) Race has been the
dominant one on earth. If we contemplate ourselves, we here in Europe
are thus the fifth Sub-Race of the great Aryan Root Race. The first
Sub-Race lived in the distant past in Ancient India. And the present-day
Indians are descendants of that first sub-Race, whose spiritual life is
still extant in the ancient Indian Vedas. The Vedas are indeed only
echoes of the ancient culture of the Rishis. At that time there was of
course no writing yet - there was only tradition. Then came the second,
third and fourth Sub-Races. The fourth Sub-Race adopted Christianity.
Then, halfway through the Middle Ages, we see that the fifth Sub-Race
formed itself, to which we and the neighboring nations belong."
[Steiner, Rudolf. The Temple Legend: Freemasonry and Related Occult
Movements: Twenty Lectures given in Berlin between 23rd May 1904 and the
2nd January 1906. (1904-1906) Trans. John M. Wood, Edited E.M. Lloyd.
London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1985.
[p. 220]
Dan then says:
"Note he says "We and the neighboring nations", not "people on earth
today."
Yes; the Theosophical terminology (fifth Sub-Race), in Anthroposophy
called the 5th PACE, points to the West-European nations and Germany,
of which the greater part belongs to Western Europe, as the nations (now
EU) out which the present, presently rapidly evermore globalized world
culture has developed, through the imperialistic formation through
centuries of the Anglosachson British Empire over Canada, USA and
Australia, and Central and Southern America with their Spanish and
Portugese Latin cultures and presently with especially "In Bratislava as
in Bangkok .. a sort of adapted para-American culture superficially
grafted onto local life" (Time, Winter 1998/99 p 64) evermore as a
thinner or thicker layer on top of it all.
He then writes, again mixing the concepts:
"Regarding the sub-race:"
quoting something that has nothing to do with "sub-races", but with the
relation between "Globes" (planetary stages) and the "Earth Epochs",
that the Theosophical tradition calls "Root-races" or "Great Epochs".
"Thus our earth passed once more through earlier material conditions
before arriving at its present physical density. Before our present
condition, it was astral. We denote the astral Globe as a kind of Cosmos
of Wisdom. Each Cosmos or Globe is again divided into seven epochs. Thus
we have seven Race-cycles [or Great Epochs] in our present Globe: The
Polarian, the Hyperborean, the Lemurian, the Atlantean and now the Aryan
Race [or Epoch] in which we live. The sixth and seventh Races are still
to come. After that the earth will return to the astral condition."
{brackets by
translator}
[ibid. p. 184]
(phew!)
Kevin:
) However, I still think it is an interesting point that no one wanted to
) *say* the word "Aryan".
Again, if "Aryan" is not an answer to a question, why should one say
"Aryan"?
If someone asks me:
What is two plus two?
I donĄt say "number".
I say "four".
If someone asks me:
What is the "name" in some sense for the present "5th post-Atlantean
cultural epoch"?
I donĄt say "Aryan".
I say, as main stream anthroposophy does not give a name to it, partly
out of the same reason that it still after more than 1200 years of
European cultural development, seems to impossible to "define" "Europe"
it in a more strict sense:
Looking at the world today, even after almost 600 years of the epoch in
a possibly more principal sense, I would maybe call it a generally
"West-European cultural epoch", with one central root seemingly in the
Teutonic culture and with the Anglosachson element dominating at
present.
If anyone still wants to read a racist sub-text into this description
because it somewhere contains the words "Teutonic" to describe one level
of it or "Aryan" to describe another level ot it ... If The Penguin
Atlas of Ancient history, Penguin Books 1983 uses the word "Teutonic" in
the description of the history of Europe and all more extensive
Encyclopedias I have seen and a Paladin Dictionary of mythologies use
and describe the meaning and proper uses of "Aryan", I somehow feel free
to use them too, when asked about the meaning of them, even though I
feel no need personally to to use them to advocate _anything_.
A sadly crazy maniac called Hitler used them as do a number of his
sad present day followers, giving their own meaning to them.
What can I now, born 5 years after his death in another country do
about that?
Dan, more than ever anthroposophy or I hang onto him, giving me
problems and taking my time and offending people of Jewish origin with
an interest in anthroposophy and driving people of my generation in
Germany more or less crazy poking in their still greatly unhealed
historical wounds and feeling of guilt on behalf of the former genertion
and then asking them why they sometimes react strangly to his
allegations.
Yet, after all this, remembering the long time it took me too, to get a
feeling that I at least partially could grasp the contours of this great
elephant called "anthroposophy", I must say I understand Dan. It _does_
take some effort, thinking, pencil and paper to sort out the concepts.
I also somehow have a feeling that the evasive and lacking answers
to the original post, quoted by Dan, more have their root in the same
difficulty that Dan, even after 10 years of studying anthroposophy as a
"hobby" shows in understanding and describing anthroposophy, than an
actual deeper knowledge of "tabu-terms" and their meaning that they
donĄt want to name or describe.
All the best!
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1018.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 20:22:22 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com)
(199812311855.KAA24252 lists1.best.com)
(199901021615.IAA00192 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901021615.IAA00192 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
) I looked into a Norwegian Encyclopedia from 1959
)(Gyldendals Konversationslexicon) for its description of Aryans.
) It said:
) "Aryans: Common name for those peoples who speak the Indian and
)Iranian languages. It was originally a name of honor for those peoples
)belonging the Indian cultural world. At present it is used as a term for
)all those who speak Indo-European languages, which is somewhat
)misleading. It is completely wrong to do, as the Nazi race theorists
)did, to let Aryan stand as something opposite to Jews, which is a
)religious category, or to mix Aryans with racial terms like for example
)the Nordic race. This mixing of linguistic, religious and antropological
)criterions, made the Germans try to exterminate the single people that
)with any scientific right could call themselves Aryan in Europe, namely
)the Gypsies, who speak an Indian language."
Sune,
Isn't it interesting that those who would try to stain Steiner with Nazi
tendencies have a preference for the Nazis redefinitions of certain
words in preference to the original meanings (as used by Steiner)?
Funny old world!
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1018.4 ---------------
From: SINGERCARP aol.com
Subject: Slipper Question
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 19:01:11 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 02.01.1999 8:36:00 Uhr, schreiben Sie:
)Hi all,
)When my kids were in Waldorf, they were required to wear slippers or
)Eurythmy shoes inside the classroom. Can anyone tell me if there is an
)Anthroposophical reason for this practice?
)Deby
A very interesting question indeed! How did you get to that question?
What do you mean by )Anthroposophical( in context of slippers in the
classroom ???
I guarantee a sophisticated answer by an expert if you tell me that.
TSCarpenter, Switzerland/Germany
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1018.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: brev
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 05:34:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199812291615.IAA17841 lists1.best.com) (199812311121.DAA26332 lists1.best.com)
By mistake, Per Hallstr–m wrote me a letter via this list:
) Hej Sune h”r kommer ett utkast till brev.
...
) Med v”nliga h”lsningar
I hope you all ignore it, erase it and forget it.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1018 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1019 --------------
001 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Question
002 - RebFree aol.com - Re: Re: Question
003 - Kathy (spike netshel.net) - Testing?
004 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Testing?
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Testing?
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Testing? (Clarification)
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: we don't say that in public
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: we don't say that in public
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.1 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Question
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 06:31:30 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 02.01.99 08:36:00 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
(( Hi all,
When my kids were in Waldorf, they were required to wear slippers or
Eurythmy shoes inside the classroom. Can anyone tell me if there is an
Anthroposophical reason for this practice?
Deby
))
Hi Deby!
It is normao practice to wear indoor shoes in the classroom, especially when
the playground is covered with thick mud. This usually goes to about class 8,
thereafter the "kids" (arent they young goats) have enough skill/sense to
clean their shoes before entering the building!
In Forest Row, the home of Michael Hall (largest school in the UK) it is/was
rumoured that ALL waldorf pupils ALWAYS wore wellingtons (rubber boots) to and
from school. Naturally this is rubbish, but SOMEONE started the rumour - on
this list? (wwg)
Happy New Year to all my fans!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.2 ---------------
From: RebFree aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Question
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 07:43:06 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/3/99 11:37:59 AM, you wrote:
((It is normao practice to wear indoor shoes in the classroom, especially when
the playground is covered with thick mud. This usually goes to about class 8,
thereafter the "kids" (arent they young goats) have enough skill/sense to
clean their shoes before entering the building!
))
As an early childhood teacher, I will add that while cleanliness is next to
godliness, that is not the sole (pun intended) reason for wearing "indoor
shoes" or slippers.
We want to emphasize the transition from indoor to outdoor, and one way to do
it is to wear different shoes. We behave differently inside than we do
outside (on a good day!). We walk softer inside, and we play less roughly.
The time it takes to take off the outdoor shoes and put on the indoor shoes
gives a little "breathing room" for the transition to happen.
Rebecah
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.3 ---------------
From: Kathy (spike netshel.net)
Subject: Testing?
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 11:48:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901030810.AAA08077 lists1.best.com)
List Members,
I have had on my mind for some time to pose a few questions regarding
the attitude toward *testing* espoused by many Waldorf teachers,
parents, Anthropsopohists, etc. In general, I would sum up my
interpretation that the Waldorf method rejects testing, particularly the
bane of standardized testing used in the US and Europe to ascertain the
acquisition of subject specific skills per a particular grade level. I
have read a number of statements to the effect that Waldorf schools are
not *test driven* (inferring or alleging that public schools, in their
entirety, are), children learn more effectively and truly/deeply without
the *test* as a part of the educational experience, etc. Ezra recently
mentioned that he received a lower grade in a college calculus class (or
something similar) because he had not acquired the ability to test -
this the result of the non-test environment of his Waldorf education.
I am curious regarding what is so wrong with testing children on
specific skills or subject area knowledge. How is this injurious to the
child or to the curriculum? Certainly, I would not like my young child
to attend a school or class that was driven simply to produce the
ability to fill in the correct bubbles. However, in contrast to this
dreary picture, my two youngest children attend/attended public schools
that are rich in music, art, drama, etc., and the district has
standardized test scores that fall into the top 90th percentile in the
US. I would be deeply concerned if my children found themselves unable
to demonstrate their various abilities effectively on a standardized or
subject/class test (re: Ezra) because their schools had not prepared
them to be able to demonstrate their acquired skills except through
anecdotal ("I/She can do it . . ") methods.
I also believe that Waldorf schools could go a long way toward
validating their educational methods if their graduates were able to
demonstrate through testing and, yes, through writing clearly and
effectively, using the accepted grammatical *rules* of their written
language.
On a personal level, as an educator, I require that my students
demonstrate mastery in order to receive a passing grade in any course I
teach. This means that they must pass a testing process that includes
answering questions correctly *and* demonstrating ability. If they
cannot demonstrate mastery (80% or higher), then they do not pass my
class. They have the option to complete some corrective assignments and
meet with me for further teaching before they test again. I give my
students a minimum of 3 times to achieve and demonstrate mastery. I
teach high school students and I do not believe I am doing the student
or future teachers/employers any favor if I pass them without clearly
demonstrated mastery in any course I may teach.
So, my questions are these: Why do Waldorf schools reject subject/class
testing? Why do Waldorf schools reject standardized testing? How and in
what way are these injurious to a child or their educational experience?
Why isn't the ability to *test* a valued skill particularly in our
society where colleges, entrance exams, job level exams, concise
demonstration of abilities is often demanded in order to achieve
acceptance or advancement in a variety of venues? What is wrong with the
expectation that students should be able to demonstrate mastery of a
subject in order to receive a passing score or advancement to the next
level?
My thanks for your thoughts on these questions . . .
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.4 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 99 21:38:42 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi, all,
One reason (of many) that I am in favor of as little testing as
possible, is that the kind of learning that prepares one for a test is
often not the kind of learning that stays with a student.
Testing often leads to cramming, and cramming leads to what I refer to
as 'the Bacchanalia effect' wherein the information is taken in quickly
and in vast quantity, promptly regurgitated, and it is all but gone
forever.
I think that most of us will remember this scenario if we think back far
enough.
There is also the tension and fear that accompanies testing that is
debilitating to so many. I recently took an informal poll among friends
and colleagues, and was amazed at the number who say they vomited before
(or during) SAT's .
Of course, the majority of problems associated with the administration
of tests can be alleviated by caring and conscientious teachers; but I
believe that such a teacher can also obviate the need for most testing.
This is particularly easily accomplished in the Waldorf schools, where
close attention is payed to main lesson books.
New York State even accepts copies of 3rd grade main lesson books in
lieu of the standardized literacy test.
Peace for the new year.
Charlie Frey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 22:25:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901040227.SAA23709 lists1.best.com)
)Hi, all,
) One reason (of many) that I am in favor of as little testing as
)possible, is that the kind of learning that prepares one for a test is
)often not the kind of learning that stays with a student.
) Testing often leads to cramming, and cramming leads to what I refer to
)as 'the Bacchanalia effect' wherein the information is taken in quickly
)and in vast quantity, promptly regurgitated, and it is all but gone
)forever.
You know, I'm not sure that I agree with you here. If a teacher is worth
his/her salt, and the test addresses the content of the class, I think
testing is a wonderful barometer for both teacher and student. If many
students fail, it is likely something administration and the teacher should
address. If one or two kids don't perform well, the teacher can use that
signal to look closer at the few students that failed.
) I think that most of us will remember this scenario if we think back far
)enough.
) There is also the tension and fear that accompanies testing that is
)debilitating to so many. I recently took an informal poll among friends
)and colleagues, and was amazed at the number who say they vomited before
)(or during) SAT's .
There is a big difference between SAT's and grade school performance tests.
My son, living in California and attending mainstream public school, looks
forward to the performance tests each year. Interestingly, he is a
wonderful speller (clearly not biologically related to me...) who
consistently receives 100% on his spelling tests, but he scored 69% on the
spelling aspect of his achievement test. His score is a signal that the
school could improve on their spelling curriculum. (His school agrees and
have stepped up their spelling curriculum this year.)
) Of course, the majority of problems associated with the administration
)of tests can be alleviated by caring and conscientious teachers; but I
)believe that such a teacher can also obviate the need for most testing.
Then we're back to the multi-level marketing approach to education, based
on testimony and hear say. Who decides if the teacher is conscientious and
caring? In my son's school, student achievement is given weight by the
administration. Since parents can choose their children's teacher, the
caring and conscientious part is defined by each parent. The trend is that
most teachers end up teaching the siblings of the first child, allowing the
teachers time to know the families pretty well.
)This is particularly easily accomplished in the Waldorf schools, where
)close attention is payed to main lesson books.
Those copying skills may come in handy one day - it is good they are
monitored. :+)
) New York State even accepts copies of 3rd grade main lesson books in
)lieu of the standardized literacy test.
Are they awre that every child's main lesson book is the same, or are they
under the assumption that these children are so gifted that they come up
with these beautiful and original texts?
)
)Peace for the new year.
Right back atcha Charlie,
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Testing? (Clarification)
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 22:28:30 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I should clarify this paragraph,
If a teacher is worth his/her salt, and the test addresses the content of
the class, I think testing is a wonderful barometer for both teacher and
student. If many students fail, it is likely something administration and
the teacher should address.**The teacher's performance should be in
question if many students fail.** If one or two kids don't perform well,
the teacher can use that signal to look closer at the few students that
failed.
) I think that most of us will remember this scenario if we think back far
)enough.
) There is also the tension and fear that accompanies testing that is
)debilitating to so many. I recently took an informal poll among friends
)and colleagues, and was amazed at the number who say they vomited before
)(or during) SAT's .
There is a big difference between SAT's and grade school performance tests.
My son, living in California and attending mainstream public school, looks
forward to the performance tests each year. Interestingly, he is a
wonderful speller (clearly not biologically related to me...) who
consistently receives 100% on his spelling tests, but he scored 69% on the
spelling aspect of his achievement test. His score is a signal that the
school could improve on their spelling curriculum. (His school agrees and
have stepped up their spelling curriculum this year.)
) Of course, the majority of problems associated with the administration
)of tests can be alleviated by caring and conscientious teachers; but I
)believe that such a teacher can also obviate the need for most testing.
Then we're back to the multi-level marketing approach to education, based
on testimony and hear say. Who decides if the teacher is conscientious and
caring? In my son's school, student achievement is given weight by the
administration. Since parents can choose their children's teacher, the
caring and conscientious part is defined by each parent. The trend is that
most teachers end up teaching the siblings of the first child, allowing the
teachers time to know the families pretty well.
)This is particularly easily accomplished in the Waldorf schools, where
)close attention is payed to main lesson books.
Those copying skills may come in handy one day - it is good they are
monitored. :+)
) New York State even accepts copies of 3rd grade main lesson books in
)lieu of the standardized literacy test.
Are they awre that every child's main lesson book is the same, or are they
under the assumption that these children are so gifted that they come up
with these beautiful and original texts?
)
)Peace for the new year.
Right back atcha Charlie,
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 18:31:40 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Steiner names the Post-Atlantean Cultural Epochs in a note to Elise
Wolfram, between 1906 and 1908:
indisch (Indian)
persisch (Persian)
aegyptisch (Egyptian)
griechisch (Greek)
germanisch (Germanic) [present time]
slavisch (Slavic)
das siebente (seventh)
[Steiner, Rudolf. From the History and Contents of the First Section of the
Esoteric School 1904-1914: Letters, Documents, and Lectures. Edited by
Hella Wiesberger, Trans. John Wood. Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1998,
p. 194.]
I know he later said some Theosophical teachings (he split off in 1912)
were erroneous, but he seems to have adopted the cosmology whole.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1019.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 17:45:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Apparently Liz also posted her question on a web-hosted discussion group
called "spiritualscience." There she did get a fairly accurate answer.
-Dan Dugan
***
[spiritualscience] Re: The various epochs
By 888 alphalink.com.au
Wednesday November 18 1998
Dear Liz,
How come our epoch does not have a name?
It does have a name/s, namely, "Anglo/Teutonic" or plain "Teutonic".
"Aryan" is the name of our over all "Root Race" which contains the 7
"Sub-races" or cultural epochs you named- Greco-Roman etc.
Who gave the others their name? Did Steiner come up with those?
Yes I think he may have, but the idea of cyclical rounds and races was
first made public last century by A.P. Sinnett in his Esoteric Budhism, and
later corrected and expanded upon by H.P.B. in her Secret Doctrine. In fact
before the war the Society was called the "Aryan" Theosophical Society.
H.P.B. names the Sub-races of Atlantis as Rmoahals, Tlavtlis, Toltecs, the
original Turanians, original Semites, Akkadians and Mongols.
On a less facetious note, Steiner said we see as far ahead as we see behind
us. But he named four epochs behind us and only two beyond, the Sixth and
Seventh post-Atlantean epochs. What happens after the seventh?
These are two more Sub-Races of the Aryan Root-Race. We have two more
Root-Races (of the seven) with their seven Sub-Races on this Fourth Round.
The sixth Sub-Race or Cultural Epoch will appear in Russia (the Slavonic or
Philadephian). You'll have to stick around till the seventh Sub-Race for
the American Cultural epoch.
Warmest Regards,
Bruce P.S. I hope you got the posts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1019 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1020 --------------
001 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Testing?
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Question/ Slippers
003 - SINGERCARP aol.com - Slipper Question
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: we don't say that in public
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: we don't say that in public
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1020.1 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 99 09:47:25 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
)
)) New York State even accepts copies of 3rd grade main lesson books in
))lieu of the standardized literacy test.
)
)Are they awre that every child's main lesson book is the same, or are they
)under the assumption that these children are so gifted that they come up
)with these beautiful and original texts?
They see ALL the books, not just one from each class. I'm sure that if
the NY board of ed. was anything but convinced that the children are
progressing adequately, they would speak up.
They are not shy people!
Best,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1020.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Question/ Slippers
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 99 10:24:10 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Deby wrote:
)Hi all,
)When my kids were in Waldorf, they were required to wear slippers or
)Eurythmy shoes inside the classroom. Can anyone tell me if there is an
)Anthroposophical reason for this practice?
)Deby
)
)
I have narrowed this slipper question down to two possibilities:
1....Since the mystery at Golgotha, wherein the Christ being's blood fell
upon the earth thereby giving the earth and all its inhabitants a
'homeopathic dose' of the Christ, the earth and all humanity contain a
little bit of the Christ. This forever changed the way in which we
incarnate.
From that day forward, the human body and soul have incarnated from the
earth, up through the soles of the feet (soul=sole...get it?), and,
through spiritual research, we have discovered that these cosmic forces
*will not* pass through synthetic materials such as those often found in
the thick soles of outdoor shoes.
---OR---
2....It's nice to take off a dirty pair of shoes and slip into some soft,
snuggly slippies.
Jeeze, y'all on the critics' list must really think we're a bunch of
weenies. :-)
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1020.3 ---------------
From: SINGERCARP aol.com
Subject: Slipper Question
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:00:12 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Deby wrote:
)Hi all,
)When my kids were in Waldorf, they were required to wear slippers or
)Eurythmy shoes inside the classroom. Can anyone tell me if there is an
)Anthroposophical reason for this practice?
Tom wrote:
)A very interesting question indeed! How did you get to that question?
)What do you mean by )Anthroposophical( in context of slippers in the
)classroom ???
)I guarantee a sophisticated answer by an expert if you tell me...
Too bad Deby did not yet tell if the Slippers - at least one of them -
appeared in one of her very deep meditations, or in an even more
mysterious way. The answer you gave happens to be exactly the one
I had been thinking of:
)...the human body and soul have incarnated from the
)earth, up through the soles of the feet (soul=sole...get it?), and,
)through spiritual research, we have discovered that these cosmic forces
)*will not* pass through synthetic materials such as those often found in
)the thick soles of outdoor shoes.(
The fact you knew the answer shows we were united in the spirit and
proofs the eternal truth therein.
May I tell the secret that YOU were the expert I was secretly seeing
- in one of MY very deep meditations- ?
I thank you, Charlie
Tom
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1020.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 00:43:00 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199812301705.JAA22699 lists1.best.com)
(199812311855.KAA24252 lists1.best.com)
(199901021615.IAA00192 lists1.best.com) (199901022117.NAA05294 lists1.best.com)
Stephen:
) Isn't it interesting that those who would try to stain Steiner with Nazi
) tendencies have a preference for the Nazis redefinitions of certain
) words in preference to the original meanings (as used by Steiner)?
Yes, though I think, like Dan, that it at times really can be a tricky
business to sort and get all the concepts in the right place, like with
this German-"Aryan"-"Teutonic"-Anglosaxon problem.
All the best!
Sune
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1020.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: we don't say that in public
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 02:26:04 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901041013.CAA10708 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Apparently Liz also posted her question on a web-hosted discussion group
) called "spiritualscience." There she did get a fairly accurate answer.
by Bruce; "888 alphalink.com.au":
) It does have a name/s, namely, "Anglo/Teutonic" or plain "Teutonic".
) "Aryan" is the name of our over all "Root Race" which contains the 7
) "Sub-races" or cultural epochs you named- Greco-Roman etc.
So, maybe we can agree that Liz got answers; and that I gave a mainly
proper answer to the question on the Anthroposophia list
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/cultures.htm) like Bruce gave on the
[spiritualscience] list. And maybe we can also agree that the proper
answer is not "Aryan", which was the name of the group of settlers
emigrating from the north into India, also giving the name to
"Aryan"=Indo(European) to the language group streaming westwards all the
way into Europe.
Yet, I still have not read anything from Steiner from his
anthroposophical time where he used the term "Teutonic" for the present
"cultural epoch".
BRUCE:
) In fact
) before the war the Society was called the "Aryan" Theosophical Society.
ME:
... out of the great "Aryan"=Indian influence on the Theosophical
Society;
But you still put forth an argument, that even if Steiner didnĄt use
"Aryan" to name the present cultural epoch, he at least called it
"Germanic" in a letter from his Theosophical period;
DAN:
Steiner names the Post-Atlantean Cultural Epochs in a note to Elise
Wolfram, between 1906 and 1908:
indisch (Indian)
persisch (Persian)
aegyptisch (Egyptian)
griechisch (Greek)
germanisch (Germanic) [present time]
slavisch (Slavic)
das siebente (seventh)
[Steiner, Rudolf. From the History and Contents of the First Section of
the
Esoteric School 1904-1914: Letters, Documents, and Lectures. Edited by
Hella Wiesberger, Trans. John Wood. Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press,
1998,
p. 194.]
ME:
As can be seen from some of the other names; "Egyptian", "Greek" the
names in the list are given in a simplified sense and "Germanic" still
meaning not "Aryan" but given as a simplified term for "Teutonic", the
"German" seed culture out of which many and maybe most of the later,
present cultures of Europe, including the Anglosaxon one (now dominating
the world) developed as it turns out when you really try to look into it
(http://home1.2.sbbs.se/thebee/history/teutons.htm).
So based on this I think it is also not more enthocentric than
justified as an "objective" term.
DAN:
I know he later said some Theosophical teachings (he split off in 1912)
were erroneous, but he seems to have adopted the cosmology whole.
ME:
There I agree that one runs into problems if one tries to approach it
from an only external empirical perspective. Yet, thatĄs another larger
thread.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1020 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1021 --------------
001 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Testing?
002 - Kathy (spike netshel.net) - Testing?
003 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Testing?
004 - SINGERCARP aol.com - Re: Testing or how intelligent are WS students?
005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Testing?
006 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Testing?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.1 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 18:32:58 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901030810.AAA08077 lists1.best.com) (199901031949.LAA14685 lists1.best.com)
I want to clear up a few facts (or at least factual representations). I stated my failure is attributable to Waldorf's lack of textbook learning, not testing. When the teacher sucked eggs, learning the material from a generic textbook (which
sometimes assumed you had already been learning from such generic textbooks all the way through highschool and hence shared a common generic textbook paradigm) proved more challenging then the cursory attention I willingly paid it.
In Waldorf HS I took a Math test almost every week, and tests were definitely a central part of my Waldorf experience. I think there is some confusion about WE and testing. Much testing goes on within WE, and is tailored by each teacher (the math
teacher's tests were much different than say the german teacher's tests) ostensibly to measure our understanding of their particular (not the same as peculiar) material.
When WE proponents resist testing, it is the standardized, State (or worse yet, Federal) tests they are against. Why should they embrace such tests? What do they truly measure? This is something of a rhetorical question, but I question their scope
and purpose (i.e. usefulness).
I for one think the State (in all its myriad webs and weavings) has no business in education. Caveat Emptor. If a school chooses scientific (i.e. statistical) proof of their prowess, so be it. If a school does not, so be it as well. Let the
parents decide; unless you deem them unfit on a grand scale.
Why should those people who choose to turn away from the collective (public education) be taxed twice for education? Where in the Constitution does it mention government's role in education? Schools were alive and well long before government
entered into the education business (see Boaz's Libertarianism).
Oh yeah, for the record, my SAT scores (I only took it once with no preparation) gained me entrance to all but a single school (Swarthmore in PA). Other standardized tests I took while in WE were the CAT and PSAT tests. Always in the 95-99% (as
were all my peers, though I can't vouch for my entire class).
Regards,
e
Kathy wrote:
) Ezra recently
) mentioned that he received a lower grade in a college calculus class (or
) something similar) because he had not acquired the ability to test -
) this the result of the non-test environment of his Waldorf education.
)
) I am curious regarding what is so wrong with testing children on
) specific skills or subject area knowledge. How is this injurious to the
) child or to the curriculum? Certainly, I would not like my young child
) to attend a school or class that was driven simply to produce the
) ability to fill in the correct bubbles. However, in contrast to this
) dreary picture, my two youngest children attend/attended public schools
) that are rich in music, art, drama, etc., and the district has
) standardized test scores that fall into the top 90th percentile in the
) US. I would be deeply concerned if my children found themselves unable
) to demonstrate their various abilities effectively on a standardized or
) subject/class test (re: Ezra) because their schools had not prepared
) them to be able to demonstrate their acquired skills except through
) anecdotal ("I/She can do it . . ") methods.
)
) I also believe that Waldorf schools could go a long way toward
) validating their educational methods if their graduates were able to
) demonstrate through testing and, yes, through writing clearly and
) effectively, using the accepted grammatical *rules* of their written
) language.
)
) On a personal level, as an educator, I require that my students
) demonstrate mastery in order to receive a passing grade in any course I
) teach. This means that they must pass a testing process that includes
) answering questions correctly *and* demonstrating ability. If they
) cannot demonstrate mastery (80% or higher), then they do not pass my
) class. They have the option to complete some corrective assignments and
) meet with me for further teaching before they test again. I give my
) students a minimum of 3 times to achieve and demonstrate mastery. I
) teach high school students and I do not believe I am doing the student
) or future teachers/employers any favor if I pass them without clearly
) demonstrated mastery in any course I may teach.
)
) So, my questions are these: Why do Waldorf schools reject subject/class
) testing? Why do Waldorf schools reject standardized testing? How and in
) what way are these injurious to a child or their educational experience?
) Why isn't the ability to *test* a valued skill particularly in our
) society where colleges, entrance exams, job level exams, concise
) demonstration of abilities is often demanded in order to achieve
) acceptance or advancement in a variety of venues? What is wrong with the
) expectation that students should be able to demonstrate mastery of a
) subject in order to receive a passing score or advancement to the next
) level?
)
) My thanks for your thoughts on these questions . . .
)
) Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.2 ---------------
From: Kathy (spike netshel.net)
Subject: Testing?
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:24:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901041210.EAA19236 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey posted:
) One reason (of many) that I am in favor of as little testing as
) possible, is that the kind of learning that prepares one for a test is
) often not the kind of learning that stays with a student.
I don't know what kind of learning you're talking about that "prepares
one for a test" as opposed for "the kind of learning that stays with a
student." It's my experience as an educator that one teaches the subject
matter using a variety of resources and approaches that best address the
particular curriculum and the students. The *test* is designed to have a
variety of components to assess the retention or mastery of the subject
matter. I see nothing wrong with reviewing material in order to do well
on an exam. If a student was engaged in the lessons, then the review
will serve to reinforce previous learning. If the student was not
engaged in the lesson, the test, if designed well, will reflect this
too. Testing/formal assessment is a valuable tool, in my opinion, for
teachers (current and future), students, parents, and a variety of other
people/situations.
I am still quizzical regarding the stance I have experienced from other
Waldorf educators/supporters (yourself) that asserts learning is somehow
not deep or valid or something-or-other if there is a formal assessment
of what the student digested and is able to apply.
) Testing often leads to cramming, and cramming leads to what I refer to
) as 'the Bacchanalia effect' wherein the information is taken in quickly
) and in vast quantity, promptly regurgitated, and it is all but gone
) forever.
I'm sorry Charlie, but this is crap as it applies to the serious
student. It holds true for the student that dilly-dallied through the
subject, but it does not hold true for the student that wants to learn.
I know your description does not hold true for my personal experience of
learning, nor does it hold true for my own children. True, there have
been many tests I *crammed* (studied hard) for in order to get a good
grade. But, if I had a good grasp of the material prior to the
*cramming* then this led to better, more reinforced learning. During the
period of my life when I was a lazy student, no amount of cramming could
cover for my lack of attentiveness in class.
How do you suggest that students be assessed? Would it simply be from a
pretty lesson book? I weight my class grades heavily on in-class
projects and active participation, however, formal assessment tells me
how much each student knows and can apply. An attractive class project
(read: lesson book) doesn't necessarily tell me how a student can take
the information presented and apply to another situation.
) There is also the tension and fear that accompanies testing that is
) debilitating to so many. I recently took an informal poll among friends
) and colleagues, and was amazed at the number who say they vomited before
) (or during) SAT's.
I believe that if the test is well designed then it will not be
debilitating. The *debilitation* comes from fear of failure. I have
never experienced a student of mine to be debilitated by one of my
tests. When a large number of my students have done poorly on a test I
know that I missed something in my teaching. When one or two students do
poorly I find these are inevitably the ones that have been inattentive,
unengaged students in the class.
As to vomiting before SAT's, I suspect this is a recent phenomena.
During my era the SAT was not such a big deal. It has now become a very
big deal and students (my eldest daughter at present) strive to get high
scores so they can get into the college of their choice. I wish these
tests weren't so stressful. However, an SAT is not a class assessment
test. I don't know how a Waldorf student can fare very well on an SAT if
they have no testing experience. I am curious regarding SAT averages for
Waldorf students, but I know this information is not available.
) Of course, the majority of problems associated with the administration
) of tests can be alleviated by caring and conscientious teachers; but I
) believe that such a teacher can also obviate the need for most testing.
) This is particularly easily accomplished in the Waldorf schools, where
) close attention is payed to main lesson books.
Sorry Charlie, I was trained in the lesson book teaching style. These
are not much more than exercises in copying and pretty illustration.
Take a look at the postings of the few Waldorf students to this list. A
full Waldorf education and we haven't had one on here yet that has even
a minimal grasp of grammar, spelling, sentence structure, logical
thinking, etc.
) New York State even accepts copies of 3rd grade main lesson books in
) lieu of the standardized literacy test.
This doesn't surprise me in the least. State boards, bureaucracies,
etc., permit all sorts of shoddy substitutions to serve in place of
quantifiable data. Look at California. They permit public Waldorf
schools despite the overwhelming evidence that this is direct violation
of the state constitution. The fact that the NY Board accepts these
doesn't validate the use of these lesson books as a reasonable
substitute. It simply tells me that this is a board comprised of folks
that haven't looked closely at what goes into these lesson books and
what these kids actually know at the end of the 3rd grade.
My question once again is: what is the reason Waldorf doesn't support
formal assessment? Is it because they wish to spare their students what
they perceive to be extreme stress? Is it because the subject matter is
not organized in such a way that teachers also plan for assessment as
they plan their instructional units? Are the teachers simply not trained
in assessment? Are *grades* or formal assessment in terms of
quantifiable acquisition of academic skills considered to be
unimportant? Is there an deeper, Anthroposophical reason (no sarcastic
replies needed)?
An inquiring mind wants to know . . .
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.3 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 10:58:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901041210.EAA19236 lists1.best.com) (199901060426.UAA09866 lists1.best.com)
Kathy wrote:
) Sorry Charlie, I was trained in the lesson book teaching style. These
) are not much more than exercises in copying and pretty illustration.
I take it you haven't produced a HS MLB on the Renaissance, or the Middle Ages
(11th Grade). These books were theses unto themselves, and I worked harder
over the course of those blocks than any other academic period (save my thesis
on Rational Expectations Theory). None of the essays contained therein were
copied, and neither were all the illustrations. Instead, they reflected my
decisions beyond the general assignment. I thought I'd lost them, but my old
ML teacher reminded me she had them (and uses them at RSC) when I saw her a
year or so ago.
Frankly, I am weary of such ignorant denigration of the MLB concept. It
stands in my mind as one of the finest examples of interdisciplinary teaching
methods I've ever heard of. (I'm no pedagogue).
) Take a look at the postings of the few Waldorf students to this list. A
) full Waldorf education and we haven't had one on here yet that has even
) a minimal grasp of grammar, spelling, sentence structure, logical
) thinking, etc.
What bigotry, what political speech, what nonsense.
After berating administrators for being incompetent, you end your post with
the question of why WE doesn't support formalized testing. I've already
informed you WE does not shun formalized testing as you have defined it
(individual teachers assessing their students), but seems to be against
standardized (ostensibly by administrators, or their ilk) testing.
yadda yadda yadda,
e
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.4 ---------------
From: SINGERCARP aol.com
Subject: Re: Testing or how intelligent are WS students?
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 16:46:20 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mittwoch, 6. Januar 1999
22:35 Uhr
Kathy wrote:
)) Take a look at the postings of the few Waldorf students to this list.* A
)) full Waldorf education and we haven't had one on here yet that has even
)) a minimal grasp of grammar, spelling, sentence structure, logical
)) thinking, etc.
My English is not good enough to reverse your sentence. Could it mean:
)Not one (former?) Waldorf student has been able to spell right?
)Not one (former?) Waldorf student has been able to structure a sentence?
)Not one (former?) Waldorf student has been able to grasp grammar?
)Not one (former?) Waldorf student has been able to think logically?(
*How do you know who on this list is a (you probably mean: former?)
Waldorf student and who is not? You must either be clairvoyant or you
have logical thinking skills that are far beyond everything I have been
able to pick up in my (Swiss Waldorf) school system.
)From what I have learned about quantitative determination it is
not possible in a quantitative analysis to assign determined components
in an unknown aggregate.
At least I know one exception to your rule:
At the Harvard reunion two years ago we spotted German Chancellor
Kohl (without body guards, but with the first lady) watching his
son's graduation.
The young man is a former Waldorf student - and he did graduate!
But you have a point: he is not a member of this list...
Pardon my English!
Tom Singer-Carpenter
Switzerland/Germany
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.5 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:34:22 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 06.01.99 20:17:50 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
(( ) Take a look at the postings of the few Waldorf students to this list. A
) full Waldorf education and we haven't had one on here yet that has even
) a minimal grasp of grammar, spelling, sentence structure, logical
) thinking, etc.
))
I wunder were yoo wer ool brung up theen?
The ludicrous swings from insistence on statistical proof to the quote above
sometimes make me question my own ability to read the "pro-Dan lobby". I
myself TRY to write proper but living in another language makes it trickier,
although not forgivable.
So ther
Bruce (the one word I can -usually- spell proper)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1021.6 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 99 22:00:20 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Spike writes
)I don't know what kind of learning you're talking about that "prepares
)one for a test" as opposed for "the kind of learning that stays with a
)student." It's my experience as an educator that one teaches the subject
)matter using a variety of resources and approaches that best address the
)particular curriculum and the students. The *test* is designed to have a
)variety of components to assess the retention or mastery of the subject
)matter. I see nothing wrong with reviewing material in order to do well....
Please feel free to comment on my ENTIRE post. I believe I did concede
that conscientiously administered tests aren't *all* bad.
Spike:
)
)I am still quizzical regarding the stance I have experienced from other
)Waldorf educators/supporters (yourself) that asserts learning is somehow
)not deep or valid or something-or-other if there is a formal assessment
)of what the student digested and is able to apply.
The idea is, that a teacher who spends as much time through the years as
a Waldorf teacher does has(or should have) ways of evaluating students
without a lot of testing.
Again, I maintain that test results are often not an indicator of
digested knowledge.
Spike:)
)I'm sorry Charlie, but this is crap as it applies to the serious
)student. It holds true for the student that dilly-dallied through the
)subject, but it does not hold true for the student that wants to learn.
Ah, the old ca-ca defense!
Even in Waldorf, I would not depend on all students being serious, and it
would be doing a grave disservice to even a small number of students who
realized that they could do well on a test one day and forget the
material the next---the reward being the high grade rather than the
ownership of knowledge.
The student who *wants* to learn, invariably will, but we can't always
depend on a thirst for knowledge--especially in high school--beer, maybe,
but not always knowledge. :-)
Spike:
)
)Sorry Charlie, I was trained in the lesson book teaching style. These
)are not much more than exercises in copying and pretty illustration.
Piffle! Copying only happens in the early grades wherein it is as useful
a tool as we have for learning.
In the later grades, students should be free(nay, required) to *create*
what goes into the main lesson book.
I will concede, though, that I have seen creativity thwarted in the
interest of beautiful ML books, and I heartily disagree with this. A ML
book should be a true representation of the student--warts and all.
Spike:
)
)My question once again is: what is the reason Waldorf doesn't support
)formal assessment?
) Are *grades* or formal assessment in terms of
)quantifiable acquisition of academic skills considered to be
)unimportant? Is there an deeper, Anthroposophical reason (no sarcastic
)replies needed)?
)
Which brings me to competition vs. cooperation.
Don't get me started!
Also, there are the deep spiritual ramifications in these matters that
cannot possibly be understood by the layman.
Only kidding!!!! Gotcha. HAR!
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1021 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1022 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Competition
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Fwd: Competition
003 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - By way of comparison - Accountability
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1022.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Competition
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 20:30:00 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901070250.SAA14484 lists1.best.com)
Charlie wrote,
[snip]
)Which brings me to competition vs. cooperation.
)Don't get me started!
My youngest son, Max, and his dearest friend [of several years] continually
compete for grades. Both attend the same school but have different
teachers. Both are top students, in part because of this friendly
competition. I overhear them razzing each other about how one is going to
get the coveted "A" on a math test, state report, etc., while claiming the
other will do badly.
Recently Alex blew a math homework assignment because, according to Max,
"he had his mind on vacation and not school." He received a "D". Max
insisted that he speak to his teacher and ask to redo his paper. Alex did,
the teacher willingly allowed him a second chance, Max and Alex discussed
strategy, Alex redid his homework and got them all correct. Max was very
happy for him and Alex said to me, "It was because of Max that I got that
'A'. He convinced me to talk to my teacher and ask for another chance." I'm
certain that Alex would do the same for Max. Competition is not always bad.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1022.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Fwd: Competition
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 99 10:31:05 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
Date: 01/06 10:30 PM
Received: 01/07 10:13 AM
From: Debra Snell, snell netshel.net
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Charlie wrote,
[snip]
)Which brings me to competition vs. cooperation.
)Don't get me started!
Deby:
)
)Recently Alex blew a math homework assignment because, according to Max,
)"he had his mind on vacation and not school." He received a "D". Max
)insisted that he speak to his teacher and ask to redo his paper. Alex did,
)the teacher willingly allowed him a second chance, Max and Alex discussed
)strategy, Alex redid his homework and got them all correct. Max was very
)happy for him and Alex said to me, "It was because of Max that I got that
)'A'. He convinced me to talk to my teacher and ask for another chance." I'm
)certain that Alex would do the same for Max. Competition is not always bad.
)
)Deby
----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
I see a story about cooperation here, and there are infinite
opportunities for it, even if the impetus isn't a test score or grade.
And you're right, of course. Clearly, competition is not always bad; but
I feel that it pervades our society--often at the expense of cooperation;
and we must be extremely awake to its detriments as we teach children.
Best,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1022.3 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: By way of comparison - Accountability
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 10:30:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Are Schools Accountable for Results?
By DEB RIECHMANN Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Schools get report cards
now and more students take tests to
prove they've mastered their lessons, but a
new study reveals that few states have tough
policies to hold schools accountable for
results.
A nationwide study released Thursday by the
publication Education Week says 48 states
now test students to see if they've learned
material taught, and 36 states publish report
cards on individual schools, but only a
handful have comprehensive policies to reward
success and identify failure.
``An analysis of statewide efforts shows that
most are skirting the edges of a serious
accountability system,'' the study says.
In the early 1990s, states began to set
education standards for the knowledge and skills
educators believe students should know at
certain grade levels. States developed tests to
find out whether students, teachers and
schools were making the grade. Now, the focus
has shifted to figuring out what to do when
students or schools don't meet the standards.
``If you look at the 50-state picture, we're
at a very, very perilous stage,'' says Richard
Elmore, a professor at Harvard University's
Graduate School of Education. ``The
progress at the state and local levels is
very uneven, and the systems are much slower to
develop and much more complicated than a lot
of reformers expected them to be.''
Among the study's findings:
--Nineteen states, or fewer than half,
publicly rate the performance of all schools, or at
least identify low-performing ones.
--Sixteen states have the authority to close,
take over or overhaul failing schools.
--Fourteen states offer financial rewards for
individual schools based on performance.
--Nineteen states require students to pass
state tests to graduate from high school.
--Two states have tried to tie the evaluation
of individual teachers to student performance.
Chester Finn Jr., an education official under
President Reagan and president of the
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in Washington,
said people generally have two schools
of thought on accountability: Those -- often
educators -- who think that performance will
improve if students are given enough
resources and support, and those -- often business
people and elected officials -- who think
schools need external pressure to succeed.
Connecticut, for instance, publishes report
cards on all schools, including their marks on
statewide tests. The state also offers grants
to school districts that have improved over
time, but has no explicit sanctions for
schools that don't improve.
By contrast, Texas schools and districts can
receive cash awards for top performance, but
also could be taken over if their achievement
falls below a certain level. High school
students in Texas must pass state graduation
tests.
Education schools can lose their
accreditation if too many of their students fail
teacher-licensing tests. There also is a
system to link teachers' evaluations to schoolwide
test scores.
A survey by Public Agenda, a public opinion
research group, also published in Education
Week, indicates that most teachers disapprove
of tying financial incentives for teachers to
student improvement or replacing the
faculties at failing schools.
The survey's 2,600 interviews were done with
public school teachers, parents of public
school students, children in public middle or
high schools, college professors who taught
freshmen and sophomores in the last two years
and employers who hire for entry-level
positions.
Done in October and November 1998, the survey
had a margin of error of plus or minus
6 percentage points for employers and college
professors and 4 percentage points for
other groups.
In the survey, 60 percent of employers and 53
percent of parents favor tying financial
incentives for teachers and principals to
student improvement. But only 22 percent of
teachers said this was a good idea.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1022 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1023 --------------
001 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Testing?
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Testing?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1023.1 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 08:26:47 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 07.01.99 03:55:08 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
(( A ML
book should be a true representation of the student--warts and all. ))
I restrained from commenting until now, more 'cos of lack of time (3 Kings
Play) than incentive!
The strength of waldorf is that each teacher is able (within certain
constraints) to do what he feels best for a given class in a given situation.
There are occasions when ML books NEED to be brought up to standard, ie fewer
warts, and occasions when more warts are needed. Except maybe in math(s) you
will find it difficult to find two ML books with the same essay, let alone the
same entire content. Naturally a lot of copying is done in the first years -
the accusation that many waldorf products cannot spell cannot (generally) be
levelled at the writing itself, which is generally really well-formed and
legible.
To testing:
In math(s) I will constantly test my students, with quick written "mental
arithmetic" as well as termly "exams"! The point that external and internal
tests are entirely different has been made already; the situation differs
dramatically from country to country and in Germany from "Land" (= county) to
Land. In Nordrheinwestfalen I am able to set the questions that my students
answer for their university entrance (as are all qualified teachers, not just
in waldorf). In Bavaria, and in England, the questions are set and marked
externally. Needless to say there are rigorous tests of US to ensure that we
dont cheat!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1023.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 99 22:49:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I wrote:
)(( A ML
) book should be a true representation of the student--warts and all. ))
Bruce wrote:
)
)The strength of waldorf is that each teacher is able (within certain
)constraints) to do what he feels best for a given class in a given situation.
)There are occasions when ML books NEED to be brought up to standard, ie fewer
)warts, and occasions when more warts are needed. Except maybe in math(s) you
)will find it difficult to find two ML books with the same essay, let alone
)the
)same entire content. Naturally a lot of copying is done in the first years -
I agree, entirely.
I probably should have phrased my original post differently.
I didn't mean to imply that there is no limit to the wartiness(!) allowed
in a ML book; I merely wanted to debunk the assertion that ML books are
always perfect in, and of, themselves, and/or perfect representations of
what the teacher has written/drawn on the board.
Ciao,
Charlie
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1023 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1024 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Testing?
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Fwd: Re: Testing?
003 - Herman de Tollenaere (her - Sahaja Yoga in public education [fwd]
004 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
005 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Teachers on pedestals
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - the apple thing
009 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: the apple thing
010 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Teachers on pedestals
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 01:50:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901100338.TAA19387 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey, you wrote,
)A ML [main lesson] book should be a true representation of the
)student--warts and all.
I'm bothered by the uncorrected errors that I see in lesson books. It seems
to be a part of Waldorf culture that the books are supposed to look pretty
and aren't marked up. Student do drafts which the teacher corrects, then
write it beautifully in the book. But when the book is wrong, I want to see
it corrected! It's a lesson book, after all. To an outsider it looks like
the teacher either doesn't know or doesn't care.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Fwd: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 99 14:07:18 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
Date: 01/10 3:50 AM
Received: 01/10 1:45 PM
From: Dan Dugan, dan dandugan.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Charlie Frey, you wrote,
)A ML [main lesson] book should be a true representation of the
)student--warts and all.
I'm bothered by the uncorrected errors that I see in lesson books. It
seems
to be a part of Waldorf culture that the books are supposed to look pretty
and aren't marked up. Student do drafts which the teacher corrects, then
write it beautifully in the book. But when the book is wrong, I want to
see
it corrected! It's a lesson book, after all. To an outsider it looks like
the teacher either doesn't know or doesn't care.
-Dan Dugan
----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
Dan,
I guess the ML books you have seen are different from those that I have
seen.
In my experience, uncorrected errors are not acceptable in a ML book.
The "warts" I referred to would, certainly, be *corrected* errors. I only
meant to say that there is no reason for a ML book to be devoid of
corrections.
As far as I know, there is absolutely no reason to believe that Waldorf
teachers are so wrapped up in some kind of self-esteem boosting, or
smarmy, touchy-feely, coddling (as has been alluded to on this list) that
they are reluctant to correct errors.
Waldorf teachers are, in fact, very serious about the accuracy of what
goes into the ML book. Achieving such accuracy is usually a process; and
I would maintain that the ML book should show some indication of said
process.
Best,
Charlie
PS- Regards from your pal, Calkins.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.3 ---------------
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Sahaja Yoga in public education [fwd]
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 20:15:53 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
double [[]] explanations by Herman de Tollenaere; [] by author:
)Subject: !!! UTTERLY DISGUSTING LIES !!!
)To: sahaja-yoga cs.ualberta.ca
)
)Now SY [[Sahaja Yoga]] is really sinking low. Finding that success is slow
in duping
)adults they are now lying to children in the hope of getting more
)recruits into their Mataji [[Her Holiness Shri
)Mataji Nirmala Devi; leader of Sahaja Yoga]]-worshipping cult.
)
)I don't know how widespread this is but it has certainly happened at
)Bryant High School in Queens, New York, where Sahaja Yoga classes have
)been held for ninth graders.
)
)This is how the SY involved explains how the deception takes place:
)
))))))))))
)Since the practice and teaching of any religion is prohibited in public
)schools, my approach to teaching Sahaja Yoga in this school was very
)conservative. We didn't want people to misinterpret this meditation as a
)religion, so at the beginning of each class the councilor of the school who
)gave me permission to conduct these classes would inform the students and
)their teacher that Sahaja Yoga wasn't a religion, [out & out lie] but a
)means of finding a more peaceful and balanced life. I then began the
)introduction by speaking briefly about Sahaja Yoga and Her Holiness Shri
)Mataji Nirmala Devi. Then the meditation began with the affirmations which
)help to awaken the kundalini. I did not use the word "Mother" or "Shri
)Mataji" in the affirmations but "kundalini" instead
)))))))))))))
)
)This was not in the dim and distant past, this was just a couple of
)years ago. Not only is this illegal but it is morally repugnant.
)Deception is still current practice in SY just like it always was.
)
)Before now the SYs on this list have claimed that they do not practise
)this deception. Will they stand up against such deception being
)practised by other SYs? Do they dare to stand up for truth?
)
)Our SY reporter continues:
)
))))))))))))))
)I would prefer that these classes were longer and that follow-up programs
)could be held. But to be able to teach Sahaja Yoga in a public school in New
)York City is a miracle in itself, even if time is limited.
)))))))))))))
)
)So now successful deception is a miracle!
)
)))))))))))))))))
)I would like for all the Yogis to know that it was very simple to obtain
)permission to teach these classes. I am often in this school as a substitute
)teacher. One day I noticed the guidance counselor campaigning against drugs.
)I went to speak to her about meditation and its usefulness in the prevention
)of abuses and as a means of relaxation and achieving balance in life. She
)responded very positively. A week later I was teaching Sahaja Yoga.
)))))))))))))))))))
)
)Yes it appears it is easy to abuse your position of trust to
)spread your cult.
)
)))))))))))))))))
)I believe that if all yogis and yoginis (myself included) could take a
)little time out of their busy lives to go and speak to those involved in the
)health related fields and introduce them to the great benefits of Sahaja
)Yoga, the Holy Mother would be very pleased with us.
))))))))))))))))
)
)Yup, and that's all that counts - pleasing mataji.
)
)))))))))))))))))))
)Then, not only are we making Sahaja Yoga available to the seekers who come
)to the regular public meetings, but we are making Sahaja Yoga available to
)those desperate seekers who don't know which way to turn for the answers.
)And maybe they will learn, as all of us more fortunate seekers have learned,
)that the Holy Mother and the Goddess has all the answers!
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
)
)So there we have it, the final aim is not to do with drugs or relaxation -
)it is about recognising mataji as the "Holy Mother and the Goddess".
)
)Simon (sdm earthling.net)
------------------------------------------
Herman de Tollenaere
------------------------------------------
Internet site:
http://stad.dsl.nl/~hermantl/
See also:
http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/simpoeng.htm
------------------------------------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.4 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:36:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901101856.KAA04756 lists1.best.com)
)Charlie Frey, you wrote,
)
))A ML [main lesson] book should be a true representation of the
))student--warts and all.
)
)I'm bothered by the uncorrected errors that I see in lesson books. It
)seems
)to be a part of Waldorf culture that the books are supposed to look pretty
)and aren't marked up. Student do drafts which the teacher corrects, then
)write it beautifully in the book. But when the book is wrong, I want to
)see
)it corrected! It's a lesson book, after all. To an outsider it looks like
)the teacher either doesn't know or doesn't care.
)
)-Dan Dugan
)
)
----------------
)Dan,
) I guess the ML books you have seen are different from those that I have
)seen.
) In my experience, uncorrected errors are not acceptable in a ML book.
)The "warts" I referred to would, certainly, be *corrected* errors. I only
)meant to say that there is no reason for a ML book to be devoid of
)corrections.
My kid's main lesson books were never corrected. My oldest son's MLB's were
artistically pleasing and the letters formed beautifully, but often letters
or entire words would be missing. These MLB's were never corrected when the
writing would not make sense.
) As far as I know, there is absolutely no reason to believe that Waldorf
)teachers are so wrapped up in some kind of self-esteem boosting, or
)smarmy, touchy-feely, coddling (as has been alluded to on this list) that
)they are reluctant to correct errors.
Then why were neither son's MLB's corrected? Do you think the teacher
simply didn't look at them?
) Waldorf teachers are, in fact, very serious about the accuracy of what
)goes into the ML book. Achieving such accuracy is usually a process; and
)I would maintain that the ML book should show some indication of said
)process.
At our Waldorf school, practicing on another paper was generally always
done, and perhaps corrections were made on _that_ paper, but once something
was transferred to the MLB, it was not written in by the teacher.
Debra
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.5 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 99 20:13:31 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Deby writes:
)My kid's main lesson books were never corrected. My oldest son's MLB's were
)artistically pleasing and the letters formed beautifully, but often letters
)or entire words would be missing. These MLB's were never corrected when the
)writing would not make sense.
I would be interested in knowing the grade to which you refer.
This would not be uncommon before the fourth grade.
Deby writes:
)At our Waldorf school, practicing on another paper was generally always
)done, and perhaps corrections were made on _that_ paper, but once something
)was transferred to the MLB, it was not written in by the teacher.
There are many different approaches to the ML book(thank goodness
Baskin-Robin's has 31 flavors!), and the one you mention is practiced by
some great teachers, although I do not entirely agree with it. I would
like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
Thanks,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Testing?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 21:15:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901110102.RAA24281 lists1.best.com)
)Deby writes:
)
))My kid's main lesson books were never corrected. My oldest son's MLB's were
))artistically pleasing and the letters formed beautifully, but often letters
))or entire words would be missing. These MLB's were never corrected when the
))writing would not make sense.
)
)
)I would be interested in knowing the grade to which you refer.
)This would not be uncommon before the fourth grade.
My son left Waldorf at the end of fifth grade. His fifth grade MLB's were
uncorrected.
I know another Waldorf teacher who has an extensive collection of MLB's
from her past classes. They were left uncorrected as well. She brings them
out to use at enrollment procurement meetings. She admitted to "keeping the
best".
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.7 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 21:22:27 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901110102.RAA24281 lists1.best.com)
Charlie wrote,
) I would
)like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
)and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
)respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
Sounds like you are practically ready to take on your own classroom,
Charlie. You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
self-importance here.
Can you explain how you can have your opinions without making judgement?
Sounds like Anthroposophical double-speak to me.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: the apple thing
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 00:55:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Does anybody know where Steiner talks about the 5-pointed star you see when
an apple is cut across? It's a traditional Waldorf lesson. I'm looking for
references to it.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.9 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: the apple thing
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:04:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901110858.AAA18903 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Does anybody know where Steiner talks about the 5-pointed star you see when
) an apple is cut across? It's a traditional Waldorf lesson. I'm looking for
) references to it.
Can you tell more about the problem context of the question?
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1024.10 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:15:58 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 11.01.99 09:02:00 MEZ, schreiben Sie: (Deby):
(( You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
self-importance here.
))
We are not all arrogant, only me! And as for important? Well what greater joy
is there.....
Are you thinking of taking up teaching Deby? This is a really great training-
ground!
Bruce (in unusually frivolous mood - BTW how do you spell dyslexic!?)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1024 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1025 --------------
001 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: the apple thing
002 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Testing?
003 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Teachers on pedestals
004 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Teachers on pedestals
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - math and Anthroposophy
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: early adolescence
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - the what if /and remembering your spirit
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.1 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: the apple thing
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:15:59 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 11.01.99 10:05:16 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
Does anybody know where Steiner talks about the 5-pointed star you see when
an apple is cut across? It's a traditional Waldorf lesson. I'm looking for
references to it.
-Dan Dugan
))
I dont know what you mean by a "traditional waldorf lesson" Dan! Have you a
list of them?
My mother showed me the apple-star when I was little, and she has never had
aspirations as a teacher. Mind you she is one of us Anthroposophists!
Does the spiral in a red-cabbage also feature as a "traditional waldorf
lesson"? For those unfamiliar with this amazing feat of nature a tip: cut the
cabbage!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.2 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Testing?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 07:53:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901101748.JAA01586 lists1.best.com)
My main lesson books were all corrected in pencil. The errors were (gasp)
mainly spelling, but comma splices and other deficiencies were also marked.
IMHO, this nit picking of WE methodology (at least this aspect of "to mark, or
not to mark") seems a tad wee silly, (rhetorical) or have the more meatier
subjects been exhausted?(/rhetorical)
e
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Charlie Frey, you wrote,
)
) )A ML [main lesson] book should be a true representation of the
) )student--warts and all.
)
) I'm bothered by the uncorrected errors that I see in lesson books. It seems
) to be a part of Waldorf culture that the books are supposed to look pretty
) and aren't marked up. Student do drafts which the teacher corrects, then
) write it beautifully in the book. But when the book is wrong, I want to see
) it corrected! It's a lesson book, after all. To an outsider it looks like
) the teacher either doesn't know or doesn't care.
)
) -Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.3 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 07:59:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901110520.VAA10775 lists1.best.com)
Are you suggesting such reverence of the teacher is unique to WE? Perhaps I
am naive and this is the case, but what rationale is at work here? I've
always held the teaching and healing professions in the highest regard.
Shucks, looks like it might just be a defect of my education. (Um, no I
don't go to anthro docs neither.)
e
Debra Snell wrote:
) Charlie wrote,
)
) ) I would
) )like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
) )and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
) )respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
)
) Sounds like you are practically ready to take on your own classroom,
) Charlie. You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
) immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
) continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
) self-importance here.
)
) Can you explain how you can have your opinions without making judgement?
) Sounds like Anthroposophical double-speak to me.
)
) Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.4 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 99 17:05:35 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I wrote:
) I would
)like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
)and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
)respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
Deby wrote:
)
)Sounds like you are practically ready to take on your own classroom,
)Charlie. You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
)immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
)continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
)self-importance here.
Sorry-- I should have been a bit more clear; the "difficult work" to
which I referred was meant to include all teaching, not just in the
Waldorf school.
Deby wrote:
)
)Can you explain how you can have your opinions without making judgement?
)Sounds like Anthroposophical double-speak to me.
Absolutely! I meant to make it clear that my opinions are based on what I
have learned in the classroom, where we speak about unreal situations
which occur under ideal circumstances.
I merely wanted to say that I refrain from judging those who must make
real decisions in the heat of battle--as it were.
Best,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: math and Anthroposophy
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 11:18:26 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I've received some more information about the mathematician Allen Adler.
You may recall his anecdote that I posted under the subject "posting to
k12.chat.teacher #2". Adler is not on the list, so it would be good to copy
your discussion to (adler hera.wku.edu).
DUGAN
)I am curious about how your opinions about Waldorf came about.
ADLER
First let me tell you a little about my background. I received
a PhD in mathematics in 1974 and am active in my research and
publishing.
(snip)
When I was a graduate student, I took over a class for a friend
for one day. I don't remember exactly what the course was, but
I found myself explaining calculus to them. One student in the
class was absolutely adamant about certain philosophical issues,
which he had apparently studied thoroughly from whatever source
he had read. In the context of a one hour class with several students,
I could not deal with this in detail, but I arranged to talk to him
afterwards. We got to be friends and he told me a lot about Anthroposophy
and Rudolph Steiner. Probably I have forgotten a lot but certain important
details stay with me. One reason for that is that, as a favor, I agreed
to tutor him to help him pass a math course, maybe the same one.
It was from him that I learned that Steiner accepted christianity,
as he defined and interpreted it; that he would write letters to people
telling them how a deceased friend was getting along in the spiritual
realm; that he held that there was no such concept as number, but that
each number was a concept in its own right; that he had some philosophical
interpretation of the integral which was quite useless from a mathematical
point of view, etc.
I no longer remember his name.
I can tell you that it was quite impossible to teach him mathematics.
Intellectual honesty prevented him from simply learning how to pass
the course and his commitment to Steiner's nonsense prevented him
from learning it at any philosophical level.
As I mentioned in my posting, I know two individuals involved in
anthroposophy who went on to get PhDs in mathematics, so it is
not necessarily impossible for Steinerians to do mathematics.
Neither of them seemed that involved in details of his philosophy
and neither of them tried to explain it to me. It happens that
I had both of them as students in classes I taught officially
and I don't want to comment in detail on their abilities since
they have a right to privacy.
I also have a friend one of whose former girlfriends was into
anthroposophy and he used to complain bitterly about what it
was like to deal with that part of her, until they finally broke up.
However, that is anecdotal and I don't include it in my assessment
of anthroposophy. My assessment is based on a lot of conversations
with an intelligent and articulate person who had devoted himself
to the subject seriously and who spent a lot of time trying to explain
it to me.
I guess I should also mention that I am generally interested in
groups, especially proselytizing groups, since I have seen so
many of my friends drawn into them, something I have generally
regarded as a tragedy. So I make it a point to maintain my
recollections and impressions of encounters with such groups
and their philosophies intact.
Let me ask you, did you understand any of the mathematical points
I was making in my posting?
In terms of attacking state funding for Steinerian schools, probably
racism and religion are better cases to make before the public and
the law. But I think that a very good case can be made that the
information is fundamentally flawed. It is not a matter of different
teaching styles, it is a matter of spreading misinformation. Whether
a judge or jury can be found which is mathematically literate enough
to understand such arguments is another matter. But if it has been
possible to shoot down efforts to teach creationism alongside of
evolution in the public schools, why not this as well?
Sincerely,
Allan Adler
adler hera.wku.edu
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:59:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Dear Correspondents, I have received another comment on the menarche study,
this one from an OB-GYN specialist. Understand that Dr. Gorski is not on
the list, so direct questions should be directed to (doctorg writeme.com).
-Dan Dugan
***
Hello!
I'm astounded that this seriously out-of-date piece of marginal work is now
being claimed to be of some value for settling a meaningful question. My
extended remarks follow... Please feel free to post them.
Cordially,
Tim Gorski MD FACOG
============================================
Some Remarks on "Reversal of Aceleration Trends in Waldorf Schools," by
Hanno Matthiolus and Christa Schuh
©1998 by Tim Gorski MD FACOG
To begin with, the title seems to be something of a misnomer since only the
introduction of this article deals with "acceleration trends" as a general
subject. For the bulk of the item is taken up presenting data having to do
with the age of menarche of girls at Waldorf as compared to public schools
in several locations in Germany. The data presented may support the general
hypotheses that the authors suggest in their introductory remarks and which
are implied in the title of their piece. But they are by no means proved,
either by the data or, if the data are as reliable as alleged, by the
authorsí assumption that menarche is a satisfactory proxy measure of
"acceleration trends."
In the introductory remarks, the authors are unclear in several respects as
to exactly what it is they are assuming about "acceleration trends" or
suppose has been proven by others. For example, they state that "terminal
growth is reached more quickly [today] than in earlier days." Yet the fact
that people are taller, or have earlier sexual maturity does not support
this statement at all. For if all that is happening is that "terminal
growth is reached more quickly," then people would not necessarily be taller
today than they once were. Rather, they would simply achieve the "terminal
growth" sooner. Likewise, the more meaningful endpoint of sexual maturity
and function is not its onset, but senescence, or, in women, menopause. Yet
there is no evidence that earlier menarche has tended to accompany earlier
menopause.
It is certainly true that people growing up today have a different set of
problems than those who grew up in the past. But there is little reason to
attribute all or most of this to the changes the authors cite. Is it really
true, for example, that "accelerated teenagers make a more alert,
intelligent, and assertive impression" [which the authors suggest are among
the 'negative aspects of acceleration!']? Mere personal observations by
others who wrote 40 years or more ago is cited to support this sweeping
statement. But, even if true, it could as easily be due to the absence of
wartime conditions since the close of World War II, or to the institution of
laws prohibiting child labor, or even to effective vaccines and antibiotics
that largely obliterated many acute and chronic diseases to which children
were commonly subjected in the past.
The speculations about whether "gifted" or "ungifted" children are more or
less likely to experience earlier sexual maturation and/or achieve greater
adult physical size are similarly shaky. And, as for "outstanding
personalities," there are many examples both of geniuses who were not
appreciated until later in their lives as well as of those who were
identifiable as prodigies in their childhood. No reliable information is
available as to whether there may be any relationshipships between these
variables. It is as easy to speculate one way as another and the whole
exercise partakes of the flavor of similar speculations about the
intelligence and moral fiber of people based on their physical and racial
characteristics.
Concerning the data presented on the average age of menarche of girls at the
Waldorf as compared to the public schools surveyed, several points seem
relevant:
1. It is not clear how the surveyís respondents may have interpreted a
request for "the exact year and month of the first menstrual period." Many
young girls, for example, may experience light spotting before the beginning
of regular menses. If this tended to be interpreted as "the first menstrual
period" by a greater percentage of the public school children and/or their
parents, then the results would be affected accordingly.
2. It is also unclear whether or not they may have been a recall bias
between the two groups. If the age of the subjects at the time that the
survey was actually carried out were significantly different, this could
affect the data.
3. The difference between the average age of menarche at the two different
sorts of schools, while apparently statistically significant, is only .62
years. In addition, Table VI shows that at both kinds of schools the
greatest percentage of girls experienced menarche at age 13.00
4. Although the authors say that there was no relationship between the
father's profession and the age of menarche of their daughters, it is
nevertheless interesting that in both groups there was a tendency for
menarche to occur later when the fathers were in "leading positions" or were
professionals. What exactly were the authors trying to do in bringing in
this variable, anyway? It would seem more reasonable, if some measure of
socioeconomic status were desired, to look at household income, for example.
5. No information is presented with regard to other variables known to be
associated with the average age of menarche such as general health status,
height, weight, and, especially, percent body fat. In the discussion
section the authors essentially dismiss these variables without presenting
their data to the effect that they were somehow taken into account.
In the discussion section of the article, the authors simply state that the
two groups of schoolgirls "differ[ed] solely according to the school they
are attending." Yet this has clearly not been shown. Indeed, no scientist,
especially in the social sciences, would claim that a measured variable had
been precisely isolated, much less do so in the dismissive terms relied on
by these authors that, "We were able to eliminate other influences which
might have affected these figures and which were even described as doing so
in the literature." How was this done, and exactly what "influences" were
considered? And where are the literature references relating to these
difficulties, most of which will be of much more recent date than the 1950s,
since there is now a wealth of published material concerning the
relationships between percent bodyfat, exercise, and the hormonal events of
puberty and menstruation.
The authors seem to recognize the vulnerability of their position in
referring to "the effects on the metabolism of carbohydrates and oxygen
[and] height and acceleration." But, again, instead of presenting the data
that would shed light on whether or not they had, indeed, overcome the most
serious questions concerning whether their data really support the
conclusions they wish to draw, they are silent. They say only that. "there
is obviously no difference in the two groups of girls we have described
stemming from this source." Yet it is not obvious at all. If it is
possible to show tables comparing the birth order of girls and their fathers
í occupations as compared to age of menarche, it ought to be a simple matter
to show the figures for percent bodyfat and other indicators of diet and
physical condition.
Indeed, given that the teachings of Rudolph Steiner are not confined to
educational pedagogy, including philosophical ideas with respect to farming
and diet, it is not reasonable to suppose that the two groups of schoolgirls
"differ[ed] solely according to the school they are attending." On the
contrary, it is far more reasonable to suppose that they may have differed
in precisely the sort of ways that could be expected to produce the observed
results. For example, if the girls attending Waldorf schools generally ate
a diet containing less fat, and if they exercised more, they could be
expected to have a later menarche than children attending public schools.
The remainder of the authorsí discussion involves additional speculation
that runs far afield from their limited data. As in their introductory
remarks, they refer to the works of others that are at least 20 years old
and unsupported by credible evidence and/or superseded by more recent
scientific understanding. For example, "Noldís theory," which is said to be
the idea, "that genetic traits are more prominent in illegitimate children
than in their parents" is laughable given the advances in genetics that have
occurred since the early 1960ís.
All of these considerations render the conclusions offered by these authors
in their summary essentially nonsensical. It may be consistent with the
thought of Rudolph Steiner but it is not consistent with current scientific
understanding either of mind-body (this is now the preferred term for
"psychosomatic") phenomena nor of sexual maturation and menstrual cycle
initiation and control. Indeed, if Steiner was half the scientist he
appears to have been, he would doubtless object strenuously to this
particular article being represented as supporting its pretentious
conclusions, or even, perhaps, of possessing any value at all.
In all fairness, of course, Matthiolus and Schuh appear to be seriously
out-of-date because they are. This article is said to have come from a book
published in 1977, after all. This is consistent with the authorsí data
including schoolgirls who were born in 1960 and the most recent citation
among their references being from 1975. The source book, A New Image of Man
in Medicine, is simply a misnomer now at the close of 1998. Why anyone
should wish to rely on such material to believe the conclusions offered by
these authors is even more ridiculous than the conclusions themselves.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1025.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 18:41:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Bruce Jackson, a friend passed me this posting you wrote on Tom's
"Steiner98" list:
***
To: Multiple recipients of list STEINER98 (STEINER98 intuition.org)
Subject: re: re-re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999
In einer eMail vom 11.01.99 08:12:45 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I suppose that is true. But what frightens me more than death is the
prospect of having to go through childhood and adolescence again, what a
drag! I much prefer the struggles of adulthood.
Hilmar
))
Yeah, but imagine being irresponsible again - having no care in the world...
I was watching some class 2 kids beating the hell out of each other in break
today and wondering when to intervene.... They were ALL clearly enjoying
having no responsibility for their actions!
Bruce
***
Bruce, you are a Waldorf teacher. You were wondering when to intervene? Not
wanting to interfere with their karma, or what?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1025 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1026 --------------
001 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Teachers on pedestals
004 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Teachers on pedestals
005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: early adolescence
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: early adolescence
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - math and Anthroposophy - apology
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.1 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:47:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901121002.CAA14789 lists1.best.com)
Q wrote:
) Bruce Jackson, a friend passed me this posting you wrote on Tom's
) "Steiner98" list:
You have delegated keeping a check on different laboratory cages to
different intelligence officers at PLANS?
You and Deby Anthroposophia and Waldorf?, you on anthropos-science,
noone on anthropos-views?, "006" on B.HiveĄs [spiritualscience], "007"
on Steiner98, who/noone on biodynamics?.
Ambitious organization.
Compliments!
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:54:35 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901121002.CAA14789 lists1.best.com) (199901121604.IAA15677 lists1.best.com)
I. Sune Nordwall wrote:
) You and Deby Anthroposophia and Waldorf?, you on anthropos-science,
) noone on anthropos-views?, "006" on B.HiveĄs [spiritualscience], "007"
) on Steiner98, who/noone on biodynamics?.
Sorry, missed Deby ("006"?/"007"/"008"?), still on anthropos-science?
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.3 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:59:00 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901110520.VAA10775 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901111554.HAA09905 lists1.best.com)
)Are you suggesting such reverence of the teacher is unique to WE? Perhaps I
)am naive and this is the case, but what rationale is at work here? I've
)always held the teaching and healing professions in the highest regard.
)Shucks, looks like it might just be a defect of my education. (Um, no I
)don't go to anthro docs neither.)
)e
I have never heard a good public school teacher or principal say teachers'
jobs are difficult, or that they have been given "a difficult class". Seems
to be a Waldorf thing, used especially when classroom behaviors or parent
concerns are being discussed. From my own personal experience, public
school classrooms seem to be more in control than Waldorf classrooms.
Admittedly I have not spent much time in urban public schools. A standing
joke among the parents at our Waldorf was the saying, "The parents don't
have to build the teachers' pedestals because Waldorf teachers come with
their own."
-DS
Hey Ezra, I heard that guns are included among your list of interests. Is
this true?
)Debra Snell wrote:
)
)) Charlie wrote,
))
)) ) I would
)) )like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
)) )and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
)) )respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
))
)) Sounds like you are practically ready to take on your own classroom,
)) Charlie. You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
)) immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
)) continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
)) self-importance here.
))
)) Can you explain how you can have your opinions without making judgement?
)) Sounds like Anthroposophical double-speak to me.
))
)) Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.4 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:34:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901110520.VAA10775 lists1.best.com) (199901121659.IAA17995 lists1.best.com)
Yup. I grew up on a farm, which is probably the signal most significant factor
in my interest in guns. However, I'm also a libertarian and take my freedoms
(and responsibilities) very seriously. But why do you ask?
e
PS I disagree with most of your observations with regard to teaching and
teachers.
Debra Snell wrote:
) )Are you suggesting such reverence of the teacher is unique to WE? Perhaps I
) )am naive and this is the case, but what rationale is at work here? I've
) )always held the teaching and healing professions in the highest regard.
) )Shucks, looks like it might just be a defect of my education. (Um, no I
) )don't go to anthro docs neither.)
) )e
)
) I have never heard a good public school teacher or principal say teachers'
) jobs are difficult, or that they have been given "a difficult class". Seems
) to be a Waldorf thing, used especially when classroom behaviors or parent
) concerns are being discussed. From my own personal experience, public
) school classrooms seem to be more in control than Waldorf classrooms.
) Admittedly I have not spent much time in urban public schools. A standing
) joke among the parents at our Waldorf was the saying, "The parents don't
) have to build the teachers' pedestals because Waldorf teachers come with
) their own."
)
) -DS
)
) Hey Ezra, I heard that guns are included among your list of interests. Is
) this true?
)
) )Debra Snell wrote:
) )
) )) Charlie wrote,
) ))
) )) ) I would
) )) )like to mention, though, that I have never taught in a Waldorf school,
) )) )and, although I have my opinions, I do not judge, and I have the utmost
) )) )respect for, those who do this difficult work every day.
) ))
) )) Sounds like you are practically ready to take on your own classroom,
) )) Charlie. You are starting to sound like a Waldorf teacher. Parents are
) )) immediately trained to place their children's teacher on a pedestal by
) )) continual reminders of how difficult their work is. I sense a degree of
) )) self-importance here.
) ))
) )) Can you explain how you can have your opinions without making judgement?
) )) Sounds like Anthroposophical double-speak to me.
) ))
) )) Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.5 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:36:37 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 12.01.99 11:10:47 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
Bruce Jackson, a friend passed me this posting you wrote on Tom's
"Steiner98" list:
***
To: Multiple recipients of list STEINER98 (STEINER98 intuition.org)
Subject: re: re-re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999
In einer eMail vom 11.01.99 08:12:45 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I suppose that is true. But what frightens me more than death is the
prospect of having to go through childhood and adolescence again, what a
drag! I much prefer the struggles of adulthood.
Hilmar
))
Yeah, but imagine being irresponsible again - having no care in the world...
I was watching some class 2 kids beating the hell out of each other in break
today and wondering when to intervene.... They were ALL clearly enjoying
having no responsibility for their actions!
Bruce
***
Bruce, you are a Waldorf teacher. You were wondering when to intervene? Not
wanting to interfere with their karma, or what?
-Dan Dugan
))
Dear Dan!
I am unsure of the problem here - I didnt mean more by intervene than "break
up the fight". Whether you are trying to wind me up or there is a difference
between US and english usage of intervene I dont know!
Bruce
For the rest of you - the remark was tongue in cheek and makes virtually no
sense if you havent been following the thread
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.6 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:22:36 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com)
Dan wrote:
) Dear Correspondents, I have received another comment on the menarche study,
) this one from an OB-GYN specialist.
Sounds neutral and scientific.
So I didnĄt understand his almost completly onesided comments until I
found out what you forgot to tell of his other qualifications and maybe
not so neutral background as a long and well documented fighting
sceptic; chairman of the Dallas/Fort Worth Council Against Health Fraud,
a board member of the National Council Against Health Fraud, a Technical
Advisor to the North Texas Skeptics and a regular writer for its
newsletter.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.7 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:10:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901130121.RAA00463 lists1.best.com)
Sune,
You are good, girl! Wanna job working for PLANS ? The pay is crummy but,
hey, we need a super sleuth like you!
Deby
)Dan wrote:
)
)) Dear Correspondents, I have received another comment on the menarche study,
)) this one from an OB-GYN specialist.
)
)Sounds neutral and scientific.
)So I didnĄt understand his almost completly onesided comments until I
)found out what you forgot to tell of his other qualifications and maybe
)not so neutral background as a long and well documented fighting
)sceptic; chairman of the Dallas/Fort Worth Council Against Health Fraud,
)a board member of the National Council Against Health Fraud, a Technical
)Advisor to the North Texas Skeptics and a regular writer for its
)newsletter.
)
)Sune Nordwall
)Stockholm, Sweden
)
)http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
)- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
)EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:17:08 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901121739.JAA10725 lists1.best.com)
BRUCE JACKSON
)I was watching some class 2 kids beating the hell out of each other in break
)today and wondering when to intervene....
(snip)
)I am unsure of the problem here - I didnt mean more by intervene than "break
)up the fight". Whether you are trying to wind me up or there is a difference
)between US and english usage of intervene I dont know!
Maybe things are different where you are, but by my understanding, it would
be a teacher's moral and legal duty to stop playground violence
-immediately-, not stand there "wondering when to intervene."
I brought this up because we keep hearing stories about Waldorf playgrounds
being out of control. What are the Waldorf guidelines for staff supervising
free play areas?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: math and Anthroposophy - apology
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:07:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901122052.OAA27011 hera.wku.edu)
Last night I posted a portion of a private message I received from Allen
Adler. I regret that I did not ask his permission for this, and I apologize
to him for violating his confidence. Please do not copy discussion of this
thread to Mr. Adler.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1026.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 22:50:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
New Twin Ridges charter sought by Citrus Heights
By Brett Nelson - Tue, Jan 12, 1999
The Twin Ridges School District - which is basedin North San Juan - may
have another charter school by September, but it won't be in Nevada County.
A group of parents and educators asked Twin Ridges to oversee its first-
through eighth-grade charter school inCitrus Heights, a Sacramento suburb.
If the Twin Ridges board of trustees approves the
charter petition, it will be the first Nevada County school
district to have an out-of-county school. However, the idea is not new.
The Nevada County Charter High School in Grass Valley is one of five
charter schools run though Tahoe-Truckee Unified School District's charter.
The Tahoe-Truckee district
also has schools in Napa and Auburn.
Twin Ridges currently has three charter schools and four traditional public
schools. The Citrus Heights charter school won't have any financial impact
on the other schools in
the district, said Superintendent Dave Taylor.
Trustees for Twin Ridges will discuss the Citrus Heights petition tonight,
but aren't expected to vote on it until later this month.
Messages left with members of the Citrus Heights charter group who wrote
the charter were not returned.
The Citrus Heights group first contacted Twin Ridges in November, Taylor said.
Yuba River Charter School in Nevada City uses a Waldorf-inspired method of
teaching - a method the Citrus Heights charter wants to incorporate into
its school, according to the
charter petition.
A Waldorf-inspired education differs fromtraditional public education in
that no textbooks or computers are used. Students create their own workbook
for use in lessons.
The Waldorf method was derived from private Waldorf schools that combine
education and anthroposophical religious teachings. Since a charter is a
public school, the
curriculum is changed to eliminate the anthroposophical teachings.
Taylor said that the Yuba River Charter is known throughout the state as
one of the more successful
Waldorf-inspired schools. Twin Ridges has had about four other requests from
around the state to oversee different Waldorf-method charter schools,
Taylor added.
But Twin Ridges decided to consider Citrus Heights' charter because of its
proximity to Nevada County, Taylor said. Taylor said that a lawsuit filed
against Twin Ridges, alleging the Yuba River Charter is unconstitutional,
won't have an impact on this decision.
The lawsuit - filed in U.S. District Court in Sacramento by People for
Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools Inc. - charges the Yuba River Charter
school is unconstitutional because it incorporates anthroposophical
teachings. Sacramento Unified School District is also named in the suit for
its Waldorf-inspired Oak Ridge Elementary School.
The case, filed Feb. 11, 1998, hasn't gone to court. Both sides are still
gathering evidence, Taylor said.
KNOW & GO
What: Twin Ridges School District
When: Tonight, 7 p.m.
Where: District Office, 18847 Oak Tree Road,
North San Juan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1026 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1027 --------------
001 - Kathy Thibodeau (sadie pe - RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: early adolescence
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - New Twin Ridges charter sought by Citrus Heights
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: early adolescence
005 - SINGERCARP aol.com - Re: Teachers on pedestals
006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: early adolescence
007 - Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmow - Re: Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
008 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Teachers on pedestals
009 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
010 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.1 ---------------
From: Kathy Thibodeau (sadie peep.netshel.net)
Subject: RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 23:15:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BE3E81.83E0BE80"
------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3E81.83E0BE80
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As a teachers aide in a public school I can tell you that the most =
important issue is keeping the children safe at all times. Fighting is =
definitely stopped immediately! It is a natural reaction to intervene. =
Fighting is the most punishable offense on the playground or in a =
classroom.
Sincerely,
Kathy
BRUCE JACKSON
)I was watching some class 2 kids beating the hell out of each other in =
break
)today and wondering when to intervene....
Maybe things are different where you are, but by my understanding, it =
would
be a teacher's moral and legal duty to stop playground violence
-immediately-, not stand there "wondering when to intervene."
I brought this up because we keep hearing stories about Waldorf =
playgrounds
being out of control. What are the Waldorf guidelines for staff =
supervising
free play areas?
-Dan Dugan
------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3E81.83E0BE80
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64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------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3E81.83E0BE80--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 00:36:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901130121.RAA00463 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall, you wrote,
)Sounds neutral and scientific.
)So I didnĄt understand his almost completly onesided comments until I
)found out what you forgot to tell of his other qualifications and maybe
)not so neutral background as a long and well documented fighting
)sceptic; chairman of the Dallas/Fort Worth Council Against Health Fraud,
)a board member of the National Council Against Health Fraud, a Technical
)Advisor to the North Texas Skeptics and a regular writer for its
)newsletter.
These are excellent qualifications for examining Anthroposophical science!
Anthropops always call anything that disagrees with them "one sided." As
though rationality and nonsense should be given equal time.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: New Twin Ridges charter sought by Citrus Heights
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 00:56:13 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
New Twin Ridges charter sought by Citrus Heights
By Brett Nelson - Tue, Jan 12, 1999
The Twin Ridges School District - which is based in North San Juan - may
have another charter school by September, but it won't be in Nevada County.
A group of parents and educators asked Twin Ridges to oversee its first-
through eighth-grade charter school in Citrus Heights, a Sacramento suburb.
If the Twin Ridges board of trustees approves the charter petition, it will
be the first Nevada County school district to have an out-of-county school.
However, the idea is not new.
The Nevada County Charter High School in Grass Valley is one of five
charter schools run though Tahoe-Truckee Unified School District's charter.
The Tahoe-Truckee district also has schools in Napa and Auburn.
Twin Ridges currently has three charter schools and four traditional public
schools. The Citrus Heights charter school won't have any financial impact
on the other schools in the district, said Superintendent Dave Taylor.
Trustees for Twin Ridges will discuss the Citrus Heights petition tonight,
but aren't expected to vote on it until later this month.
Messages left with members of the Citrus Heights charter group who wrote
the charter were not returned.
The Citrus Heights group first contacted Twin Ridges in November, Taylor said.
Yuba River Charter School in Nevada City uses a Waldorf-inspired method of
teaching - a method the Citrus Heights charter wants to incorporate into
its school, according to the charter petition.
A Waldorf-inspired education differs from traditional public education in
that no textbooks or computers are used. Students create their own workbook
for use in lessons.
The Waldorf method was derived from private Waldorf schools that combine
education and anthroposophical religious teachings. Since a charter is a
public school, the curriculum is changed to eliminate the anthroposophical
teachings.
Taylor said that the Yuba River Charter is known throughout the state as
one of the more successful Waldorf-inspired schools. Twin Ridges has had
about four other requests from around the state to oversee different
Waldorf-method charter schools, Taylor added.
But Twin Ridges decided to consider Citrus Heights' charter because of its
proximity to Nevada County, Taylor said.
Taylor said that a lawsuit filed against Twin Ridges, alleging the Yuba
River Charter is unconstitutional, won't have an impact on this decision.
The lawsuit - filed in U.S. District Court in Sacramento by People for
Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools Inc. - charges the Yuba River Charter
school is unconstitutional because it incorporates anthroposophical
teachings. Sacramento Unified School District is also named in the suit for
its Waldorf-inspired Oak Ridge Elementary School.
The case, filed Feb. 11, 1998, hasn't gone to court. Both sides are still
gathering evidence, Taylor said.
KNOW & GO
What: Twin Ridges School District
When: Tonight, 7 p.m.
Where: District Office, 18847 Oak Tree Road, North San Juan
from the Grass Valley/Nevada City Union
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:20:50 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com) (199901130209.SAA11613 lists1.best.com)
Debra Snell wrote:
) Sune,
) You are good, girl! Wanna job working for PLANS ? The pay is crummy but,
) hey, we need a super sleuth like you!
) Deby
Man! IĄve already got my ... full of unpaid work!
Seems to be the destiny for us idealistic workers on all sides of all
fences investing for the future.
At least us good ones ...
Keep it up!
Sune
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.5 ---------------
From: SINGERCARP aol.com
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:59:35 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Deby wrote:
)I have never heard a good public school teacher or principal say teachers'
)jobs are difficult, or that they have been given "a difficult class".(
)I have never heard) in my understanding can have two meanings.
I assume you meant )is a rare thing( and not )I have no experience(
Am I correct?
The next part of your mail:
)Seems to be a Waldorf thing, used especially when classroom behaviors
)or parent concerns are being discussed.(
)seems( sounds like an assumption, but combined it with at least one
fine accusation.
At this point I was really interested in your PERSONAL experience,
not your personal assumptions, and there it is:
)From my own personal experience, public
)school classrooms seem to be more in control than Waldorf classrooms.(
If this is your experience, there is nothing to add or to subtract. Fine.
But then you write:
)Admittedly I have not spent much time in urban public schools.
How disappointing!
How much time have you spent in public school classrooms,
How much time have you spent in Waldorf school classrooms,
in order to judge and compare discipline? (the original question)
How much time have you spent observing before making
judgements?
I PERSONALLY have met both: good public school teachers and
good Waldorf school teachers, dozends of each group. (Seems to be)
a common thing among good teachers not to blame the children for
being difficult.
Greetings from
Germany/Switzerland
Tom Singer-Carpenter
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.6 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:00:39 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com) (199901130859.AAA29331 lists1.best.com)
Dan wrote:
) These are excellent qualifications for examining Anthroposophical science!
) Anthropops always call anything that disagrees with them "one sided." As
) though rationality and nonsense should be given equal time.
Dan, I completely agree with you about the importance of learning and
correcting our understanding and acting in the world also out of what
can be learnt from natural scientific empirical studies.
As you may have seen on my home page, I have really tried, within the
limits of my abilities, to understand the roots, development and nature
of "natural science", especially in relation to what is today called
"anthroposophy".
And I quite agree with you that Rudolf Steiner is a great challenge to
understand, digest and relate to in todayĄs strongly natural
scientifically oriented and West dominated world.
The manĄs an offense to many and an inspiration to others.
People arenĄt supposed to be like him, today, in the very deepest sense
of the word.
Why?
Since the Renaissance, the developing scientific revolution and its
achievements has ever more come to dominate the world.
This revolution has important roots in the dethroning, condemnation and
dismissal of the authorities of tha Antique.
Knowledge was not any more looked upon as something you come to simply
by reading and learning what the "authorities" had come to, said and
written.
It was something you come to through your own observation and thinking.
Then comes this guy, Rudy.
What does he do?
And with whom can one compare him?
He acts as if he was somebody like Aristotle, the Greek Natural
scientific "authority" of the Antique, born in the "wrong" time and
place, building an enormous thought system and having opinions about all
and everything, from the importance of learning something like knitting
for the development of thinking to the nature or not nature of numbers
as concepts!
And not only that, _at the same time_ he behaves like he was somebody
like Thomas Aquinas, in the Middle Ages trying to show that the Natural
science, developed by the Greeks _not_ was un-Christian or
anti-Christian, but that the understanding of the natural world was
fully compatible with the understanding of the spiritual world, becoming
the "Prince of the Scholastics".
Most of this has been swept away by the following "natural scientific
revolution" of the past centuries, in the form it has taken so far.
And then comes Rudolf Steiner and tries to do it _again_, and show how
both the natural world and the spiritual world can be understood out of
the human being as the central perspective and main frame of reference,
a number of methods for doing this, and a number of consequences for
different fields of practical life.
Of course heĄs a problem!
And of course _one_ instinctive reaction is to call it "nonsense" and
something we now as humanity have left behind us.
The material, natural world is in essence all there is for the man of
today, if one has been raised and learnt to think in terms of the
Natural science as it has mainly been developed so far, dispelling of
the human being as anything but a lump of matter, organized as a higher
form of animal, striving and having succeeded to dominate all other
animals and the world and using them and the world for his own good.
Learning to understand man and the world from this perspective is
learning to understand the nature of "matter", for which the best tool
is the hypothetical-deductive experimental method, ending up with
reducing the world to the necessary causal relations between pairs of
factors, built up into the world net of interacting factors.
I completely agree that that is one of the levels of reality we must
respect, investigate and correct our understanding and acting in
relation to, and that the hypothetical-deductive method is an invaluable
tool for doing this.
The problem for me is I feel it does not do justice to the reality I
experience as a human being. "I", what is personally _most_ important to
_me_ as a human being among other human beings, am left out of this
picture, possible to investigate with the hypothetical-deductive method.
For this perspective "I" am an illusion, coming to expression in one of
its many forms in the naming by Popper of one chapter in his "Objective
Knowledge" as "Epistemology Without a Knowing Subject".
ThatĄs the background for my finding the "anthroposophical" description
of reality to be the most interesting to me, so far, in its way of
differentiating between
- that which does not change and develops out of itself; matter,
- that which does; living matter; organisms,
- that which also displays passion and antipassion in different forms
and moves out of this; animals, and
- that which goes beyond this too as the potentially purely human
element in us, and the methods for investigating, understanding and
handling these layers of reality.
I also give you full credit for pointing to the weaknesses in doing
complete justice to "matter" and present day science in anthroposophy
and waldorf pedagogics. It is, as I see it, an still unsolved problem
that will take time to solve in a balanced way. Waldorf pedagogics (as I
see it) is still in its infancy.
I wonĄt carry this reasoning further here, only wanting to pointing once
again to the central problem in this ongoing discussion about waldorf
pedagogics, as I see it.
And I _did_ find the comments by Mr Gorski very stimulating and well
worthy of discussing, even though they still, to my mind, stand out as
quite, but interestingly!, onesided.
(mr) Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.7 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmoweb.net)
Subject: Re: Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:23:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901130649.WAA17162 lists1.best.com)
Debra,
What does the subject heading "Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS" have
to do with the article you posted?
--
Robert Tolz
Email: rtolz cosmoweb.net
Web: http://www.cosmoweb.net/~rtolz
Tel: (212) 754-9400
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.8 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Teachers on pedestals
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:59:02 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 13.01.99 01:18:30 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I have never heard a good public school teacher or principal say teachers'
jobs are difficult, or that they have been given "a difficult class". ))
Does that mean that it is true?
I have never heard a public school teacher say teachers' jobs are easy!
BTW I know plenty of public school teachers who think their jobs are
difficult, and that they cannot abide teaching particular classes. I believe,
however, that the "threat" of being brought before the principle makes their
jobs "easier" in the discipline sense than ours. I would not say my job is
difficult though - closer to impossible (gggg) (honestly - I love my job,
otherwise I wouldnt do it!)
Bruce
PS public throughout in the US(A) sense
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.9 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:59:04 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 13.01.99 08:26:05 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
Maybe things are different where you are, but by my understanding, it would
be a teacher's moral and legal duty to stop playground violence
-immediately-, not stand there "wondering when to intervene."
I brought this up because we keep hearing stories about Waldorf playgrounds
being out of control. What are the Waldorf guidelines for staff supervising
free play areas?
))
To ban children from fighting so long as there is no risk of injury strikes me
as a removal of an innocent civil liberty. I agree that there is less fighting
in state schools that I am familiar with, but the contacts that I have there
do not necessarily see that as a good thing: "Is is good to see the children
being allowed to let off steam".
There are naturally guidelines for playground duty, but I do not intend to
translate ours for the benefit of readers to this list
Bruce
PS Do you allow snowball-fights?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1027.10 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:10:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901130323.TAA07611 lists1.best.com)
I wondered if there was some problem of translation with Bruce's post.
Even so, my experience of the WE playground is entirely fond. In the 12 years I went to SWS, I saw maybe three fights. Usually they occurred between friends who'd become a tad wee too competitive.
e
Dan Dugan wrote:
) BRUCE JACKSON
) )I was watching some class 2 kids beating the hell out of each other in break
) )today and wondering when to intervene....
)
) (snip)
)
) )I am unsure of the problem here - I didnt mean more by intervene than "break
) )up the fight". Whether you are trying to wind me up or there is a difference
) )between US and english usage of intervene I dont know!
)
) Maybe things are different where you are, but by my understanding, it would
) be a teacher's moral and legal duty to stop playground violence
) -immediately-, not stand there "wondering when to intervene."
)
) I brought this up because we keep hearing stories about Waldorf playgrounds
) being out of control. What are the Waldorf guidelines for staff supervising
) free play areas?
)
) -Dan Dugan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1027 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1028 --------------
001 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
002 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: early adolescence
003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
004 - BruceyJ aol.com - Fighting in the playground
005 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: early adolescence
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
007 - Daniel Sabsay (DanielSabs - Anthroposophy & science (was: early adolescence)
008 - Kathy Thibodeau (sadie pe - RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
010 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.1 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:53:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199901131601.IAA18485 lists1.best.com)
On 13 Jan 99, at 10:59, BruceyJ aol.com wrote:
) To ban children from fighting so long as there is no risk of injury
) strikes me as a removal of an innocent civil liberty.
I wonder whether this is a cultural difference, or a difference
between Waldorf schools and other schools. In the United States,
many people, including me, would be shocked if kids were allowed
to hit and kick each other on the playground. Sure, fights happen,
but they are not allowed, and are immediately broken up.
Even when I was a child in the early 60's, we were taught by
teachers, coaches, boy scout leaders, and others to walk away
when challenged to a fight.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.2 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 09:07:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199901131303.FAA11570 lists1.best.com)
This was a very good post, Sune. I have one comment:
On 13 Jan 99, at 14:00, Sune Nordwall wrote:
) The material, natural world is in essence all there is for the man of
) today, if one has been raised and learnt to think in terms of the Natural
) science as it has mainly been developed so far, dispelling of the human
) being as anything but a lump of matter, organized as a higher form of
) animal, striving and having succeeded to dominate all other animals and
) the world and using them and the world for his own good.
I do not think you are doing justice to the materialist viewpoint.
Most scientists, I think, have a broader view, and do not approve of
human attempts to "dominate all other animals and the world and
using them and the world for his own good." This attitude is more
a consequence of religious thought than of scientific thought.
After all, Christianity teaches (according to some) that the world
was created for the benefit of man, and that man is inherently
dominant and superior. The supposed mastery that we humans
have over other animals and the world is due to our spiritual
superiority. Is this not similar to the teachings of Steiner?
Scientific thinking, on the other hand, leads me to conclude that
the world is an interconnected, ecological whole, and that we are
but one of many species. Yes, we have more intelligence than
other animals, and a greater ability to mold our environment, but we
also have the responsibility to use those abilities wisely, so as to
avoid unnecessary harm to the environment that we share with
other species.
The concept that the human being is nothing more than a lump of
matter seems to be commonly attributed to scientific thought by
those who feel that science is opposed to spirituality, but I have
never heard that view expressed by a proponent of the scientific or
materialist viewpoint.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.3 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 09:59:13 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901130649.WAA17162 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901131513.HAA28812 lists1.best.com)
)Debra,
) What does the subject heading "Twin Ridges Thumbs Nose at PLANS" have
)to do with the article you posted?
Just venting my human emotions. Sorry.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.4 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Fighting in the playground
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 13:55:15 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 13.01.99 18:10:43 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I wonder whether this is a cultural difference, or a difference
between Waldorf schools and other schools. In the United States,
many people, including me, would be shocked if kids were allowed
to hit and kick each other on the playground. Sure, fights happen,
but they are not allowed, and are immediately broken up.
Even when I was a child in the early 60's, we were taught by
teachers, coaches, boy scout leaders, and others to walk away
when challenged to a fight.
))
This is beginning to become quite an interesting thread, and hence I have
isolated it from the main thread and renamed it. It might be worth posting the
question on other lists to see what happens, ie what people who are on other
lists think! I have so far been stating my personal views, but obviously my
eyes have seen many things that others eyes have seen too!
I will seek other views from other lists!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.5 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: early adolescence
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 19:54:56 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901131303.FAA11570 lists1.best.com)
(199901131709.JAA24160 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901131709.JAA24160 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)The concept that the human being is nothing more than a lump of
)matter seems to be commonly attributed to scientific thought by
)those who feel that science is opposed to spirituality, but I have
)never heard that view expressed by a proponent of the scientific or
)materialist viewpoint.
I concur. It is often used as a straw man in those with an anti-
scientific bent (amongst whom I do *not* include Sune!).
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 19:59:33 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901131601.IAA18485 lists1.best.com)
(199901131655.IAA15184 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901131655.IAA15184 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)On 13 Jan 99, at 10:59, BruceyJ aol.com wrote:
)
)) To ban children from fighting so long as there is no risk of injury
)) strikes me as a removal of an innocent civil liberty.
)
)I wonder whether this is a cultural difference, or a difference
)between Waldorf schools and other schools. In the United States,
)many people, including me, would be shocked if kids were allowed
)to hit and kick each other on the playground.
I suspect that there may be a difference of use of the word "fight"
here. I suspect that Bruce may be referring to what is known in the UK
as "puppy fighting" or "play fighting", where youngsters wrestle, etc.
with each other with no intent of causing hurt -- it is more play than
aggression.
That said, it *can* get out of hand and is, for this reason, not
permitted at the school at which I teach.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.7 ---------------
From: Daniel Sabsay (DanielSabsay earthlink.net)
Subject: Anthroposophy & science (was: early adolescence)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 12:52:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote )
)As you may have seen on my home page, I have really tried, within the
)limits of my abilities, to understand the roots, development and nature
)of "natural science", especially in relation to what is today called
)"anthroposophy".
I have seen that your web page on "natural science" does not contain the
words falsifiabilty, logic, comprehensiveness, honesty, replicability, or
sufficiency. This does not seem to me to be an intellectually honest way
of understanding science. (- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological
cell biology and EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of
society)
Homeopathy = quackery.
-- Daniel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daniel Sabsay, president "Ignorance is the ultimate renewable resource"
East Bay Skeptics Society http://www.eb-skeptics.org
mail eb-skeptics.org
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.8 ---------------
From: Kathy Thibodeau (sadie peep.netshel.net)
Subject: RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 13:43:58 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BE3EFA.DA8D6C00"
------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3EFA.DA8D6C00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I feel it is more a loss of civil liberty to not feel safe at school, =
then to lose the privilege of fighting. I cannot see how it is good to =
fight=20
in order to let off steam. We teach our children to vent in other ways =
such as=20
physical activity, using your words and so on. As far as snow fights, =
no they would not
be allowed. Hard snowballs caught in the face is not a pretty sight. =
The school is held accountable for all behavior and accidents. Living =
in California, it isn't really an issue.
We get snow a few times a year and the children play by building =
snowmen, making=20
snow angels and building forts. Snowball fights are not necessary for =
fun in the snow.
Behavior that can hurt someone else is not acceptable. =20
Kathy
To ban children from fighting so long as there is no risk of injury =
strikes me
as a removal of an innocent civil liberty. I agree that there is less =
fighting
in state schools that I am familiar with, but the contacts that I have =
there
do not necessarily see that as a good thing: "Is is good to see the =
children
being allowed to let off steam".
There are naturally guidelines for playground duty, but I do not intend =
to
translate ours for the benefit of readers to this list
Bruce
PS Do you allow snowball-fights?
------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3EFA.DA8D6C00
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64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------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3EFA.DA8D6C00--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:14:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199901131655.IAA15184 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901132003.MAA11355 lists1.best.com)
On 13 Jan 99, at 19:59, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
) Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
) )On 13 Jan 99, at 10:59, BruceyJ aol.com wrote:
) )
) )) To ban children from fighting so long as there is no risk of injury
) )) strikes me as a removal of an innocent civil liberty.
) )
) )I wonder whether this is a cultural difference, or a difference
) )between Waldorf schools and other schools. In the United States,
) )many people, including me, would be shocked if kids were allowed
) )to hit and kick each other on the playground.
)
) I suspect that there may be a difference of use of the word "fight"
) here. I suspect that Bruce may be referring to what is known in the UK as
) "puppy fighting" or "play fighting", where youngsters wrestle, etc. with
) each other with no intent of causing hurt -- it is more play than
) aggression.
That occurred to me as well.
In thinking more about differing cultural attitudes toward *real*
fighting among children, it occurred to me that there was
considerably more tolerance for kids' fights in generations born in
the U.S. before, say, 1930. This is my impression from films that
were made in the 30's, and from reading Mark Twain. There is a
description of a fight toward the beginning of "Tom Sawyer" that
reflects an attitude that boys were almost *expected* to fight the
new boy in the neighborhood.
This, I think, is related to the prevalence of "bullies" in those days.
I'm using the word "bully" to refer to a boy who would routinely pick
fights with, and beat up on, smaller boys in order to extort money,
feel important, or whatever.
)From what my father tells me, bullies were a fact of life when he
was growing up in the 1930's. You'd walk out of your way to avoid
walking past an area where the local bully hangs out. Although
there are still bullies, I never personally had to deal with bullies as
a child, and I have the impression that they are not as common as
they used to be. I suspect that this is related to the fact that our
society has shown less tolerance for childhood fights in the last 30
years than was shown in prior generations.
And it works both ways. If there is a bully in the neighborhood, the
other boys need to cultivate an ability to fight in self defense. And
as shown in "Tom Sawyer," when a new boy comes into the
neighborhood, both he and the other boys are likely to start off by
acting tough. The new boy wants to show that he can't be bullied,
and the other boys want to show the new kid that they won't allow
him to become a bully.
This is so different from the situation when I was growing up! But
my point here, I guess, is to show that cultural attitudes toward
fights among children can differ considerably.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1028.10 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:41:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901132003.MAA11355 lists1.best.com)
(199901131655.IAA15184 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901132217.OAA16401 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo, writing about fewer childhood fistfights, says:
)I suspect that this is related to the fact that our
)society has shown less tolerance for childhood fights in the last 30
)years than was shown in prior generations.
If anyone is noticing that incidents of fisticuffs are diminishing within a
population of children, I'd suggest a correlation with the level of
physical violence inflicted on children by caretaking adults.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1028 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1029 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
002 - Amy An (amyan ibm.net) - Re:critics list
003 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Early adolescence
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Bullying and violence (Was Re: the what if /and remembering yo
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
006 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
007 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re:critics list
008 - Herman de Tollenaere (her - Czech Waldorf criticism at Prague university
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re:critics list
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Bullying and violence (Was Re: the what if /and rememberin
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: the what if /and remembering your spirit
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:20:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901132149.NAA20966 lists1.best.com)
)PS Do you allow snowball-fights?
Snowball fights with soft-pack balls _are_ allowed at both of my children's
schools. Snowball fights are only allowed on the field. Children who do not
wish to participate can play elsewhere.
Debra
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.2 ---------------
From: Amy An (amyan ibm.net)
Subject: Re:critics list
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 21:45:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901132337.PAA26076 lists1.best.com)
Hello,
I have only recently subscribed to this list though I have read parts of
the archive.
I do find some of the postings here a bit interesting but am rather
puzzled. Exactly why do you have this list? What are the origins and why
is the "conversation" here not better placed on a skeptics or similar
list?
I can understand that you might be concerned when a Waldorf School is
misleading (either by accident or design) or when public funds are used
for a Waldorf School which includes religious content.
But I find myself confused about this list more than any other I have
had experience with. Are you interested in educating parents who are
considering Waldorf education? Are you interested in supporting parents
who are unhappy with a WE experience? What are you trying to accomplish?
I could describe myself as part skeptic but also part ... not sure what
to call it but anyway open in some way to "alternative" medicine,
schooling etc.
So I am less interested in the Christian, Anthroposophic side to WE and
tend to ignore it or explain it to my child in the context of my
family's other beliefs. And I am very happy with the way math and
reading are being taught to my son and with the general feeling of the
classroom.
Would you object to my, I believe rational, and personal decision to
choose WE, at least for now for my son? How does WE differ, in your
belief system, from Catholic or other religious education?
Also, I have not seen anything here suggesting a better alternative to
WE or any other type of schooling. For example, there are many, many
problems with the actual content of more traditional approaches to
schooling. History, as I was taught it, was full of inaccuracies, gaps,
and misinformation etc as the textbook and even some suggest, political
groups, hold sway over what our children are taught. Math, science, and
history textbooks are, in most cases, woefully inadequate and inaccurate
(I love Richard Feynman's description of the problems with textbooks in
his books, Surely you must be Joking Mr. Feynman, and What do you care
what other people think? He is a Nobel Prize winner and self described
sceptic.) In addition to content, the problems with the _methods_ of
teaching children in public school are also many. I am sure many of you
are familiar with these. The list can go on and on.
So, in terms of all myquestions what is the intent of this list? It
seems you do an excellent job supporting like minded folks but beyond
that I am not sure how your hard work and obviously thoughtful approach
can be useful.
Respectfully,
Amy An
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.3 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Early adolescence
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:44:14 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199812171751.JAA00659 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199812172057.MAA16173 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo wrote about estrus and child-rearing:
[snip]
)One *big* difference between the reproductive cycle of humans and
)those of most other animals, including our close relatives, chimps,
)bonobos, and gorillas, is that female humans don't have an estrus
)cycle. They don't go into heat, and are capable of being sexually
)active at all stages of their menstrual cycles, rather than just for a
)few days around ovulation (which is rather fortunate for their
)husbands and boyfriends).
Female humans may be capable of sex outside of the time of ovulation, but
there is evidence that they do have a time of greater sexual awareness and
interest (to put it calmly) just preceding and around the time of
ovulation. You may not call this estrus, but, as it is related to higher
levels of the hormone estrogen, and the effect is similar to that in
animals (if muted by culture), I would think it an unlikely argument to use
to differentiate humans from animals. I think it's a case of degree, and
the presence of a sexual capacity and interest outside of ovulation, which
makes humans different; not biology.
)Presumably, there is an evolutionary advantage to this. I suspect
)that it is related to keeping the man around all the time.
)
)Human young require parental care for an extended period
)compared to other animals. So the parents must be able to
)simultaneously care for a number of kids. Those kids are more
)likely to survive if they get more care, and they get more care if
)there are two parents around.
Consider Canis lupus, a very social animal. Mom and dad look after the pups
along with the rest of the pack, despite the lack of a sexual inducement,
for an extended period of time, lasting into the next estrus cycle and the
birth of more pups. Sex as an evolutionary inducement for longer family
bonding in humans, for the benefit of the young, seems unlikely to me,
especially as humans, in their early development, lived in packs as well,
and are famous in native and primitive societies for their extended
families.
)So we can see a possible advantage to doing away with estrus.
)On the other hand, estrus has an advantage. If sexual activity is
)only possible around the time of ovulation, it is more likely that the
)woman will get pregnant. In the absence of estrus, it makes
)evolutionary sense for the woman to ovulate at a time when sexual
)activity is most likely.
)
)My experience camping is that when you are living outside in a
)simple shelter with no artificial light other than campfires, you tend
)to go to sleep shortly after it gets dark. But if the moon is full, and
)shortly before the full moon, it does not get so dark, and one might
)feel more awake after sunset (except for astronomers, who prefer
)moonless nights). And the more awake you feel, the more likely
)you are to be in the mood for sex.
)
)So it would make sense for the menstrual cycle to correlate with
)the lunar cycle. This would not be because of the tidal pull of the
)moon, but because of the additional light that it sheds.
Steve, you old romantic, you. Maybe not good science, but great stuff for a
novel like Jean Auel's Ayla series.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Bullying and violence (Was Re: the what if /and remembering your
spirit)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:48:16 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901121739.JAA10725 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901130323.TAA07611 lists1.best.com)
There's been a lot of rubbish said about playground bullying.
Any violence between children is to be abhored, however natural- and
innocent-seeming. There is no such thing as "play-fighting". It's all
serious business. No child laughs while engaged in these rituals.
Children tussle and fight naturally -- at least male children. So do wolf,
bear, lion cubs, and almost every other kind of young mammal.
Most animal "fighting" is ritualistic, designed to keep order and place in
the pack. In the human pack, egalitarianism has replaced that need for
pecking order. But 2 million years of human nature has not been changed by
two thousand years of moral codes.
Children become adults. Adults kill each other. Families, clans, tribes,
societies and nations war. The Duke of Wellington said "The battle of
Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton". The Boy Scouts, with their
code of conduct similar to the military "duty, honour, country", were
(are?) nothing more than the socialisation of war-acceptance.
The "better instincts" of civilised people have tried for four to six
millenia to control these "animal instincts", with greater or lesser
success. Apologists for brutality (including anyone here on this list who
says playground violence is "harmless") are apologists for war.
It is probably a forlorn hope that stopping childhood violence on the
playgrounds will curb human instinct for conflict. But you gotta start
somewhere. The dad who tells his son to "stick up for yourself" is the
foster parent to cannon fodder; what _real_ man tells his son to "walk away
from it"?
Is violence endemic to the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposphical way or its
current efflorescence in some hundreds of schools worldwide?
To the extent that has been reported here (see the archives for some horror
stories of Waldorf playground supervisors tolerating grave violence among
children because it `must have been the victim's karma') it would seem that
Waldorf does not have an anti-violence dogma or control mechanism. And
that's the same thing, today, as saying that playground violence is
tolerated, nay, encouraged.
Now to my personal experience.
New Zealand is a very macho country. It's young. It's still celebrating the
stupidity of its sending young men off to other people's wars (Britain's)
and sending them to slaughters like Gallipoli and the Egyptian desert 50
and 80 years after the events. Ritualised violence is rampant in sport:
real Kiwis (rugby players) don't wear football pads and helmets like the
American pussies do. Acceptance of pain and suffering is manly and looked
up to. Playground violence is the stuff of novels and legends.
This macho subcultural inculcation of violence was one reason I wanted an
alternative to public secondary education for my children. Even in -- or
perhaps naturally in -- his first years in school, my sweet, gentle,
cheerful, funny little boy was bullied. From the sandbox of kindergarten to
the playground of sixth grade, from the bathrooms and hallways to the
playing fields of the gentlemen's game, cricket (I wouldn't allow him to
play rugby or soccer) he was bullied.
Why? I've heard it said all my life (I was bullied as a small child) that
children who are subjected to violence are natural attractors of it. There
may be something in this in terms of the innate animal instincts to either
be top dog or to submit to top dogs.
But in our egalitarian cultures (and there is no culture I know of more
egalitarian than the Kiwi, where the dustman proudly wears a badge that
says he is the equal of the prime minister, even as the prime minister guts
his economic, medical, educational, psychological, retirement and
socio-cultural living standards) the idea of equality has fostered the idea
of civility. Except that everyone knows that these codes are shams, and
that real life ain't like that. We simply replaced six-guns with lawyers.
Well, apparently, not completely. (That's one point for Godzone: no
handguns at all, and rigidly-licensed hunting weapons. Though an awful lot
of men and boys have been killing each other, wives, kids, fathers, and the
general public in these parts in the last few years.)
But political correctness and feminism brought Godzone one advance: a
mandate to schools to control violence at any cost. It seems the moms were
fed up with the tide of manly violence. Mainly because they were copping
the worst of the lot of spousal violence. So anti-bullying and conflict
resolution and win-win became a staple of the public school curriculum, and
playground monitoring and negotiation sessions became the norm.
As a board of trustees member and father of a boy attending a public
primary school, I was pleased to see this. Especially as my best advice to
the boy, about what to do when he was bullied by neighbourhood toughs while
delivering papers after school, away from the `safety' of the monitored,
progressive school playground, was to fight like hell and kick the shit out
of the jerks in any way possible, including `dirty' tactics.
My second-best advice was for him to run like hell.
He usually chose the worst option: he stood his ground and took it.
The paper-run bullies were the top dogs at school. The playground violence
didn't cease, boys didn't become more sensitive and negotiate their
differences. Violence simply went underground at school, and changed venue
to the streets.
But, out-of-sight, out-of-mind. In the absence of broken bones, bruises or
complaints, it appeared to me, and my colleagues on the board of trustees,
that the anti-violence programme was working at our up-market, teachers-
college- affiliated school, with its top staff and top students.
However, reports of the continuation of the macho subcultural rites of
passage in the secondary schools, and my aversion to the old school tie
(uniforms are still worn in top public schools here, both on the body and
the spirit) prompted me to look for alternatives. Most were too expensive,
or overtly religious, or both.
Then came news of the integration into the public system of this quaint,
hillside, small, philosophically-oriented school -- a Rudolf Steiner school
-- into the state (public) school system. A private school became
affordable, subsidised by the state (my taxes). I investigated. I won't go
into the nature of that investigation and my duping by the school here;
this is about physical and emotional violence, not spiritual. We were
persuaded. Any alternative, especially one which promised to be more
humanities-centred, would have been acceptable. This was the only such
alternative. We moved both children, despite the younger one's having two
more years of public primary and intermediate education available.
So off we went to the happy suburban hills. Except that it didn't turn out
that way. I've catalogued elsewhere the educational, philosophical and
religious/ spiritual evils we found. Add to that the continued presence of
playground bullying -- among teenagers who had been together in the same
class for up to ten years. And my son was still one of those who were
picked on. Only now, he was getting to be big, and strong, and athletic,
from working out and outdoors stuff and rock climbing. So _he_ not only
fought back, givng as good as he got, but giving before he got.
The violence was ritualised, down to the specific nature of the violent
acts. A particular favourite, of both boys and girls, was
"nipple-crippling", or the pinching of [only] boys' nipples. (I thought
that a terribly unfair advantage for the girls, who were protected by this
country's even stronger feminist anti-harassment laws from having _their_
nipples pinched.) I noted that the girls didn't pinch each others' nipples,
either. I also got sore nipples myself from the grab-and-run tactics of
both of my own kids. Now, lest you think this is a really kinky country,
let me assure you there was nothing at all sexual in any of this: it was
purely sublimated, ritualised violence. "Play-fighting" my
Vietnam-veteran's ass.
There were other, more subtle forms of cultural violence practiced as well,
and there would be the occasional real fight among the boys. And the girls
had their own "catty" society, in addition to their physical abuse of each
other. All very enlightened ... philosophical ... and ... _spiritual_ ...
don'tcha know?
So where were the teachers while all this was going on? Out in the staff
room, having their own brain chemistry altered, by nicotine, prohibited to
the kids and to adults anywhere else in the school. Outside class time, in
the upper-primary, middle and upper schools, there was absolutely no sight
of a teacher. (The kindergarten playgrounds are supervised, I gather, as a
matter of legal responsibility. Although the school is just a block away,
I've never observed the kindy playground for its violence and anti-violence
supervision, and I'm not aware of any complaint or anecdotal evidence of
violence there.)
So where was the state-mandated anti-bullying programme? My son never saw
any evidence of it.
And where was the supposed concern for the spiritual welfare of the pupils
that is such a major focus of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools?
My son says that even when the subject was brought up by the kids
themselves, it was ignored by the teachers. I know the subject was given
lip-service by the teachers in parent-teacher meetings. But there was no
substance.
I can't say that my son's Steiner teachers thought it was his "karma" to be
bullied. I never asked. In fact, I never really knew the situation was that
bad. The kids didn't tell me. When they went back to the public schools,
after our displeasure over the school's other failings became to great,
they went back to the same ritualised culture of violence, of one sort or
another.
And are my kids any the worse for this? Well, they're both still physical
with me -- though I give as good as I get. Yet they're both non-violent and
generally thoughtful, gentle, kind, empathetic, and all those other
wonderful things -- with everyone but their parents. (They are, after all,
teenagers, and who ever heard of a teenager who was loving and respectful
to their parents?) The boy has a tendency towards outbursts of anger that
could be unmanageable if he were pushed too far.
Is playground bullying the cause of all this? Is it the cause of all the
murders and wife- and child-beatings? Is it the cause of wars?
Yep. And so is my own play-fighting and tussling and kid-pinching as the
father of these kids, oh, so long ago. And the ritualised spankings (an
embarrassing sting, not a beating, I'm relieved to say). And the harsh
words.
Violence is violence. It may be that humanity may never be able to rise
above it. As a war correspondent who believes in the journalists' and
historians' dictum that the world would be a boring place without conflict,
I'm responsible for the continuation of human violence. I'd rather be
bored, I say. And I've worked (as a journalist) to foster peace.
But have I helped my children to be less accepting of violence -- personal,
institutional and nationalistic -- in the future?
Has their Steiner education and its milieu?
I'm ashamed to say I don't think I've helped, because my actions didn't
match my words and oft-repeated philsophy.
I'm angry that the Steiner school did not make an understanding of human
violence a major, formal part of its much-vaunted curriculum. After all,
it's mandated by the state, whose school inspectors have found the school
wanting in this regard for all of its five years of integration.
So what do we do? We start by saying no to all violence, everywhere, all
the time, and not tolerating any acceptance of it as a cultural,
evolutionarily- useful, natural part of life.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
Stopping the violence between children and substituting more humanistic,
useful
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:52:00 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901120211.SAA10973 lists1.best.com)
(199901130859.AAA29331 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901131303.FAA11570 lists1.best.com)
In an apparently reasonable discussion of Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical "science" and natural science, which tries to appear not
unfriendly to the latter, but which is, I believe, a thinly-veiled attack
on natural science, Sune Nordwall wrote, inter alia, :
)Dan wrote:
)
)) These are excellent qualifications for examining Anthroposophical
))science!
)) Anthropops always call anything that disagrees with them "one sided." As
)) though rationality and nonsense should be given equal time.
)
)Dan, I completely agree with you about the importance of learning and
)correcting our understanding and acting in the world also out of what
)can be learnt from natural scientific empirical studies.
)
)As you may have seen on my home page, I have really tried, within the
)limits of my abilities, to understand the roots, development and nature
)of "natural science", especially in relation to what is today called
)"anthroposophy".
)
)And I quite agree with you that Rudolf Steiner is a great challenge to
)understand, digest and relate to in todayĄs strongly natural
)scientifically oriented and West dominated world.
Michael KOPP says:
Steiner has _always_ been a great challenge to understand, since the 19th
Century. It has nothing to do with "today's strongly natural scientifically
oriented and West dominated world".
It is part of the methods of cults (including the great religions and the
individual snake-oil-salesmen) to be "difficult". Nobody understood Steiner
in them days neither. They just pretended to, like they pretend to now, so
they can be a part of something warm and fuzzy and cozy and _accepted_. Or,
like Nordwall, they claim the path is oh, so difficult.
Yeah, it's difficult, all right.
I _might_ someday be able to understand the technical substance of
Einstein's two theories (as opposed to the popular explanations which I did
understand, when Carl Sagan showed me, before newer knowledge changed the
picture again). I'd have to learn a lot of _science_.
But my chances of `understanding' Steiner are zip. I think he designed it
that way. And his system doesn't produce results, and can't be taught. Not
even the method (introspection and clairvoyance) can be taught. It has to
be "come to".
Science, however, CAN be taught. (Except in Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical schools, where they teach phenomenology and
pseudo-science.)
[snip]
NORDWALL:
)And then comes Rudolf Steiner and tries to do it _again_, and show how
)both the natural world and the spiritual world can be understood out of
)the human being as the central perspective and main frame of reference,
)a number of methods for doing this, and a number of consequences for
)different fields of practical life.
KOPP:
This paragraph illustrates the central falseness of all things Steiner/
Waldorf/ Anthroposophical: IT IS TOTAL GOBBLEDEGOOK!
The writer may not be a native speaker of English, but that doesn't stop
(her?) from commenting at length.
Nordwall's paragraph is incomprehensible. I think this is more an effect of
Anthroposophical dogma than Nordwall's lack of command of English (I'm
trying not to be my usual sarcastic, personally-oriented slagger, here,
gimme a break).
Of course, in the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical world, it doesn't have
to: the more obscurantist the language, the easier it is to say one must
work hard to come to an understanding of Steiner -- and get away with it.
Makes a mystical attraction for the rubes and navel-gazers who buy into the
guru's mumbo jumbo. Hey, man, it's deep, reallllyyy deeeep, you know?
All bullshit aside, I challenge anyone to translate Nordwall's paragraph
into plain English with meaning.
The words that need explaining -- not the concept or philosophy, you
understand, but just the meaining of the words, in plain English -- are
"... out of the human being as the central perspective and main frame of
reference ...".
What, I want to know, is a "central perspective"? Navel-gazing?
What, I want to know, is a "main frame of reference" in a human being?
Fantasy?
Is it too much to ask?
Perspectives and frameworks are things we humans create and construct;
they're not some inherent (or received) special substance, to be divined.
Humans ARE not these things themselves.
NORDWALL:
)Of course heĄs a problem!
KOPP:
No, not really. He's an anachronism and a footnote to the history of
esotericism masquerading as knowledge and understanding.
The problem is that people continue to believe in his supernatural mumbo
jumbo, and foist it on unsuspecting parents and public schools, by
duplicity and false representations of pedagogical respectability such as
Waldorf's "arts-oriented".
NORDWALL:
)And of course _one_ instinctive reaction is to call it "nonsense" and
)something we now as humanity have left behind us.
KOPP:
Well, if it's "instinctive" to call Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthropsophical mumbo
jumbo "nonsense", then that's one victory for the evolutionary "nature over
nurture" view. But I doubt it: otherwise, why are so many children -- and
their parents -- fooled into believing Steiner's looniness?
It takes education in reasoning, and the scientific method, to learn how to
spot mumbo jumbo. Just the opposite of the traits inculcated in my children
at their Steiner school, which insisted there was value in everyone's
wildest maunderings, and disallowed any _rational_ criticism of anyone
else's thought.
The natural human inclination appears to be just the opposite: 20,000 years
of using superstition and imagination to try to make sense of the world
have left us so imbued with a need to believe in the supernatural that it's
a wonder science made any progress at all. Of course, science worked, where
superstition failed.
But, as I have written here on many occasions, I am afraid the late
populariser of science, Carl Sagan, was right when he said we are moving
into a new dark age.
The Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthrosophical cultism is just one small sign of the
resurgence of the disease which has afflicted humanity for most of its
development: irrationality.
We spent aeons becoming rational. Now we're expected to go backwards to
some pagan shibboleths? Boy, are we in trouble.
NORDWALL:
)The material, natural world is in essence all there is for the man of
)today, if one has been raised and learnt to think in terms of the
)Natural science as it has mainly been developed so far, dispelling of
)the human being as anything but a lump of matter, organized as a higher
)form of animal, striving and having succeeded to dominate all other
)animals and the world and using them and the world for his own good.
KOPP:
Rubbish. Nordwall, in the science-denigrating tradition of spiritualists,
suggests that the "material, natural world" isn't enough, and is somehow
afflicted with a poverty of interest and depth of complexity, and ability
to provide answers to humans' deepest questions.
Scientists know that this is far from true, and that far from _reducing_
humanity, much less life itself, the richness of the mysteries of the
Universe provides fertile ground for rationalists to seek ever more
understanding. They do this in terms of what is real, rather than what is
only imaginary, which is what superstitious spiritualists deal in.
Nordwall also prates the classic putdown of those for whom naturalism --
and its rational outgrowth, humanism -- is sufficient. I stopped looking at
the world of superstition for answers at about age 10, when no church
person (my momma sent me to the Baptists, my daddy to the Catholics) could
tell me the answer to the question "if God created the world, who created
God?". I was told I was presumptuous and impertinent, and I could never be
confirmed in any religion unless I simply believed.
One could ask the same question of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
(and all other primitive) cosmological systems regarding whatever spirits
they posit.
Systems of thought that seek to understand existence by imagination and
introspection are doomed to failure -- or self-delusional success. They
are, in my opinion (stated before here in regard to the off-topic arguing
of philosophical, rather than practical, school-teaching-oriented problems
of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical education) intellectual wanking.
Science may never produce the ultimate answer either. Or it may: and the
answer may turn out to be, "What was the question, again?". (Read Isaac
Asimov's short story, "The Last Question", from 1956, the dawn of the
computer age. He considered it the best story he had ever written. And he
was an atheist.)
Sagan, in his novel "Contact" (ever finish reading it, Stephen Tonkin, or
did you just go to the movie for the cheesecake?), says the beings we take
for gods don't know the answers, either.
Science asks questions, and looks for data, or information -- not
imaginings. Science correlates data. Correlated data leads to understanding
and the possibility of actions that were not possible before the data was
acquired and correlated. There is perhaps no question that is unanswerable.
Perhaps science is, in fact, God (or vice versa).
Or perhaps we are the gods, ourselves, and we had best get good at it.
I'll put my money on science, not superstition. (And please, let's not go
around again on the tired wank that science IS superstition, or a religion.)
NORDWALL:
[snip]
)The problem for me is I feel it [the scientific method] does not do
)justice to the reality I
)experience as a human being. "I", what is personally _most_ important to
)_me_ as a human being among other human beings, am left out of this
)picture, possible to investigate with the hypothetical-deductive method.
)
)For this perspective "I" am an illusion, coming to expression in one of
)its many forms in the naming by Popper of one chapter in his "Objective
)Knowledge" as "Epistemology Without a Knowing Subject".
)
)ThatĄs the background for my finding the "anthroposophical" description
)of reality to be the most interesting to me, so far, in its way of
)differentiating between
)- that which does not change and develops out of itself; matter,
)- that which does; living matter; organisms,
)- that which also displays passion and antipassion in different forms
)and moves out of this; animals, and
)- that which goes beyond this too as the potentially purely human
)element in us, and the methods for investigating, understanding and
)handling these layers of reality.
KOPP:
The Anthroposophical "description of layers of reality" may be
"interesting", but only in the way that any fairy story is. It's like the
four elements of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical dogma (earth, air,
fire, water), or the four humours of the body, or the four temperaments.
Sheesh.
Look at Nordwall's Anthroposophical posits of a hierarchy of existence, all
false :
Matter "develops out of itself" and does not change. Leaving aside the
recurrent problem of exposition (what do the words actually mean: "develops
out of itself"), this "description" is totally ridiculous in light of
modern cosmology and astrophysics and particle physics. Inanimate matter
coalesced from energy, and matter does undergo changes, re-liberating
energy.
Living matter is somehow inherently different from non-living matter.
Living matter does not "change" just for being organic; what changes is the
organisation of matter, presumably thus investing it in some way with
greater meaning than inanimate matter alone. But there is no evidence for
anything supernatural about the organisation of inanimate matter into
organisms. Matter is matter.
Some living, organic matter somehow attains higher properties, called
emotions. This is a curious rejection of the obvious scientific fact that
many creatures other than humans are able to think, some of them
abstractly, and communicated with approximations of language, and be
self-aware. Yet is is typical of the need for the superstitious to
categorise everything as either inferior to humans or superior.
"The potentially purely human element in us" (again ignoring the failure to
specify what these words actually mean). It does seem true that, on this
planet, we humans appear to be the only species to develop intellect
sufficient to question existence, develop language and thought and high
reasoning. But Nordwall, and all spiritualists, want us to believe this
means there must be something more to us than the organisation of atoms
into ever more capable patterns, and that this effect HAD to have some
outside agent. There is no proof for this logic.
We are coming to know more about how the brains of creatures work, and,
while we don't yet know where the "mind" is, there is increasing evidence
that there are loci within the brain which associate with what we think of
as our selves, that is, our "minds". Until I am shown evidence of a
supernatural causation, influence, or animus, I will put my money on
science to produce evidence of how the mind works to produce selfhood.
NORDWALL:
)I also give you full credit for pointing to the weaknesses in doing
)complete justice to "matter" and present day science in anthroposophy
)and waldorf pedagogics. It is, as I see it, an still unsolved problem
)that will take time to solve in a balanced way. Waldorf pedagogics (as I
)see it) is still in its infancy.
)
)I wonĄt carry this reasoning further here, only wanting to pointing once
)again to the central problem in this ongoing discussion about waldorf
)pedagogics, as I see it.
KOPP:
Waldorf pedagogics is in its infancy?
Pedagogics can produce answers to fundamental scientific questions?
WALDORF "pedagogics" can "do complete justice" to explaining nature?
Excuse me, what planet am I on?
What is likely to take more time is the development of Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical DOGMATICS to the refined level of the Catholic, Muslim,
Hindu or fundamental Christian religions.
But I have no doubt that the "seeking" for oneself that Steiner supposedly
espoused -- nay, commanded -- will in the fullness of time turn into as
great a mesmerising force as, say ... Scientology, or ... Krishna
Consciousness.
While I make fun of this eventuality, I am not laughing: from such roots do
great oaks of repression grow, and from such trunks of oppression in the
guise of freedom does the newspeak of fascism branch to canopy rational
civilisation and shut out the light of reason.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.6 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:22:37 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 14.01.99 07:59:30 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
Dan wrote:
)
snip
) Anthropops always call anything that disagrees with them "one sided."
snip
)
How many sides do you have Dan?
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.7 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re:critics list
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:17:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199901140301.TAA22984 lists1.best.com)
Hi, Amy, I'll try to answer your questions as best I can. I didn't
start the list, though, and I'm not involved in administering it. I'm
just a regular who likes to hang out here.
On 13 Jan 99, at 21:45, Amy An wrote:
) Exactly why do you have this list?
To discuss Waldorf education from a point of view outside that of
anthroposophy and Waldorf educators.
) What are the origins and why
) is the "conversation" here not better placed on a skeptics or similar
) list?
I believe the list originated because the "Waldorf" list would not
allow discussion which critically examined Waldorf education. The
Waldorf list is for Waldorf supporters to discuss Waldorf education,
but is not a forum to discuss such issues as whether Waldorf
education is a good idea in the first place, whether Waldorf
education is appropriate in the public schools, and so on.
A "skeptics" list would be much more general than the focus here.
) I can understand that you might be concerned when a Waldorf School is
) misleading (either by accident or design) or when public funds are used
) for a Waldorf School which includes religious content.
Well, yes. The issues relating to Waldorf in public schools are a
bit broader than that, though. Even if anthroposophical content is
deleted, is it appropriate for public schools to have a pedagogy
which is based on such spiritual/religious concepts as Steiner's
specific view on reincarnation and the stages and times at which
different aspects of the spirit incarnate into the physical body?
And is it appropriate to require public school teachers to undergo
spiritual indoctrination in order to teach?
) But I find myself confused about this list more than any other I have had
) experience with. Are you interested in educating parents who are
) considering Waldorf education? Are you interested in supporting parents
) who are unhappy with a WE experience? What are you trying to accomplish?
Amy, everyone on the list has a different viewpoint. Some are
Waldorf teachers, supporters, and graduates; some are generally
opposed to Waldorf education. Personally, I'm not opposed to
Waldorf education, but I feel that it is inappropriate for public
schools, and that the spiritual basis of the pedagogy should be
made more explicit to those considering a Waldorf education for
their children. Also, while I generally disagree with anthroposophy,
I find it interesting to discuss.
) I could describe myself as part skeptic but also part ... not sure what to
) call it but anyway open in some way to "alternative" medicine, schooling
) etc.
)
) So I am less interested in the Christian, Anthroposophic side to WE and
) tend to ignore it or explain it to my child in the context of my family's
) other beliefs. And I am very happy with the way math and reading are being
) taught to my son and with the general feeling of the classroom.
)
) Would you object to my, I believe rational, and personal decision to
) choose WE, at least for now for my son?
Certainly not!
) How does WE differ, in your
) belief system, from Catholic or other religious education?
I'll pass on that one; I don't know that much about Catholic
schools. Dan Dugan went to one, though, and I'm sure he has
some thoughts on this.
) It seems you do an excellent job supporting like minded folks but
) beyond that I am not sure how your hard work and obviously
) thoughtful approach can be useful.
For myself, I found discussions on this list to be very useful in
thinking about my kids' education.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.8 ---------------
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Czech Waldorf criticism at Prague university
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:34:51 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
For people on this list who know Czech, or know people who know it:
Professor JirĚ Hert, who is not on the Internet, kindly sent me a floppy
disk with the Czech text of his critical lecture on Waldorf education on 17
December 1998 at Prague university:
WaldorfskČ ökolstvĚ - anthroposofie
Predn·öka v AV CR dne 17.12.1998
The text of this lecture is also at
http://amber.i-topp.cz/az/AWL.exe?Windows+/AmberZine/occam/waldorf.htm
and linked from
http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/anthroposophy.htm
More than 150 people were present at the lecture; debate was lively. Czech
Waldorf schools are private; however, all money comes from the government.
------------------------------------------
Herman de Tollenaere
------------------------------------------
My Internet site on Asian history and "new" religions:
http://stad.dsl.nl/~hermantl/
See also, on occult tendencies' impact on society:
http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/simpoeng.htm
------------------------------------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re:critics list
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:45:57 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901140301.TAA22984 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901141919.LAA25504 lists1.best.com)
Amy wrote,
[snip her questions thus far and Steve Premo's good answers]
) How does WE differ, in your
) belief system, from Catholic or other religious education?
Since Steve passed on this one, I'll take a shot at it.
IMO, Waldorf differs from Catholic and other religious education because
Catholic schools and other religious schools are primarily designed for
members of their parish. They are forthright about their religious nature.
I believe Waldorf schools are a missionary arm of Anthroposophy - meaning
that they are not truely designed for the children of Anthroposophists as
much as they are designed for outsiders. Waldorf school promoters advertise
WE as non-sectarian and are not forthright about Anthroposophy's tenets or
Anthroposophy's role in the Waldorf classroom. Parents whose religious
belief system does not align itself with Anthroposophy are denied their
parental right to make a fully informed decision about their children's
education and religious training because of this. This creates a moral
problem for Waldorf in the private sector, which is combined with a legal
problem in the public sector.
Welcome Amy! (Today my daughter, Aimee, turns 29!)
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1029.10 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Bullying and violence (Was Re: the what if /and remembering your spirit)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:39:17 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901121739.JAA10725 lists1.best.com)
(199901130323.TAA07611 lists1.best.com)
(199901140651.WAA06703 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901140651.WAA06703 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)Any violence between children is to be abhored, however natural- and
)innocent-seeming.
I agree...
)There is no such thing as "play-fighting". It's all
)serious business. No child laughs while engaged in these rituals.
...but here I disagree. I have witnessed young children thoroughly
enjoying -- and laughing -- a "puppy fight"; there is usually no
intentional violence (as usually understood by the word), no intention
to hurt the other person, but merely the enjoyment of "getting
physical". Usually no-one gets hurt.
However, these things can and do get out of hand and then hurt can
happen. For this reason these "rituals", as Michael accurately
characterises them, have absolutely no place in a school playground.
IMNSHO if parents wish their children to enjoy this sort of activity,
there is ample opportunity for it outside school, so there is no need
for the child to be "deprived" of it.
A couple more thoughts:
To what extent are competitive sports just another form of ritualised
fighting? Where, then, is their place in a school?
What about "verbal bullying"? -- many children feel much more hurt by
this than by physical bullying.
I suggest that every school needs to have a code of conduct which
respects the right of other human beings to be unbullied, physically or
verbally. It is also important that the "official" response to a breach
of this code is *not* an action which contravenes the code, but which is
still effective!
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1029 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1030 --------------
001 - Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmow - http://home.netscape.com/computing/download/index.html
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Kopp finally gets it right
003 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Kopp finally gets it right
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
006 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
007 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.1 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmoweb.net)
Subject: http://home.netscape.com/computing/download/index.html
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 18:07:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901142048.MAA03884 lists1.best.com)
Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)
) A couple more thoughts:
)
) To what extent are competitive sports just another form of ritualised
) fighting? Where, then, is their place in a school?
Not to mention the time-honored war game generally known as "chess," a
permissible form of non-physical fighting.
There are many forms of "fighting" which are purely a form of play.
There are many parents who will refuse to allow their children to buy or
receive toy guns, feeling that it desensitizes the child from the
violence associated with guns. So what happens with the child who
doesn't have a toy gun? It's quite simple to make believe, simply by
placing the first finger and thumb at a 90 degree angle to one
another.
--
Robert Tolz
Email: rtolz cosmoweb.net
Web: http://www.cosmoweb.net/~rtolz
Tel: (212) 754-9400
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Kopp finally gets it right
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 99 19:10:28 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp says:
)But my chances of `understanding' Steiner are zip.
That's for sure!
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.3 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 99 00:32:25 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp writes:
)
)The natural human inclination appears to be just the opposite: 20,000 years
)of using superstition and imagination to try to make sense of the world
)have left us so imbued with a need to believe in the supernatural that it's
)a wonder science made any progress at all. Of course, science worked, where
)superstition failed.
Ahh, the modern, scientific man who can feel superior to those quaint,
ignorant cultures of millenia past. I know him well. I've *been* him!
It took me many years to come to the idea that "myths" and "legends" are
the deepest form of understanding, as opposed to ways of explaining away
the unexplainable.
A Christian may speak of the "age of miracles", and believe that, in
Biblical times, the spiritual world was much more present on earth. If
the presence of the spiritual world has waned on earth since then, why
should it not have been stronger before then?
What has happened to the moon since man has visited it? What once was
alive in the heart of man,is now dead in his mind. For millenia it was
the stuff that dreams are made of, now it has been exposed as a burnt-out
cinder. Are we improved by that knowledge?
Anyone who has had the honor of spending time with cultures outside of
the western, scientific mainstream can easily see that these
"superstitious" people have knowledge that is far outside of what we
clever westerners can even dream of.
This is, by no means, to say that we should throw away science. I love
science! What I dislike is the inclination to use it to replace
everything else.
Kopp:
)Systems of thought that seek to understand existence by imagination and
)introspection are doomed to failure.
Aaaaaarrrghhh!
Thank God, Einstein (and you friend Sagan, although to a much lesser
degree) were given a heaping helping of imagination and introspection!
Science, done well, is 99% imagination. I have heard that Einstein, when
asked by a parent to suggest a course of study for children, suggested
fairy tales (apocryphal? I don't know, but it sounds like him).
Anybody in history who has taken civilization a step further has started
with imagination and ended with introspection.
Kopp writes:
)from such roots do
)great oaks of repression grow, and from such trunks of oppression in the
)guise of freedom does the newspeak of fascism branch to canopy rational
)civilisation and shut out the light of reason.
Whew! A jungle of metaphor! :-)
I would remind you that it was Rudolph Steiner who exhorted us to, above
ALL, train ourselves to see the world with fresh eyes,rather than looking
at everything through our prejudices, which, as humans, we grow so
attached to. It is Michael Kopp who is attached to a static,
whatever-Steiner-said-must-be-wrong-because-he-said-it dogma.
I think that you can't see the forest for the trees! Har!
Cheers from Sunbridge,
Charlie
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Kopp finally gets it right
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:41:01 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901150039.QAA00390 lists1.best.com)
)Kopp says:
))But my chances of `understanding' Steiner are zip.
)
)That's for sure!
)
)Charlie
Charlie,
Do YOU `understand' Steiner?
Glad to hear a defender of the faith [TM] admit that Steiner is
incomprehensible to rational people.
But where were you when I needed you, BEFORE we enrolled our children in a
school run by medievalist throwback mystics masquerading as teachers?
If you had been around to enlighten me about Steiner, I could have known a
lot earlier to run the other way, real fast.
Only thing I object to in your post, Charlie baby, is the "finally" in the
title.
While I admit it took me a couple of years to get my family out of the
clutches of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school movement, and
while I am ashamed that my rationality appears to have deserted me from the
start of my quest for an alternative school, I actually cottoned onto the
weirdness and mumbo jumbo of SWA after only about six months of the first
year of my kids' tenure there. (Actually, I made a rational investigation
of Steiner through the available literature, and asked rational questions
of the school, but the answers were lies.)
My mistake was in trying to engage the school's teachers and authorities,
and to try to learn more about why such outlandish things as Goethe's
colour theory were being taught, and to try to do something about it. We
should have gotten out immediately upon the first inclination of weirdness.
But, you see Charlie, baby, this wonderful Internet discussion list did not
exist until about halfway through our odyssey in Steiner gaga-land. Nor did
any of the other Steiner-devoted lists that demonstrate the irrationality
of Steiner adherents like yourself.
When I first saw this list, and learned that my children's education was in
the hands of people who believed in reincarnation and spirits as the
driving forces of their purpose in education, and that they (the teachers)
believed they owned my children's minds and bodies, not I, so as to prepare
their souls for their next incarnation, instead of preparing their brains
for this one, I began the long disengagement process. One does not rip
children out of such a milieu rapidly, lest the damage be greater than the
disease.
Such fine-sounding educational goals as integrating arts and humanities
with science and maths, and educating children's heads, hearts and hands,
and "through love to freedom", are very seductive, even to rationalists.
And because our school lied to us about its true nature and the extent of
Anthroposophical presence in every aspect of the curriculum, and did not
divulge any of these later revelations BEFORE we enrolled, as they morally
and legally should have, we believed that our children would be safe from
the cult-like clutches of all religious/spiritual schools.
Now, Charlie baby, why don't you take your snide sniping and shove it up
your ether-hole, and go peddle your mumbo jumbo to like-unminded types?
Give us a break here, at any rate, from your nuttiness.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:35:14 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901150521.VAA25780 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey says:
)Kopp writes:
))
))The natural human inclination appears to be just the opposite: 20,000
))years
))of using superstition and imagination to try to make sense of the world
))have left us so imbued with a need to believe in the supernatural that
))it's
))a wonder science made any progress at all. Of course, science worked,
))where
))superstition failed.
And FREY replies:
)Ahh, the modern, scientific man who can feel superior to those quaint,
)ignorant cultures of millenia past. I know him well. I've *been* him!
) It took me many years to come to the idea that "myths" and "legends" are
)the deepest form of understanding, as opposed to ways of explaining away
)the unexplainable.
KOPP says:
As usual, the defender of the faith talks gobbledegook.
What, precisely, is it that myths and legends understand? Can you give me
an example of a myth or legend that gives a better, deeper, more rational,
better understood, better evidenced truth about the world than some modern,
scientific understanding?
And to what do you refer by the incomprehensible phrase "ways of explaining
away the unexplainable"?
FREY:
) A Christian may speak of the "age of miracles", and believe that, in
)Biblical times, the spiritual world was much more present on earth. If
)the presence of the spiritual world has waned on earth since then, why
)should it not have been stronger before then?
KOPP:
Christianity is not science. There is no scientific documentation for any
"miracle". The "age of miracles" is an age of fables, in my opinion.
There is no evidence for a spirit[ual] world, then or now. Fables about
miracles do not provide evidence of the existence of spirits.
The presence of the "spiritual world" has not "waned" because there is no
such world, in my opinion. If you wish me to believe otherwise, you will
have to provide scientific evidence. I'll bet you can't. I'll bet you don't
want to -- it would destroy something you WANT to believe in.
FREY:
) What has happened to the moon since man has visited it? What once was
)alive in the heart of man,is now dead in his mind. For millenia it was
)the stuff that dreams are made of, now it has been exposed as a burnt-out
)cinder. Are we improved by that knowledge?
KOPP:
Well, I don't think the Moon has changed much since 1969. And the latest
evidence from SCIENCE is that the Moon is NOT a "burnt-out cinder", but in
fact has water-ice or liquid water. The discoveries of science do not
destroy the wonder humans feel about the Universe: in fact, they increase
it. We are indeed enriched by scientific knowledge, immeasurable moreso
than metaphysical progress, because metaphysics has never approached
reality, while science does.
What, exactly, was once "alive in the heart of man" about the Moon, which
is now dead? And what effect, exactly, has this "death" had on humanity?
*****There was another thought here*****
KOPP:
)Anyone who has had the honor of spending time with cultures outside of
)the western, scientific mainstream can easily see that these
)"superstitious" people have knowledge that is far outside of what we
)clever westerners can even dream of.
KOPP says:
I have done so, and I am impressed with their practical knowledge of nature
and their practical cultural arrangements and skills.
But I have neve seen evidence of any "knowledge far outside of what we
clever westerners can even dream of".
Please give specific examples of such primitive knowledge, and explain how
it is in any way in advance of Western scientific _understanding_. For
instance, is there a primitive society which has a better understanding of
what the Universe, and ourselves, are made of? Or the laws of nature?
And I am not here talking about anecdotal folk knowledge of how some plant
"cures" some ailment (as modern science is well aware that there are
millions of unknown chemical reactions, many of which may be known by long
and often deadly trial and error -- not exactly the scientific method). Nor
am I talking of primitive creation myths.
I'm talking about _evidence_. Please provide some to back up your
extraordinary claims for non-Western cultures.
FREY:
)This is, by no means, to say that we should throw away science. I love
)science! What I dislike is the inclination to use it to replace
)everything else.
KOPP:
You are welcome to use any other system of thought and exploration that you
wish. Please let me know when you (or any other non-scientist) makes a
fundamental discovery about the laws of nature which merits a Nobel prize
using that alternative method.
Please provide evidence of how, for instance, a system such as
Anthroposophy has aided in some scientific breakthrough which is accepted
by the whole world in the same fashion as, say, Newton's laws.
(And do not tell me about Newton being superseded; all science has the
inherent possibility of being superseded. I don't think Goethe is a good
example of Newton being superseded, as is taught in Steiner schools.)
Nor do I want to know about the esoteric leanings of either Newton or
Einstein (see below). Newton's metaphysics is not a part of his physics.
The metaphysics are forgotten.
I want evidence of how some Anthroposophical principle (if any exist) or
idea has been proven to be a part of some fundamental scientific principle
or law.
)Kopp:
))Systems of thought that seek to understand existence by imagination and
))introspection are doomed to failure.
FREY:
)Aaaaaarrrghhh!
) Thank God, Einstein (and you friend Sagan, although to a much lesser
)degree) were given a heaping helping of imagination and introspection!
) Science, done well, is 99% imagination. I have heard that Einstein, when
)asked by a parent to suggest a course of study for children, suggested
)fairy tales (apocryphal? I don't know, but it sounds like him).
) Anybody in history who has taken civilization a step further has started
)with imagination and ended with introspection.
KOPP:
Einstein did not keep studying, or using, fairy tales for his scientific
method.
By contrast, Anthroposophical scientists, in the great tradition of the
Goethean metaphysicians, still rely on fairy tales in adulthood: Steiner's.
Steiner never _proved_ anything or provided any scientific evidence. His
science was not efficient or correct. Wildly imaginative, sure. But wrong.
Lest you think that I am an unimaginative, non-introspective person, or
that I think scientists should avoid these two activities, let me correct
your reading of my comment. I was referring to mystical, esoteric systems
like Anthroposophy, which replace scientific rationality with nothing but
introspection and imagination.
Examples abound, such as the fraudulent "scientitific proof" offered by a
former Michigan Waldorf school teacher, one Ralph Marinelli, with no other
scientific credentials, and no greater scientific laboratory than his
basement, that the heart is not a pump. No one has been able to duplicate
his work, and his conjectures are not supported by fact.
Please provide an example of someone "in history who has taken civilization
a step further" (I'm confused: I thought you believed "civilization" was
actually backwards, and primitive societies were more advanced -- have I
missed something here?) on the basis of imagination and introspection
ALONE;
While I know it's fashionable for some modern physicists to claim that
these powers (and other, more spiritual ones) are actually important to
their work, I'm not aware of any scientist of the stature of Einstein who
has made a discovery as deep as relativity, who credits these additional
powers as essential or seminal to their disvoveries. Can you provide an
example?
Einstein, the epigramist and fancier of alternative schooling, also was
fond of quoting another great discoverer, Thomas Edison, who said genius
was 99 percent perspiration, and only one percent inspiration. I'm glad he
had inspiration, and used introspection and imagination.
I wish Ralph Marinelli would use Edison and Einstein's 99 percent
perspiration (rational thought), and the scientific method, instead of just
the ravings of his febrile limbic system.
)Kopp writes:
))from such roots do
))great oaks of repression grow, and from such trunks of oppression in the
))guise of freedom does the newspeak of fascism branch to canopy rational
))civilisation and shut out the light of reason.
)
)Whew! A jungle of metaphor! :-)
)I would remind you that it was Rudolph Steiner who exhorted us to, above
)ALL, train ourselves to see the world with fresh eyes,rather than looking
)at everything through our prejudices, which, as humans, we grow so
)attached to. It is Michael Kopp who is attached to a static,
)whatever-Steiner-said-must-be-wrong-because-he-said-it dogma.
)I think that you can't see the forest for the trees! Har!
KOPP:
This is a serious misrepresentation of my position.
I have never said that there CANNOT BE ANY truth to Steiner's ideas, or
that gods or spirits or reincarnation CANNOT exist.
I have never said that
"whatever-Steiner-said-must-be-wrong-because-he-said-it".
I have on many occasions said that people should be completely free to
believe anything they want, even six impossible things before breakfast,
and to teach those beliefs to any other consenting adults or the children
of adults who wish to adhere to those beliefs -- as long as they do not
impinge on anyone else's freedoms, and do not defraud unsuspecting seekers.
I have, on many occasions, said that I am perfectly willing to be persuaded
that fairies exist, or that I was once a worm, or that God created the
Universe, or that my anti-Steiner activity, at this very instant as I sit
here in front of my computer, typing on an electrical keyboard, is being
controlled or influenced by a spirit called Ahriman, who is up to no good
(Anthroposophically-speaking).
I consider, on the weight of evidence (its absence, really), and rational
logic, that all of these things are _likely_ to be false.
All I have said is: "show me evidence".
Can you do that for me, Charlie baby? Can you provide me with some evidence
of any of these, or the myriad other fairy stories, in which you believe?
I think Steiner was a fallible human being who had a crashingly huge ego,
and wanted to be remembered. I think he was a really clever guru-type
manipulator of other, gullible people. I do not think he was a "bad" human;
just wrong.
I also think Steiner had some interesting educational ideas. Few, and
mostly outmoded, and never updated, and often dangerous and anti-rational.
But a few good ones. "Head-heart-hands" was one. What has become called
"holistic", or integrated, study, for another. (This is one of the most
abused by the current Waldorf schools, I believe, and one of the most
poorly practiced, on the basis of personal experience.) Unfortunately, most
of Steiner's good ideas are bastardised.
I think believers in Steiner and Anthroposophy -- for all their lip service
to Steiner's supposed commands to see freshly, not take him for granted or
as gospel, and to find their own answers -- are a deluded bunch of seekers
of a dream. A pipe-dream, unfortunately.
)Cheers from Sunbridge,
)Charlie
KOPP:
What sort of hallucinogen do they put in the censers at Sunbridge Steiner
Seminary, Charlie?
Cheers from Godzone (not what it seems to mean)
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.6 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 09:45:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199901150521.VAA25780 lists1.best.com)
On 15 Jan 99, at 0:32, ckzfrey wrote:
) It took me many years to come to the idea that "myths" and "legends" are
) the deepest form of understanding, as opposed to ways of explaining away
) the unexplainable.
Yes, there is a great deal of truth and beauty to be found in
mythology, as there is in poetry, music, and art. Those stories are
told over and over again because they mean something to people,
and one need not dissect and analyze the meaning of the story in
order to appreciate its beauty and be touched by it.
That doesn't mean, of course, that, say, the biblical creation myth,
or any other myth or story, is *literally* true.
) What has happened to the moon since man has visited it? What once was
) alive in the heart of man, is now dead in his mind. For millenia it was the
) stuff that dreams are made of, now it has been exposed as a burnt-out
) cinder.
Charlie, I am so sorry that knowledge of the moon makes it "dead"
in your mind! It made me really sad to read that it has had that
effect on you.
Lunar exploration has the opposite effect on me. I can imagine the
mountains and the plains. I can picture myself walking in the low
lunar gravity, or driving a moon rover across the landscape, or
throwing a rock to see how far it will go.
During a total lunar eclipse, the moon appears somewhat red.
Sometimes it appears more red than other times. The reason for
this is that the light hitting the moon is sunlight which has travelled
through the Earth's atmosphere, and has been scattered.
Essentially, during the lunar eclipse the moon is illuminated by the
light of a sunset stretching all the way around the circumference of
the earth.
What a sight it must be to see the earth from the moon, ringed with
the fire of such a sunset! It is possible for someone to see that,
first hand, now that we humans have developed the ability to leave
our planet.
And now water has been discovered on the moon! This is one of
the most exciting discoveries of my lifetime, because it means it
could be feasible to establish colonies and refueling stations there.
Lunar exploration fires my imagination, and inspires in me a
feelings of awe and reverence.
And you think this wondrous world that we call the moon is a
"burnt-out cinder." I don't know where you got that idea, but it's not
from science.
Even so, Charlie, you are not doing justice to the beauty and
wonder inherent in a *real* burnt-out cinder. There is so much to
know and learn, even in the head of a burnt-out match. Consider
the chemical process of combustion, and how it releases the
chemical energy stored in the match head. Think about how a little
heat initiates a process which liberates that energy, and how the
materials in the match head change as they burn. Look closely at
the match, and observe the pits and valleys of its surface.
There is beauty all around us, Charlie, and the more I learn about
science, the more beauty I see in the things about which I learn.
) Are we improved by that knowledge?
I certainly am, and I'm sorry that you feel that you are not.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1030.7 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:07:58 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901150521.VAA25780 lists1.best.com)
(199901151747.JAA22465 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901151747.JAA22465 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)On 15 Jan 99, at 0:32, ckzfrey wrote:
)
)) It took me many years to come to the idea that "myths" and "legends" are
)) the deepest form of understanding, as opposed to ways of explaining away
)) the unexplainable.
)
)Yes, there is a great deal of truth and beauty to be found in
)mythology, as there is in poetry, music, and art.
Indeed -- they all are rather wonderful illustrations of states of
evolution of human consciousness. Sometimes I wish I had had a Classical
education...
)
)Charlie, I am so sorry that knowledge of the moon makes it "dead"
)in your mind!
It is sad, isn't it? I certainly don't find that to be the case;
although my astronomical activities usually take place when "nature's
light pollution" is out of the way (my interests are deep sky objects),
I think it is probably fair to say that I probably have more material
knowledge of the moon than do most people. Yet I will still stop my car
to look at a particularly beautiful apparition of the Moon (or the
brighter planets, especially in a twilight sky -- watch out for
Venus/Jupiter/Saturn in the evening sky as of about now, and for the
next few months, although Venus alone will be there till summer).
I am not alone in this. Last year, driving back with a friend after
assisting at a public Perseid (meteor) watch and star party, we stopped
to watch the waning gibbous moon rise through gathering clouds. As we
sat there enthralled, Bob (who is much more knowledgeable than I about
the moon) started reciting "The Moon was a ghostly galleon..." -- and
indeed it was!
I actually find that a knowledge of material astronomy enhances my
enjoyment -- I look at the moon's illumination and work out where the
Sun is and marvel at the sheer scale and beauty of this relatively local
bit of God's creation.
In fact, the day I stop being awed by the natural lights in the sky is
the day I give up astronomy. This is true of most of the serious
amateurs I know. I suspect that if someone's enjoyment of nature is
destroyed by material scientific knowledge, it is less a commentary on
science than it is on the individual. However (and I mean no offence,
Charlie), I often suspect that it is those who have a little knowledge
who find it deadening -- those at the forefront of research rarely do
so. Perhaps this is a source of the saying: a little knowledge is a
dangerous thing? (g)
Notwithstanding Thomas Campbell:
When science from creation's face
Enchantment's veil withdraws,
What lovely visions yield their place
To cold material laws.
IMHO a decent science teaching (which is what I attempt to offer) will
do its utmost both to illuminate the "cold material laws" and to enhance
the "lovely visions" with that illumination. IMNSHO Waldorf science
teaching has the capability to do just that.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1030 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1031 --------------
001 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Kopp finally gets it right
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
003 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
004 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
005 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
006 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: critics list
007 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
008 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: critics list
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.1 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Kopp finally gets it right
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 99 20:20:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp writes:
)
)Glad to hear a defender of the faith [TM] admit that Steiner is
)incomprehensible to rational people.
and
)
)Now, Charlie baby, why don't you take your snide sniping and shove it up
)your ether-hole, and go peddle your mumbo jumbo to like-unminded types?
Wow! You journalists are so articulate!
Maybe this kind of rationality is not all it's cracked up to be!
Steiner is, in fact, comprehensible *only* to rational people. This is
what prohibits many from understanding him.
Snipe!
Snidely,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 99 21:12:15 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Premo writes:
)Charlie, I am so sorry that knowledge of the moon makes it "dead"
)in your mind! It made me really sad to read that it has had that
)effect on you.
OK, Steve, I confess to overstating my position a bit, but I was
addressing Michael Kopp--a gentleman who does not respond well to
subtlety! ;-)
I do, though, believe that the moon was likely a part of the earth at
one point in history, and anything found there is also found on Earth in
greater quantity.The fact that there is a miniscule amount of water in
the form of ice,frankly, does nothing to impress me; nor does it inspire
anywhere near the awe that I feel when I see the moon rise up out of the
ocean.
You do make a strong case for the awe you feel when pondering lunar
exploration, and, although I don't particularly agree with the impetus, I
believe that such feelings of awe and reverence are helping you along
your spiritual path, and I am grateful that you have shared them with me
and the list.
I, too would love to stand on the Moon, and would thank God (and
Ahriman!) for the opportunity to do so. I just don't believe that the
mere fact that someone else has done it serves to strengthen my
imagination of what it would be like.
Ah! You've inspired me!! Tonight I shall close my eyes, visit the moon,
and stand in awe of the beauty of the Earth!
Maybe I'll see you there!
Peace,
Charlie
PS- I often wonder about just what the heck it IS that I AM trying to
accomplish by posting on this list. Is it the search for truth?,
knowledge?, lively discourse?, a good fight?, ego?,posturing?,
grandstanding?, and the list goes on...
What I do know for sure that it is NEVER my intention to sadden or
otherwise injure anyone who is here trying to find his way. If I have
truly done that to you, please accept my heartfelt apologies.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.3 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 99 20:20:43 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp writes:
)
)What, precisely, is it that myths and legends understand? Can you give me
)an example of a myth or legend that gives a better, deeper, more rational,
)better understood, better evidenced truth about the world than some modern,
)scientific understanding?
OK, so I'm already a cult-member and a snide, sniper-- and someone who
has somehow placed myself on an exalted spiritual pedestal; so I might as
well really stick my foot in it:
I don't think that "rational" and "better evidenced" "scientific
understanding" is always an improvement over our experience.
There, I said it.
Again, I am TOTALLY in favor of science. I LOVE the fact that we went to
the Moon---and found Nevada.
What I was saying is that I feel that, for example, the way that we
experience the moon from Earth --if we can look at it the way a child or
an ancient person might have looked at it-- serves us as well as visiting
it. One can learn something about themselves by contemplating the moon
and there is little one can learn about himself by knowing that there is
water on the moon. The scientific and inward perspectives are, to me,
complimentary. Science augments experience rather than superceding it.
Nobody is sure why the moon appears to be larger when it is closer to
the horizon, so the possibility that there is something a little magical
about the horizon is equally as valid as anything science has come up
with.
Such arguments are, of course, useless, though, if one removes the human
spirit and experience and relies solely on what is scientifically
quantifiable.
We do not *experience* the sun standing still.We do not *experience* 2
hydrogens and an oxygen--we experience water.
On a more mundane level---"magic" is seldom improved by finding out how
it is done, and a mystery novel is seldom improved by reading the last
page first. There would be no art if we were purely scientific/rational.
Kopp:
)The presence of the "spiritual world" has not "waned" because there is no
)such world, in my opinion. If you wish me to believe otherwise, you will
)have to provide scientific evidence.
A, clearly, ridiculous idea. I might as well say that I believe in the
spiritual world because science cannot show evidence thet it does not
exist.
Science can no more find the spiritual world than one can measure
electrical curent with a ruler.
Kopp: referring to meeting "primitive"(my word) people.
)I have done so, and I am impressed with their practical knowledge of nature
)and their practical cultural arrangements and skills.
Again, to understand the difference between a primitave person and a
modern person is to understand the difference between science and spirit.
If you only see that they look the same as you, you are denying a faculty
of observation and reducing another person to a conglomeration of bits
and pieces. It is obvious to me that when somebody who lives very close
to the earth looks at other people, they see something very different to
what I see.
It would be an equally unfortunate mistake to see a child as being the
same as an adult save for its size.
Kopp:
)
)You are welcome to use any other system of thought and exploration that you
)wish. Please let me know when you (or any other non-scientist) makes a
)fundamental discovery about the laws of nature which merits a Nobel prize
)using that alternative method.
And I hope you will let me know when a scientist wins an Oscar.
What does one thing have to do with another?
Kopp:
)
)Please provide an example of someone "in history who has taken civilization
)a step further" (I'm confused: I thought you believed "civilization" was
)actually backwards, and primitive societies were more advanced -- have I
)missed something here?) on the basis of imagination and introspection
)ALONE;
You could hardly understand me less.
Somebody who knows more about something, be it the spirit or science, can
hardly be said to be "more advanced". The fact that I can fix my car does
not make me more advanced than the Dalai Lama. Well....maybe....nah,
forget it. :-)
Kopp:
)typing on an electrical keyboard, is being
)controlled or influenced by a spirit called Ahriman, who is up to no good
)(Anthroposophically-speaking).
Actually, I heard an Anthroposophist make a pretty convincing argument
that computers(and the internet in particular) take our consciousness out
and away from our bodies---this would be Lucifer's territory.
Pull that one out at your next cocktail party!
Kopp:
)Can you do that for me, Charlie baby?
I do what I can, Mikey, snookums. xxxooo
)
)KOPP:
)
)What sort of hallucinogen do they put in the censers at Sunbridge Steiner
)Seminary, Charlie?
)
)
We don't need hallucenogenic censers, we're all just trippin' out on
Rudy. Y'know-- shaving our heads, speaking in tongues, having
orgies---you should stop by and see us sometime.
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.4 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 07:25:01 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901160212.SAA25233 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901160212.SAA25233 lists1.best.com)
ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com) wrote:
) Nobody is sure why the moon appears to be larger when it is closer to
)the horizon, so the possibility that there is something a little magical
)about the horizon is equally as valid as anything science has come up
)with.
Sorry, Charlie, but that is twaddle -- I truly hope that you don't make
unfounded statements like that in science classes; it's the sort of
thing that gives Waldorf science teaching a bad name. It's an optical
illusion which, having been understood, can be mimicked with artificial
moons and artificial horizons. Do a web search on the words "moon
illusion" and see what scientists (not pseudoscientists!) have to say
about it.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.5 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 12:57:57 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
)ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com) wrote:
)) Nobody is sure why the moon appears to be larger when it is closer to
))the horizon, so the possibility that there is something a little magical
))about the horizon is equally as valid as anything science has come up
))with.
)
Stephen Tonkin writes:
)Sorry, Charlie, but that is twaddle -- I truly hope that you don't make
)unfounded statements like that in science classes; it's the sort of
)thing that gives Waldorf science teaching a bad name. It's an optical
)illusion which, having been understood, can be mimicked with artificial
)moons and artificial horizons. Do a web search on the words "moon
)illusion" and see what scientists (not pseudoscientists!) have to say
)about it.
)
So, I did a search, fully expecting, due to Mr.Tonkin's expertise, to be
proved wrong and to slink away with my virtual tail between my cyber-legs.
This is what I found.
And, yes, I have read some of the book referred to.
)
)The explanation for this illusion is still not known. It is not an
)atmospheric phenomenon, and the Moon really does seem to be twice as large
)on the horizon as when it is high up in the sky, particularly in September
)during the Harvest Moon. The Moon obviously does not change its apparent
)size since if you held a penny at arms length it would cover the Moon
)equally well on the horizon and high over head. There must be an eye-brain
)basis for this effect, just as there are many other optical illusions that
)also 'fool' the eye...
(snip)
)
)In 1989, an entire book was dedicated to this phenomenon and edited by
)Prof. Maurice Hershenson at Brandeis University. The Moon Illusion
)Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishing; Hillsdale New Jersey. By 1985
)there were at least 8 explanations for this illusion in the literature
)with little consensus over a true explanation. The bottom line is that the
)Moon Illusion is so deeply coupled to the general problem of human space
)perception that the experts do not as yet understand all of the
)physiological factors that contribute to it...
I see nothing to disprove the idea that the horizon gives us something
that our understanding of rods, cones, neurons, and synapses can't.
Am I a lunatic? Maybe. :-)
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.6 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: critics list
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:07:46 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 15.01.99 20:20:21 MEZ, Deby writes:
(( Parents whose religious
belief system does not align itself with Anthroposophy are denied their
parental right to make a fully informed decision about their children's
education and religious training because of this. This creates a moral
problem for Waldorf in the private sector, which is combined with a legal
problem in the public sector. ))
This is an opinion, Deby, not a fact. If it is true in one school it still
doesnt make it a fact. There are well over 500 waldorf schools worldwide, and
IMO the majority give parents EVERY opportunity to make an informed opinion.
I, as a waldorf teacher, remain on this list to answer those questions which
are worth answering, as opposed to the biased drivel which is INFINITELY more
one-sided than even Dan himself, let alone waldorf education.
Waldorf education is for the children not the parents. There are very few ex-
pupils who have the vociferous "aqnti-waldorf" views of those on this list. It
would be interesting to have a statistic! Naturally the poor children of
waldorf skeptiks never had the chance to find out!
Bruce (waldorf teacher, and one-time waldorf pupil, Germany)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.7 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:42:18 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 18:52:06 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
Am I a lunatic? Maybe. :-)
Peace,
Charlie
))
Dear Charlie!
As a waldorf teacher I see the positive in all my pupils: I think that both
Steven and yourself are correct - but I will allow Steven to state why (the
eye-brain link...??!! (wg))
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.8 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: critics list
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 10:14:23 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
BruceyJ writes:
)In einer eMail vom 15.01.99 20:20:21 MEZ, Deby writes:
)
)(( Parents whose religious
) belief system does not align itself with Anthroposophy are denied their
) parental right to make a fully informed decision about their children's
) education and religious training because of this. This creates a moral
) problem for Waldorf in the private sector, which is combined with a legal
) problem in the public sector. ))
)
)This is an opinion, Deby, not a fact. If it is true in one school it still
)doesnt make it a fact. There are well over 500 waldorf schools worldwide,
)and
)IMO the majority give parents EVERY opportunity to make an informed
)opinion.
Michael KOPP says:
Please provide evidence of the "facts" that you allege: that the majority
of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools worldwide provide sufficient
consumer education.
Also please state what statistical and survey methods were used by you, or
to which you refer, in making this statement.
Also please state what statistical meaning you attach to the term
"majority". Simple, two-thirds, absolute, whatever. If the "majority" of
over 500 schools DO give good information, that leaves a _very substantial
*minority*_ -- some hundreds -- of schools that do NOT give honest pictures
of their true nature.
That's to be praised? This is a misuse of the statistical term "majority"
to try to bolster an opinion not based on fact.
Everything we have seen on this list indicates the veracity of Deby's
statement. We have heard from many people who have been duped by SWA false
advertising and propaganda literature and evasion in public lectures and
questions.
We have seen exactly ONE proposed public information sheet from one school
which went a little ways towards rectifying this. We have asked many times
for more, but they have not been forthcoming.
I recently attended an open night lecture for prospective customers of the
Steiner school which my children attended before we became disillusioned
with the duplicity and dogma of SWA. There was no more revealing
information about the real nature of SWA schools at this meeting than there
was at the first such lecture I had attended seven years ago before we
enrolled our children.
No one in the audience of about 50 parents had the slightest inkling of the
true superstitious, esoteric, mystic nature of Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical educational dogma. And when parents asked questions about
some of the aspects of the programme that were touched upon lightly (late
reading, late intellectual development) they were given reassuring,
soothing, burfle answers that avoided the real Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical principles of incarnation in stages or the claim that
children cannot reason abstractly until puberty.
Lest you think I am blowing smoke, I am happy to transcribe my verbatim
notes of the session.
)I, as a waldorf teacher, remain on this list to answer those questions
)which
)are worth answering, as opposed to the biased drivel which is INFINITELY
)more
)one-sided than even Dan himself, let alone waldorf education.
)
)Waldorf education is for the children not the parents. There are very few
)ex-
)pupils who have the vociferous "aqnti-waldorf" views of those on this
)list. It
)would be interesting to have a statistic! Naturally the poor children of
)waldorf skeptiks never had the chance to find out!
)
)Bruce (waldorf teacher, and one-time waldorf pupil, Germany)
KOPP:
My children made the ultimate decision to leave their Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposohical school, not me. One of the bases for their decision was the
elder child's realisation -- long before I ever made known to them my
growing doubts and realisations about the weirdness of SWA -- that he was
being taught pseudo-science and myth in the guise of established fact, and
that some of the teachers were not on the same planet as the rest of us
poor mortals. And this kid is no rocket scientist, by any means. But he
had, before coming to the Steiner school, been taught the scientific method
in a public grade school.
No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and sinister)
grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical cultists.
This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist). The
difference is that with the Catholics or fundamentalist Christians you KNOW
what you're buying. As a parent duped by SWA false advertising and
deception of the state school authorities (our school was integrated with
the state system) I am outraged by this attempt to steal my children from a
normal existence. [*]
Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
There is also the natural inclination of children to identify with and
defend the milieu in which they were formed, even if they could recognise
its warts. It takes critical thinking skills and an external impetus to
bring brainwashing to light. Critical thinking is inimical to SWA
education: it fosters the opposite, UNcritical acceptance of the validity
of any and every assertion or imagination.
However, in my acquaintance with graduates of the school my children
attended, and in the contemporaries of my children and my children
themselves, I have noted a healthy perception of the flakiness of the
teachers and their philosophy. The children even make fun of it. SWA
schools cannot keep children isolated from the real world, and teen culture
is well-known for its hypocrisy- detection phase.
But by then the damage has been done, and the children have a skewed
world-view and faulty reasoning.
[*] And do not introduce the red herring of the supposed political and
philosophical indoctrination practiced in public schools. Of course this
exists, and it is one of the reasons why parents have to exercise their own
rights of education of their children. I always felt very strange pledging
allegiance to a piece of cloth with stars and stripes printed on it, much
less to a "country" that I did not seem a part of. And my parents early
developed in me the critical thinking skill of skepticism about the claims
of all authority.
And it is the genius of the American political and educational system that
it allows dissent and the opportunity for change. I was on the board of
trustees of my children's public school, and had an opportunity to affect
their educations democratically in the public arena, while privately
inculcating in them my own values and knowledge.
And so did I do this with my own children. But I found that while my
children's public school teachers embraced this trait, and channeled it
towards personal discovery, in their Steiner school it seemed to be
deflected by the lip service to diversity of opinion that masked the
uncritical acceptance of any idea, including, of course, the stealthy
Anthroposophical world-view being inculcated by the curriculum. And while I
found public school teachers approachable and challengeable, I was met by
condescension and rebuff from Steiner teachers when I tried to elicit the
deeper meaning of the myths being taught to my children in
the guise of history, or tried to challenge the teaching of ideas such as
that colour arises not from light wavelength but from the interaction of
light and darkness.
It is the genius of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical cult's
educational system that it deflects all dissent and challenge, with a
"take-it-or-leave-it"
dismissal of parental concerns over the "special character" curriculum. I
did not bother to run for the board of trustees of our Steiner school (a
public, state-run election, open to anyone, by virtue of its integration
into the state school system). I learned quickly in our first year that the
BOT was a rubber stamp to the real powers of the school, and an icon of
appeasement to the state system. The real power resided in the management
committee of the trust to which the school belonged, and even moreso to the
college of teachers, a secretive (private, unrecorded meetings) council of
the inner circle of Anthroposophists in the school, several of whom were
also the proprietors.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:46:17 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901161746.JAA09521 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901161746.JAA09521 lists1.best.com)
ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com) wrote:
))) Nobody is sure why the moon appears to be larger when it is closer to
)))the horizon, so the possibility that there is something a little magical
)))about the horizon is equally as valid as anything science has come up
)))with.
))
)Stephen Tonkin writes:
))Sorry, Charlie, but that is twaddle -- I truly hope that you don't make
))unfounded statements like that in science classes; it's the sort of
))thing that gives Waldorf science teaching a bad name. It's an optical
))illusion which, having been understood, can be mimicked with artificial
))moons and artificial horizons. Do a web search on the words "moon
))illusion" and see what scientists (not pseudoscientists!) have to say
))about it.
))
)So, I did a search,
I do apologise -- my suggesting a web search was thoughtless -- there is
lots of information on the web, not all of which is current (or even
accurate!).
))The explanation for this illusion is still not known. It is not an
))atmospheric phenomenon, and the Moon really does seem to be twice as large
))on the horizon as when it is high up in the sky, particularly in September
))during the Harvest Moon.
This person obviously has not observed the Harvest Moon, i.e. the Full
Moon nearest the September equinox (for northern hemisphere observers).
It does not rise particularly high as compared to the Full Moon at the
winter solstice. The Harvest Moon phenomenon is essentially one of
unusually close rising times on successive evenings as a consequence of
the shallow angle of the ecliptic to the horizon at dusk at this time of
year (there is a tutorial which covers this on my web site). The harvest
moon is noticed primarily because it does rise at sunset. Winter and
summer full moons rise before and after sunset respectively; people are
often indoors for the former and tend not to notice the latter because
moonrise occurs in full daylight and is therefore less spectacular.
) would cover the Moon
))equally well on the horizon and high over head. There must be an eye-brain
))basis for this effect, just as there are many other optical illusions that
))also 'fool' the eye...
If you read what was *actually* written (always helpful in an internet
discussion, I suggest), that *is* what I said. i.e. there is nothing "a
little magical" about the horizon; and we *do* know what it is -- it is
neither an optical effect of the atmosphere nor a consequence of the
angle of viewing; it is an optical illusion which comes about as a
consequence of seeing the moon in relation to the horizon -- as I said,
it can be emulated with artificial moons and artificial horizons -- no
magic, Charlie, not even a little bit, unless you apply that sobriquet
to what happens in visual perception.
[...]
)By 1985
))there were at least 8 explanations for this illusion in the literature
))with little consensus over a true explanation.
Ermmm -- things have moved on a tad in the last 13 years...
What shall we have next? The "glass is a supercooled liquid which flows"
or the "liquid always flows down a plughole as predicted by Coriolis"
urban myths? (I feel I can mention these since I have been guilty, in
ignorance, of teaching both of these -- the former is falsified with a
small modicum of thought, the latter is falsified as it was by the first
and only class to whom I regurgitated it -- by simple observation of
phenomena).
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1031.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:32:49 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901161943.LAA10336 lists1.best.com)
)In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 18:52:06 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
)((
) Am I a lunatic? Maybe. :-)
)
) Peace,
) Charlie
) ))
)
)Dear Charlie!
)
)As a waldorf teacher I see the positive in all my pupils: I think that both
)Steven and yourself are correct - but I will allow Steven to state why (the
)eye-brain link...??!! (wg))
)
)Bruce
Michael KOPP says:
I'm a little unclear here, Bruce: exactly what about Charlie's intuition do
you believe is a "correct" explanation for the moon illusion?
I ask _you_ because I fail to see anything at all possible in Charlie's
ideas (and I have admitted that I am not capable of seeing such infinite
subtlety as Charlie imbues his posts with) and I am hoping that you may be
able to interpret them for me in language I can understand.
(I've asked Charlie to elucidate, but have yet seen no answer.)
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1031 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1032 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (lon
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Colour (was:critics list)
004 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
005 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Hearts and Minds
006 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
007 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
008 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:28:11 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901161943.LAA10336 lists1.best.com)
)In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 18:52:06 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
)((
) Am I a lunatic? Maybe. :-)
)
) Peace,
) Charlie
) ))
)
)Dear Charlie!
)
)As a waldorf teacher I see the positive in all my pupils: I think that both
)Steven and yourself are correct - but I will allow Steven to state why (the
)eye-brain link...??!! (wg))
)
)Bruce
Michael KOPP says:
This is exactly the problem of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical education
which I found has so seriously affected my children's lives for the worse.
It is good to hear Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical teachers admitting
that anything goes, and that there is no critical appraisal of ideas in SWA
schools.
In five years, I never saw aything written in a main lesson book be
challenged or corrected by a teacher in respect of the children's
assertions, imaginings, intuitions, or deductions. Only the baldest factual
errors -- dates, incontrovertible things accepted even by SWA -- were ever
corrected. Only the tiniest smattering of correction of poor thought,
expression and English usage and spelling were corrected.
It is one thing to encourage children by reinforcing their positive
actions, thoughts and mastery of knowledge.
It is another entirely to say that all ideas have the same value; or even
to say that two competing ideas, as in this case, can BOTH be right.
It is not possible, for instance, that the Steinerian teaching of the four
elements (earth, air, fire and water) AND the atomic theory of matter are
BOTH right. The continued teaching of the four elements in Steiner schools
is an intellectual fraud. Only people who _wilfully_ reject rationality and
reason, not to mention evidence, in favour of their own fevered imaginings,
can believe two contradictory things at the same time.
Which, of course, is just what happens to children who get a Steiner
education: they come to believe -- without ever reading Steiner, or being
catechised in Anthroposophy -- that their own intuition is superior to
reason, superior to fact, superior to scientific experiment and deduction.
And the world slides backwards into an ever darker age of ignorance and
unreason.
It is exactly the difference between Charlie's explanation of the moon
illusion and Stephen's that Charlie's is intuitive, where Stephen's is
rational, deductive and experimental. This is why Charlie is wrong, and
Stephen right. More about this in another reply to Charlie's irrational
reply to Stephen, which I predicted.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science (Was Re: early adolescence) (long)
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:41:42 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901160200.SAA24171 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey writes:
)Premo writes:
))Charlie, I am so sorry that knowledge of the moon makes it "dead"
))in your mind! It made me really sad to read that it has had that
))effect on you.
)
)OK, Steve, I confess to overstating my position a bit, but I was
)addressing Michael Kopp--a gentleman who does not respond well to
)subtlety! ;-)
Michael KOPP says:
Frey is a person who does not respond at all to directness, especially that
of fact and reason.
I'd appreciate Frey's elucidation of some piece of his subtlety which he
believes escapes me.
I rather think it's more a case of Frey's being so subtle as to be
incomprehensible. (I'll forbear characterising Frey's subtlety as lunacy.)
Perhaps he can ratchet-up his subtlety to a slightly higher level of
coherence, just for my benefit?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Colour (was:critics list)
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:06:02 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
) or tried to challenge the teaching of ideas such as
)that colour arises not from light wavelength but from the interaction of
)light and darkness.
Colour perception is a much more complicated phenomenon than either
light wavelength or interaction of light and dark suggest. Some time ago
I posted details of Land's colour experiment. Both that and the
phenomenon of Benham's disc suggest that colour perception is not simply
light-wavelength dependent. That is not to say that wavelength is
irrelevant. There is certainly the phenomenon that colour *can* arise
from an interaction of light and dark (e.g. Benham's disc), but the oft
quoted example of blue sky is fallacious -- the lunar daytime sky would
be blue if it was not fallacious.
The whole phenomenon of colour is essentially one of human perception;
physics (as taught in any school) does not explain it -- it merely
offers observed phenomena; those who pretend that these phenomena are
themselves the explanations (be they wavelength or light-dark) are
either deceitful or ignorant.
However, there is a limit to what one can do in school -- just as one
does not need to understand the molecular-bonding level of explanation
of exothermic reactions to be able to accept the observation that energy
is produced when a spark-plug ignites a stochiometric mixture of petrol
vapour and air, one does not need to understand (as a school pupil) the
complete scientific explanation for any other scientific phenomenon
(assuming the explanation is indeed known -- science doesn't know (or
pretend to know) everything!)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.4 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:34:19 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901161746.JAA09521 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (42793616 toto.iv)
As a scientist I think I have to come to Charlie's defense here. I
think he is right and we don't know what causes the moon illusion.
Stephen Tonkin writes:
) ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com) wrote:
) ))) Nobody is sure why the moon appears to be larger when it is closer to
) )))the horizon, so the possibility that there is something a little magical
) )))about the horizon is equally as valid as anything science has come up
) )))with.
) ))
) )Stephen Tonkin writes:
) ))Sorry, Charlie, but that is twaddle -- I truly hope that you don't make
) ))unfounded statements like that in science classes; it's the sort of
) ))thing that gives Waldorf science teaching a bad name. It's an optical
) ))illusion which, having been understood, can be mimicked with artificial
) ))moons and artificial horizons. Do a web search on the words "moon
) ))illusion" and see what scientists (not pseudoscientists!) have to say
) ))about it.
) ))
) )So, I did a search,
)
) I do apologise -- my suggesting a web search was thoughtless -- there is
) lots of information on the web, not all of which is current (or even
) accurate!).
And yet, by your own arguments the explanation he found agreed with
yours. It is not an optical effect but something else with an
eye-brain basis like other optical illusions. But _why_ does it have
this effect?
) ))The explanation for this illusion is still not known. It is not an
) ))atmospheric phenomenon, and the Moon really does seem to be twice as large
) ))on the horizon as when it is high up in the sky, particularly in September
) ))during the Harvest Moon.
) ) would cover the Moon
) ))equally well on the horizon and high over head. There must be an eye-brain
) ))basis for this effect, just as there are many other optical illusions that
) ))also 'fool' the eye...
)
) If you read what was *actually* written (always helpful in an internet
) discussion, I suggest), that *is* what I said. i.e. there is nothing "a
) little magical" about the horizon; and we *do* know what it is -- it is
) neither an optical effect of the atmosphere nor a consequence of the
) angle of viewing; it is an optical illusion which comes about as a
) consequence of seeing the moon in relation to the horizon -- as I said,
Great. Your explanation is "optical illusion". But that is a label,
not an explanation. My understanding of the phrase "optical illusion"
is "a situation in which human perception does not agree with
reality." But _why_ doesn't it agree? I haven't heard any
explanations, though I must admit I'm not a neurologist nor a vision
scientist.
I believe that most people of a scientific bent believe that there is
something in the way our eyes and brains process the visual
information that makes us routinely misinterpret certain things, but
does anyone have a good model for why this happens? I don't think
so. It's only recently that we've learned that the eye and optic
nerve has the ability to process some of the information before it
reaches the brain. There seem to be neural filters for detecting
lines, motion, etc., but I don't think we know what most of them are
in humans.
So, what does "optical illusion" explain? Nothing. It merely says
"it is one of a class of unexplained phenomena that we can reporduce
at will and have seen before." The fact that is can be reproduced
does not mean it is understood, it just means that it is reproducible.
It means you've found the incantation to generate the effect.
I'm prepared to be wrong. If someone has an explanation as to why the
optical illusion occurs I'd love to hear it.
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.5 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Hearts and Minds
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:41:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp writes about Waldorf schools as duplicitous:
)No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and sinister)
)grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
)Anthroposophical cultists.
)
)This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
)totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist). The
)difference is that with the Catholics or fundamentalist Christians you KNOW
)what you're buying. As a parent duped by SWA false advertising and
)deception of the state school authorities (our school was integrated with
)the state system) I am outraged by this attempt to steal my children from a
)normal existence.
Michael, why do you suppose the government of New Zealand has chosen to
treat the waldorf school(s) inclusively? There is no reason to believe
your government is unaware of criticisms such as those you raise. I would
imagine they looked at waldorf and anthroposophy pretty carefully
beforehand, and made an informed decision to integrate at least one school
into the state system.
)From what you have described over the years, it actually sounds to me like
the state authorities made a pretty poor choice. Now, I don't have any
connections in NZ to whom I could go for a second opinion on the
quality-of-education issue in this school--I'll take Michael's word for it.
But I always wonder, if it's really as bad as he says it is, why hasn't the
state retracted its support?
)Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
)day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
So far as the children are concerned, the evident anthroposophical
"purpose" that supposedly informs every minute of every day mostly involves
inculcating three habits: 1) learning to listen, 2) awareness of the needs
of others, and 3) how to negotiate problems. The techniques for imparting
these traits could be considered "anthroposophical" in a waldorf school.
The factual knowledge that is delivered (and delivered efficiently if these
three qualities are in place) has nothing to do with anthroposophy.
That said, I recognize that there have been and will continue to be cases
in which teachers "teach" anthroposophy to the children. Whether this
arises out of zealousness, ignorance, or some combination of the two, it
goes completely against both the clearly stated and generally practiced
tenets of waldorf education. Such transgressions usually occur in science
classes, and reflect a need for more rigorous and extensive science
instruction in waldorf teacher training programs and continuing education
seminars.
It's also important to recognize that while the actual factual content does
not involve anthroposophy, the choice of subjects and the order in which
they are taught can arise out of anthroposophical considerations.
The best example of this would involve the teaching of ancient history in
waldorf schools. Dan, Herman and others like to say that history in
waldorf schools involves teaching theosophical root-race theory. The fact
is, the choice of historical epochs that typically appear in 5th and 6th
grade in a waldorf school may arise from theosophical bracketing: India,
Persia, Egypt, Greece and Rome (I say "may" because it's never been
presented to me this way by any anthroposophist, but the parallels are too
strong to ignore).
In any case, this sequence is in itself a logical way to approach ancient
history, and doesn't seem objectionable to most parents and teachers. My
point, however, is this: the factual information that is imparted in these
blocks involves the standard art, literature, culture, and history that any
historian would characterize as appropriate for the period under
consideration.
The factual information presented as history in a waldorf school involves
nothing about Atlantis, or Lemuria, or root-races or any of the other
anthroposophical mystic history (unless some well-meaning miscreant has
crossed that same line described above in reference to science).
Since the understanding that waldorf springs from a foundation of
anthroposophy has always been clear, it's too easy for Michael and others
of his critical bent to make the vague claim that some form of
"mind-control seepage" occurs. Stephen Tonkin has shown the disingenuous
nature of this claim on a number of occasions.
I would invite you, Michael, to show cause. Instead of just making a
blanket accusation that mind control is constantly practiced through the
course of the day in a waldorf school via anthroposophy, give me examples.
Describe specific practices that you or anyone else is aware of that
regularly (or irregularly) impart anthroposophical dogma to the students in
a waldorf school.
I await your reply (or that of anyone else who cares to jump in) with some
excitement.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.6 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 21:01:56 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp writes:
)
)It is exactly the difference between Charlie's explanation of the moon
)illusion and Stephen's that Charlie's is intuitive, where Stephen's is
)rational, deductive and experimental. This is why Charlie is wrong, and
)Stephen right.
OK, I think I have it now.
experiments=good
intuition=bad
Thanks,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.7 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 21:20:20 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Michael Hirsch writes:
)
)So, what does "optical illusion" explain? Nothing. It merely says
)"it is one of a class of unexplained phenomena that we can reporduce
)at will and have seen before." The fact that is can be reproduced
)does not mean it is understood, it just means that it is reproducible.
)It means you've found the incantation to generate the effect.
I have to agree with his agreement! (g)
The horizon (a horizon) would seem to be little more than a line. What is
it about a line that makes something seem twice as large?
Cars in front of me don't look suddenly smaller upon turning onto a road
with no line
(I think!).
Jeeze! What's wrong with admitting that there is something really cool
and mysterious about our relationship with the moon?
How about the fact that the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon
during an eclipse?
Of course, it's because these bodies are x-sized and y-distance apart,
but what are the chances of this happening arbitrarily?
I just think that there are still mysteries out there.
Whew!
peace,
cf
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.8 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:00:38 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199901170208.SAA13104 lists1.best.com)
On 16 Jan 99,, ckzfrey wrote:
) How about the fact that the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon
) during an eclipse?
It doesn't. The moon more or less exactly covers the sun during a
solar eclipse.
The earth's shadow is much larger than the moon.
) Of course, it's because these bodies are x-sized and y-distance apart,
) but what are the chances of this happening arbitrarily?
Very slim. The fact that the moon and sun are practically the
same apparent size in the sky is very interesting, and not likely to
be true of very many other planets.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 09:09:27 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901170208.SAA13104 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901170208.SAA13104 lists1.best.com)
ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com) wrote:
)Michael Hirsch writes:
))
))So, what does "optical illusion" explain? Nothing.
(Sigh)
The point I am trying, somewhat unsuccessfully it seems, to make is that
the Moon Illusion is the consequence of an optical illusion, and *not*
of some form of magic (which is what Charlie proposed), nor of
atmospheric effect nor of angle of viewing.
I repeat, it is not even a little bit magical, and that "explanation"
has less to offer than science. (Unless, like a 5-yr old at a magic
show, you are unable to distinguish between magic and illusion.)
) It merely says
))"it is one of a class of unexplained phenomena that we can reporduce
))at will and have seen before." The fact that is can be reproduced
))does not mean it is understood, it just means that it is reproducible.
Fine. What Michael Hirsch appears to require is an end to an infinite
regress. As I am sure he well knows, however deep one goes in science,
there is always the question of how one explains the explanation, the
search for the TOE, the search for the fundamental building blocks of
matter...
Until one finds irrefutable fundamental statements (one of the goals of
philosophers for millennia) there are no "explanations", if one requires
that the description that one accepts as an explanation is itself
explained -- and so on into the infinite regress.
There is also a bit of (probably unconscious) double standard going on
here (not necessarily from Michael H) -- people seem to require a
different "depth" of explanation depending upon which "side" of the
fence they are in relation to the thing that is being "explained".
In normal human discourse, if someone asks why the moon illusion occurs,
that it is a particular type of optical illusion *is* seen as an
explanation. If you then wish to ask what causes optical illusions, in
normal human discourse that is seen as a distinct (but related)
question.
Let's take another example of this -- you stop when you think an
explanation has been reached:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Q. Why does a lens focus light?
A. Light is bent (refracted) as it passes through glass and the glass is
shaped in such a way that the combined effect of the bending is that
all the light passes through a small circle.
Q. Why does glass refract light?
A. Because light has different speeds in air and in glass (although I
think Feynman disagreed, but we'll stick to school-level physics), hence
a wavefront meeting the glass at an angle will be propagated in a
different direction [drawing of Huyghen's construction].
Q. Why does light have different speeds in glass and air?
A. (... etc. ad nauseam, or until "we don't know that yet" is reached)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
See what I mean? Where does one stop? I suppose an appeal to magic is
one way of ending an infinite regress. (g)
)The horizon (a horizon) would seem to be little more than a line.
The horizon is the (visual) interface between earth and sky. When the
moon is on the horizon one is seeing it in relation to the surface of
the earth. It is a great deal more than a line.
)What is
)it about a line that makes something seem twice as large?
Nothing -- Charlie has set up a straw man.
)Cars in front of me don't look suddenly smaller upon turning onto a road
)with no line
An entirely false analogy.
) How about the fact that the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon
)during an eclipse?
It doesn't. This is not a fact.
)Of course, it's because these bodies are x-sized and y-distance apart,
)but what are the chances of this happening arbitrarily?
I suspect Charlie may be thinking that Earth's shadow is the same size
of the moon by some strange logic based on the phenomenon that the sun
and moon appear approximately (i.e. *not* exactly) the same size in the
sky. (And the apparent size of both varies.) If they were exactly the
same size, there would be no annular solar eclipses and the moment of
totality in total eclipses would be just that: an instantaneous moment.
And the chances of this relationship happening? Given the actual size of
each body and current theories of the origin of the moon (that it is a
part of the earth dislodged by a large planetoid/asteroid whilst the
earth was condensing), I suggest that the probability that this apparent
size relationship occurring at some time is exactly one. The moon is
gradually moving further away from us; at some stage in the past it
looked significantly larger than the sun; at some time in the future it
will look significantly smaller.
Yes, it's marvellous that they *now* appear the same size, but let's not
attribute it to anything other than chance -- highly improbable things
*do* happen, in fact it is likely that anything whose probability is not
zero will happen at some time -- we shouldn't be surprised. The rapidity
with which so many people invoke supernatural cause when faced with the
occurrence of an improbable event (even worse when they notice a series
of improbable events, but choose to ignore the myriads of improbable
things that *haven't happened!) is one of the more infuriating
irrational qualities of humankind. It wastes so much time which could be
better spent!
) I just think that there are still mysteries out there.
Of course there are, billions of them. There are sufficient to last us
probably forever, sufficient that we don't need to create new ones with
woolly thinking or myopic observations.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1032.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 23:20:17 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901170150.RAA05864 lists1.best.com)
)Kopp writes:
))
))It is exactly the difference between Charlie's explanation of the moon
))illusion and Stephen's that Charlie's is intuitive, where Stephen's is
))rational, deductive and experimental. This is why Charlie is wrong, and
))Stephen right.
)
)OK, I think I have it now.
)
)experiments=good
)
)intuition=bad
)
)Thanks,
)Charlie
You persist in twisting my meaning. I SAID (in this case):
intuition = wrong
science = right
I have asked you for elucidation of your intuitive theory, because I cannot
understand it beyond your assertion that there is either some "magic"
(which I discount as a real possibility) or some "inner knowledge" (which I
discount because you cannot make it known to me).
I further, in other posts, indicated that I think the intuitive,
observation-only approach to understanding the world, taught in Steiner/
Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools, was harmful to my children.
I have said superstition is bad. If you wish to equate intuition with
superstition, and logically deduce that intuition is therefore bad, I won't
dissuade you.
But I didn't say that. In fact, I said intuition has its place. But it
cannot ALONE construct an accurate and real picture of our Universe.
I await your elucidation, instead of your continued twisting of my meaning.
In the meantime, I am working on the sythesis of my own research of the
literature on this subject; it's extensive, and will take a day to write,
and will be longish -- but I think, given the power of the irrational to
maintain itself on this list, it will be useful and instructive in
demolishing the pseudo-science taught in Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
schools by such dangerous, deluded folk as Charlie and Bruce and others we
have seen here.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1032 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1033 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - induction
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Betty Staley explains it
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Kopp finally gets it right
004 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Betty Staley explains it
005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
006 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
007 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Betty Staley explains it
008 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
009 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: critics list
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Betty Staley explains it
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: induction
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:14:39 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I've just reviewed the slick and seductive videotape "Taking a Risk in
Education: Waldorf-Inspired Public Schools." In it, the staff of H.P.
Carden School (Marysville, CA) describe how they decided to adopt a Waldorf
program. Teacher Evy Acuri tells of her conversion at Rudolf Steiner
College:
ACURI
"I was there about one hour, went to the telephone and called my principal.
And said you have to get down here, this is wonderful. And this is what
it's going to be, very helpful for our students."
Principal RUTH MIKKELSEN
"It took me about five seconds to realize that whatever I was looking at it
had a quality that I felt needed to be in this school, that our students
had to have this."
Love at first sight. Been there, done that.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Betty Staley explains it
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:15:28 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In the video "Taking a Risk in Education: Waldorf-Inspired Public Schools,
Betty Staley tells us what it's all about:
STALEY
"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
we would know how to work with the child..."
Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
the human being."
STALEY
"The education is based on a view of child development, so its curriculum
is developmentally appropriate...
How's that for logic? We got buzzwords.
STALEY continues
"and the education itself is devoted not only to intellectual development,
but also to emotional development and artistic development."
Blind us with platitudes, Betty.
STALEY (in stentorian tones)
"This is becoming a very strong educational force."
The frightening thing is all the "experts" in this professionally-produced
video talk with complete confidence. It's made for school boards.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Kopp finally gets it right
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:14:28 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901150039.QAA00390 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901151037.CAA19903 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote,
)While I admit it took me a couple of years to get my family out of the
)clutches of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school movement, and
)while I am ashamed that my rationality appears to have deserted me from the
)start of my quest for an alternative school, I actually cottoned onto the
)weirdness and mumbo jumbo of SWA after only about six months of the first
)year of my kids' tenure there. (Actually, I made a rational investigation
)of Steiner through the available literature, and asked rational questions
)of the school, but the answers were lies.)
I saw weirdness the first day I visited the San Francisco Waldorf school. I
looked in some books on the school's "bookstore" shelf and noted very
strange things in Steiner's books. I asked teachers about that. They said,
"We teachers study Steiner, but in the school we only use Steiner's
teaching methods. We teach nothing of the contents of his philosophy." I
was so in love with the external appearances of the school that I, skeptic
that I am, bought it.
KOPP
)My mistake was in trying to engage the school's teachers and authorities,
)and to try to learn more about why such outlandish things as Goethe's
)colour theory were being taught, and to try to do something about it. We
)should have gotten out immediately upon the first inclination of weirdness.
DUGAN
Same for me. I tried to engage the teachers in a dialogue about
pseudo-science being taught in the school. They told me to read more. I
did. Master teacher Dennis Klocek, enraged by my questions after a lecture
on "Goethean Science," told me I should go to church.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.4 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 99 10:18:32 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
D.Dudan posts:
)STALEY
)"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
)we would know how to work with the child..."
)
)Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
)the human being."
Jeepers, Dan. I think if Betty Staley said she liked milk on her cheerios
you'd find a problem with it.
The phrase "if we could" does not mean "when we do"; she is simply saying
that the more we know about human beings, the easier it is to educate
them.
The fact that you do not agree with her methods of learning about human
beings is a different argument.
Dan posts:
)
)STALEY
)"The education is based on a view of child development, so its curriculum
)is developmentally appropriate...
)
)How's that for logic? We got buzzwords.
)
Which words have the buzz?
Again, I'll paraphrase:
'We have some considered ideas about how children develop, and we keep
them in mind when we teach.'
This doesn't seem illogical to me. But maybe I've been at Sunbridge too
long. (g)
Dan posts:
)
)STALEY continues
)"and the education itself is devoted not only to intellectual development,
)but also to emotional development and artistic development."
)
)Blind us with platitudes, Betty.
Paraphrase:
We realize that a human being consists of more than just an intellect, so
we try to take into account that there are entire human beings sitting
before us.
I don't know, Dan...maybe we both need a rest. Have you seen the moon
lately...it does some really neat-o stuff when it's near the horizon. ;-)
xxxooo,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.5 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:46:00 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 11:33:21 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
(( such dangerous, deluded folk as Charlie and Bruce and others we
have seen here.
))
When are you really going to get personal, oh ZoneGod
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.6 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:59 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 00:49:59 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
It is good to hear Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical teachers admitting
that anything goes, and that there is no critical appraisal of ideas in SWA
schools. ))
I think, Mr Kopp, that you should be a bit more careful in your choice of
words - where did I say that anything goes?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.7 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:46:02 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 12:13:41 MEZ, Dan says:
((
STALEY
"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
we would know how to work with the child..."
Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
the human being."
))
It might help if YOU tried to understand the human being.
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.8 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:57 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 00:49:09 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
((
I'm a little unclear here, Bruce: exactly what about Charlie's intuition do
you believe is a "correct" explanation for the moon illusion?
))
Since Stephen is an astronomer his explanations are to be taken more literally
than mine! I meant, somewhat tongue in cheek, that all optical illusion is
open to several interpretations. Coloured shadows is perhaps a more obvious
example, especially on a waldorf-critics list. Is the shadow cast by a white
light in the presence of otherwise red light red, green or black/grey?
There is only one real way of finding this out, and that is by doing the
experiment yourself. But even then there are possible variations. Those who
"know" the answer should maybe hold back for a couple of days to let those who
want to try for themselves. It is worth it, believe me!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.9 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: critics list
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:56 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 23:40:48 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
(( There are well over 500 waldorf schools worldwide,
)and
)IMO the majority give parents EVERY opportunity to make an informed
)opinion.
Michael KOPP says:
Please provide evidence of the "facts" that you allege: that the majority
of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools worldwide provide sufficient
consumer education.
Also please state what statistical and survey methods were used by you, or
to which you refer, in making this statement.
Also please state what statistical meaning you attach to the term
"majority". Simple, two-thirds, absolute, whatever. If the "majority" of
over 500 schools DO give good information, that leaves a _very substantial
*minority*_ -- some hundreds -- of schools that do NOT give honest pictures
of their true nature.
))
Michael Kopp needs to know (I thought it was common knowledge) that IMO means
in my opinion.
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.10 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 20:09:24 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901171050.CAA01129 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901171050.CAA01129 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)STALEY
)"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
)we would know how to work with the child..."
)
)Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
)the human being."
Plain common sense to my way of thinking, Dan. What better route to
knowing how to work with anyone or anything than understanding it? Do
you suggest that we can know how to work with children if we have no
understanding of human beings? I suggest to you that Steiner's use of
the conditional ("if") suggests that he knew how damned difficult this
understanding is to attain -- you call that arrogance?
I make no secret that I believe my teaching would be greatly improved if
I had more than the fairly rudimentary understanding of the human being
which I now possess (and the longer I live, the more rudimentary I
realise it is!).
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1033 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1034 --------------
001 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - other anthroposophical lists
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - waldorf-education
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: critics list
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
007 - Herman de Tollenaere (her - Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and
Mi
008 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: critics list/sinister food
009 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: other anthroposophical lists
010 - Denis (zoep23 usmo.com) - please remove me from your e-mail list- I do not wish to get a
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.1 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 99 16:59:52 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
M.Kopp writes:
)
)But I didn't say that. In fact, I said intuition has its place. But it
)cannot ALONE construct an accurate and real picture of our Universe.
No, Michael, this is what you said:)
)
)intuition = wrong
)
)science = right
And I resent the implication that I would rely on intuition at the
expense of scientific knowledge.
I hunger for scientific knowledge (thank you, Mr.Tonkin, by the way), as
a complement to my intuition.
It is you who seems anxious to remove intuition in lieu of "the facts".
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 99 17:26:28 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Stephen Tonkin posts:
)
))What is
))it about a line that makes something seem twice as large?
)
)Nothing -- Charlie has set up a straw man.
)
))Cars in front of me don't look suddenly smaller upon turning onto a road
))with no line
)
)An entirely false analogy.
OK--I got carried away. It's generally after midnight when I do this
stuff---when the moon has its greatest influence on me. Har! :)
I am still intrigued by the horizon as a threshold experience.
Has anybody ever tried to duplicate the moon illusion with a vertical
horizon?
I have looked at the moon at the horizon with my head turned
sideways(pity my neighbors),
but I won't tell you what happens.
Try it!
Yours in the spirit of fun and mystery,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: other anthroposophical lists
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:17:27 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I've just caught up on reading the other anthropop lists I follow, and I
must say the Internet world of Anthroposophy is quite chaotic. Items:
* Catherine, a deep thinker and major contributor to anthroposophia, has
been temporarily banned there for an ad hominem.
* The moderator of anthroposophia has announced throwing in the towel and
the list will be moving to a new server.
* Tom Mellett sent a hoax suicide note to several correspondents; Joel
Wendt called the police. Another correspondent, who alleges Tom threatened
her family, was very upset that the police didn't commit him for
observation.
* The mailing list spiritual-science features dispatches dictated by the
"Elder Brothers," shades of the old days of Theosophy when letters were
received regularly from "The Masters."
* anthropos-science, overburdened with lengthy Anthroposophical
discussions, has split into two lists, the new one called anthropos-views.
* correspondents to anthropos-science have outed one of their number as a
Scientologist.
* Waldorf-school-net hardly exists, seeing a post every couple of weeks.
In contrast, the SJU Waldorf School list continues with healthy discussions
of real issues, becoming ever more open. Gerry Palo takes the role of
Waldorf authority, laing down the doctrine with erudite moderation.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: waldorf-education
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 14:21:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Perhaps some of our correspondents could find some old messages telling
their stories and send them to Mr. Feledi.
-Dan Dugan
***
Dan,
Thank you for PLANS and all your work about Anthroposophy and WE.Iam now
working on my diploma theses at the university about A. and WE.There is
not practically any critical material about these problems in Slovakia.Now
it is something like a boom of these "alternative" methods of education
here, in post-communist countries.Former marxists quickly "converted" to
superspiritualists and they poison our state universities.
My mother-kindergarten teacher for 35 years- claims that waldorf
"education" tends to destruction of thinking in children. It leads
to alienation of the kids in the society based on sound rational
thinking.Moreover it makes them easily accept the New Age way of thinking
in the future.If is it possible, send me, please, some parents and/or
children testimonies.I will be very gratefull for every support to my
work.
David
David M.Feledi (dmfeledi unipo.sk)
Humenne
Slovakia
EUrope
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: critics list
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:55:16 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901171648.IAA12915 lists1.best.com)
BruceyJ writes:
)In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 23:40:48 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
)(( There are well over 500 waldorf schools worldwide,
) )and
) )IMO the majority give parents EVERY opportunity to make an informed
) )opinion.
)
) Michael KOPP says:
)
) Please provide evidence of the "facts" that you allege: that the majority
) of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools worldwide provide sufficient
) consumer education.
)
) Also please state what statistical and survey methods were used by you, or
) to which you refer, in making this statement.
)
) Also please state what statistical meaning you attach to the term
) "majority". Simple, two-thirds, absolute, whatever. If the "majority" of
) over 500 schools DO give good information, that leaves a _very substantial
) *minority*_ -- some hundreds -- of schools that do NOT give honest
)pictures
) of their true nature.
) ))
)
)Michael Kopp needs to know (I thought it was common knowledge) that IMO
)means
)in my opinion.
)
)Bruce
And BruceyJ needs to know that, IMNSHO, backed up by that of scholars and
thinkers from the time of the age of reason, at least, IMO is not
authoritative, and requires evidence.
What we, on this list, get from the defenders of the faith, like BruceyJ
and Charlie, is ONLY opinion, ONLY received `wisdom' from Steiner, with no
evidence at all to back up their wild assertions.
Arguing with a Stiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy adherent is like arguing with
blancmange.
We have seen on this list much evidence (if we believe the reports of
personal experience of people like myself) of lying and duplicity by
Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools and adherents.
What we get in return is evasion, "IMO's", denunciations of critics for
criticising, and plattitudes.
Come on, Mr IMO, when you make a statement of opinion, back it up.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:00:16 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901172148.NAA24202 lists1.best.com)
)M.Kopp writes:
))
))But I didn't say that. In fact, I said intuition has its place. But it
))cannot ALONE construct an accurate and real picture of our Universe.
)
)No, Michael, this is what you said:)
)
))
))intuition = wrong
))
))science = right
)
)And I resent the implication that I would rely on intuition at the
)expense of scientific knowledge.
) I hunger for scientific knowledge (thank you, Mr.Tonkin, by the way), as
)a complement to my intuition.
) It is you who seems anxious to remove intuition in lieu of "the facts".
)
)Peace,
)Charlie
But you _have_ relied on intuition and abjured science.
You've totally ignored good scientific explanations of natural phenomena in
favour of mystical or inner explanations that are useless and airheaded.
And you've demonstrated that your command of the science you do quote is
inadequate for a teacher at any level.
For example, you found one reference to the moon illusion problem which
suited your desire to denigrate science (Herschenson's quote about there
not being a complete answer yet to the problem of the moon illusion) and
suggest that intuition and the mumbo jumbo of your Steinerian world-view
has at least as much valid to say on the problem.
But that's rubbish.
The first thing any true seeker of knowledge -- especially scientific
knowledge -- does is a literature search. An impartial one, a complete one.
As complete a search as one is capable of.
Now I know you probably have an aversion to using the Internet to search
for information, it being influenced by Ahriman and all that. And if you
take Stephen Tonkin's dictum about the 'Net providing a lot of BAD
information too much to heart, you might not try.
But from my point of view (I use the Internet _a lot_) I think you're
either prejudiced, careless or dissembling about the science available on
the moon issue.
As I've said before on this list, answering the casual,
fragmentary,ill-informed, esoteric, intuitive, mumbo-jumbo assertions of
the defenders of the faith on this list could be a full-time occupation.
I'm trying to find the time to write a proper science article to refute
the nonsense of you and BruceyJ and even supposed "scientists" like Michael
Hirsch. I've already invested the better part of a day, on and off,
researching the question. I looked at over a hundred Internet addresses.
Then there are the distractions of answering this kind of continued
sniping. I may not be able to get to the writing for another day -- I have
to earn a living, too, and today is Monday on this side of the date line.
But I can say now that Herschenson himself has offered his view on what the
illusion rests on, and there is more recent neuroscience and psychology
reported to answer the question of just how the brain is fooled and why it
makes the assumption it does, despite evidence. The explanation of the
optical illusion has been known since early in this century, and is
available on the 'Net, complete with diagrams.
It seems to me that if you truly are interested in science, Mr Frey, you
would have done a little more research and found these things yourself.
They all support the scientific explantion of optical illusion. There were
NO sites in my search which used _intuition_ to explain the illusion.
In fact, the scientific explanation of the illusion proves that it is,
exactly, the brain's use of _intuition_ which leads to the mistake in the
first place!
Which bolsters my contention that pure introspection (in-tuition, or, as in
St Rudi's case, received wisdom from HIS introspection and "clairvoyance")
will _alone_ never lead to fundamental truths about the Universe. Nor will
intuition ever provide more than a hunch for a well-educated scientist to
investigate using the scientific method.
You once again have it backwards, Mr Frey: science cannot "complement"
intuition, but intuition can complement science.
Your Rudolf Steiner seminary training has effectively blunted your reason,
sir, and I am as sad about that as are any of the others on this list who
have tried, in a more gentle fashion that I am capable of with people I
think foolish, to illuminate the dark corners of your mind.
For those of you who think I am too harsh: ask yourself if you want your
children taught by people who believe in fairies, and think the Moon (or
the horizon) "magical" (in more than the poetic sense)?
While I respect Mr Frey's humanity, and recognise his frailty as being as
human as my own, I cannot suffer his ignorance in a position of authority
and leadership for young minds, no matter what other sterling qualities he
may have.
We turn to teachers to do a better job of educating our children than we
can do ourselves.
My own children's minds were blunted by the likes of Mr Frey -- and for
that I have no tolerance, especially when it has the certainty of religious
belief behind it.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.7 ---------------
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and
Minds]
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:40:42 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Robert Flannery wrote:
The factual information presented as history in a waldorf school involves
nothing about Atlantis, or Lemuria, or root-races or any of the other
anthroposophical mystic history
Nothing? In the Dutch national daily Trouw, Wednesday 4 February 1998, the
editor for Education, Edwin Kreulen, a former student at the The Hague
Waldorf school, wrote a long article, "My education towards racism".
I posted this before on this list. I repost parts of it in reply to Robert
Flannery [and in reply to a remark by a Waldorf supporter on this list of
hardly ever hearing criticism of Waldorf from ex-Waldorf students].
Is Kreulen's school an exceptional case among Dutch Waldorf schools in
teaching Atlantis and 'root-races'? No. As I wrote before on this list, it
is the "flagship" school of Dutch Waldorf; the first one founded by Max
Stibbe, founder of the Waldorf movement in both The Netherlands and South
Africa in the 1920s-1930s, and author of articles in the Dutch Waldorf
paper defending South African Apartheid policy in the 1970s.
Edwin Kreulen:
"According to page 1 of my [Waldorf] exercise book, all races originate
from a kind of primeval man, who lived ten thousand years ago in the
central continent of Atlantis; which, however, had to perish 'because of
abuse of the divine wisdom. On the bottom of the sea, one can still find
the remains of this continent as a long extensive reef'.
... 'With the first Southern races, the natural forces of earth and sun
have worked to blacken their skins. With the Northern races, the inner
forces of light became stronger, which made them whites.' 'The races became
stuck at different stages in their development from childhood to old age.'
Then comes a classification, linking the black race to childhood, the brown
race to a fourteen year old, and the whites to all ages ...
In this very chart, I thought the linking with parts of the body was as
least as remarkable. According to the exercise book, each race corresponds
to a part of the human body. Senses and brains are linked to whites,
metabolism to blacks. And only the white person has a straight face. Eg,
the yellow race has 'slanted eyes, a hollow face, flat nose, and coarse
black hair.'
Next, the exercise book discusses all races individually; except for us,
the whites, for we obviously know about that already. ... 'All negroes
still keep a childish expression on their faces for a long time. The lips
are shapeless and thick, the nose somewhat flat and not yet grown up in a
sense.' ... 'Their ["negroes"'] stories, their views on the world and
creation are somewhat childish. In childish simplicity they worship their
gods.' The chapter on the black race concludes: 'After being dominated for
centuries, the negroes are now developing on their own; however, this goes
with big problems and bloody wars.'
In my class, there was not a single non-European pupil. Usually, children
of more highly educated and more affluent Europeans go to Waldorf school.
So, I think: how would things be, had we had a black class mate, making it
possible for us to test directly the theory, whether he really had 'a
childish expression' on his face?
At a certain point, my defense of the school changes into pure anger. How
dare they indoctrinate me with this? And why did the government and its
inspectorate of education, not finish this? An anger, which only increases,
when today Anthroposophists, including a former teacher, keep defending
this by hook and by crook."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.8 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: critics list/sinister food
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 99 19:40:06 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp:
)
)Arguing with a Stiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy adherent is like arguing with
)blancmange.
I've been called a casserole before, and even an hors d'oeuvre--but NEVER
a blancmange!!
This means war, Kopp!!!
xxxooo
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.9 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: other anthroposophical lists
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 03:24:47 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199901172222.OAA11312 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) I've just caught up on reading the other anthropop lists I follow, and I
) must say the Internet world of Anthroposophy is quite chaotic. Items:
[snip]
) -Dan Dugan
Normally correspondence between two or more people makes them constitute
a group.
The correspondence between the members of the group is based on the
mutual acceptance of certain rules, like normally accepting that the
content of the correspondence _only_ is "public" to the other member or
members of the group and requesting admission from a correspondent if
you as member of the group want to quote him or her to _another_
context, if you are in any doubt about the will of the one you quote or
refer to.
This confidence by Allan Adler in his correspondence with you, you
clearly broke, seemingly never for a second considering asking for his
will or permission before doing it, like you normally never seem to do.
From your letter by you to this list the following day, he seemed to
have become clearly mad at you for that.
As a one-time exception, I have also once quoted three lines from you as
part of posting a letter by me to this group (the one on "early
adolescence" on Wed, 13 Jan) also to the waldorf-list, a post that
_very_ respectfully gave you the credit I think (thought ...) you
deserved on a number of points, without asking for your permission, as I
thought, after having tried to understand your way of thinking, that you
would probably appreciate it.
I think the ones you mention, _name_ and describe in the post to which
this is a response donĄt do that, especially the man who seemingly has
great problems with himself and who has been the central cause of the
main part of the problems on the anthroposophia list.
The [spiritualscience] list you mention is not an "anthroposophical"
list, also not considered to be that by the moderator, but describes its
goals on http://www.eGroups.com/list/spiritualscience/info.html as "An
opportunity to discuss Christian Esotericism with the assistance of the
Elder Brothers of Humanity".
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1034.10 ---------------
From: Denis (zoep23 usmo.com)
Subject: please remove me from your e-mail list- I do not wish to get any more of your messages
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 20:26:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901172102.NAA02031 lists1.best.com)
waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com wrote:
)
) -------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1033 --------------
)
) 001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - induction
) 002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Betty Staley explains it
) 003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Kopp finally gets it right
) 004 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Betty Staley explains it
) 005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) 006 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) 007 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Betty Staley explains it
) 008 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) 009 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: critics list
) 010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Betty Staley explains it
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.1 ---------------
)
) From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
) Subject: induction
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:14:39 -0800
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)
) I've just reviewed the slick and seductive videotape "Taking a Risk in
) Education: Waldorf-Inspired Public Schools." In it, the staff of H.P.
) Carden School (Marysville, CA) describe how they decided to adopt a Waldorf
) program. Teacher Evy Acuri tells of her conversion at Rudolf Steiner
) College:
)
) ACURI
) "I was there about one hour, went to the telephone and called my principal.
) And said you have to get down here, this is wonderful. And this is what
) it's going to be, very helpful for our students."
)
) Principal RUTH MIKKELSEN
) "It took me about five seconds to realize that whatever I was looking at it
) had a quality that I felt needed to be in this school, that our students
) had to have this."
)
) Love at first sight. Been there, done that.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.2 ---------------
)
) From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
) Subject: Betty Staley explains it
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:15:28 -0800
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)
) In the video "Taking a Risk in Education: Waldorf-Inspired Public Schools,
) Betty Staley tells us what it's all about:
)
) STALEY
) "Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
) we would know how to work with the child..."
)
) Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
) the human being."
)
) STALEY
) "The education is based on a view of child development, so its curriculum
) is developmentally appropriate...
)
) How's that for logic? We got buzzwords.
)
) STALEY continues
) "and the education itself is devoted not only to intellectual development,
) but also to emotional development and artistic development."
)
) Blind us with platitudes, Betty.
)
) STALEY (in stentorian tones)
) "This is becoming a very strong educational force."
)
) The frightening thing is all the "experts" in this professionally-produced
) video talk with complete confidence. It's made for school boards.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.3 ---------------
)
) From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
) Subject: Re: Kopp finally gets it right
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:14:28 -0800
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
) References: (199901150039.QAA00390 lists1.best.com)
) In-Reply-To: (199901151037.CAA19903 lists1.best.com)
)
) Michael Kopp wrote,
)
) )While I admit it took me a couple of years to get my family out of the
) )clutches of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school movement, and
) )while I am ashamed that my rationality appears to have deserted me from the
) )start of my quest for an alternative school, I actually cottoned onto the
) )weirdness and mumbo jumbo of SWA after only about six months of the first
) )year of my kids' tenure there. (Actually, I made a rational investigation
) )of Steiner through the available literature, and asked rational questions
) )of the school, but the answers were lies.)
)
) I saw weirdness the first day I visited the San Francisco Waldorf school. I
) looked in some books on the school's "bookstore" shelf and noted very
) strange things in Steiner's books. I asked teachers about that. They said,
) "We teachers study Steiner, but in the school we only use Steiner's
) teaching methods. We teach nothing of the contents of his philosophy." I
) was so in love with the external appearances of the school that I, skeptic
) that I am, bought it.
)
) KOPP
) )My mistake was in trying to engage the school's teachers and authorities,
) )and to try to learn more about why such outlandish things as Goethe's
) )colour theory were being taught, and to try to do something about it. We
) )should have gotten out immediately upon the first inclination of weirdness.
)
) DUGAN
) Same for me. I tried to engage the teachers in a dialogue about
) pseudo-science being taught in the school. They told me to read more. I
) did. Master teacher Dennis Klocek, enraged by my questions after a lecture
) on "Goethean Science," told me I should go to church.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.4 ---------------
)
) From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
) Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 99 10:18:32 -0600
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
)
) D.Dudan posts:
) )STALEY
) )"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
) )we would know how to work with the child..."
) )
) )Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
) )the human being."
)
) Jeepers, Dan. I think if Betty Staley said she liked milk on her cheerios
) you'd find a problem with it.
) The phrase "if we could" does not mean "when we do"; she is simply saying
) that the more we know about human beings, the easier it is to educate
) them.
) The fact that you do not agree with her methods of learning about human
) beings is a different argument.
)
) Dan posts:
)
) )
) )STALEY
) )"The education is based on a view of child development, so its curriculum
) )is developmentally appropriate...
) )
) )How's that for logic? We got buzzwords.
) )
)
) Which words have the buzz?
) Again, I'll paraphrase:
) 'We have some considered ideas about how children develop, and we keep
) them in mind when we teach.'
) This doesn't seem illogical to me. But maybe I've been at Sunbridge too
) long. (g)
)
) Dan posts:
) )
) )STALEY continues
) )"and the education itself is devoted not only to intellectual development,
) )but also to emotional development and artistic development."
) )
) )Blind us with platitudes, Betty.
)
) Paraphrase:
) We realize that a human being consists of more than just an intellect, so
) we try to take into account that there are entire human beings sitting
) before us.
)
) I don't know, Dan...maybe we both need a rest. Have you seen the moon
) lately...it does some really neat-o stuff when it's near the horizon. ;-)
)
) xxxooo,
) Charlie
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.5 ---------------
)
) From: BruceyJ aol.com
) Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:46:00 EST
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)
) In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 11:33:21 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
) (( such dangerous, deluded folk as Charlie and Bruce and others we
) have seen here.
) ))
)
) When are you really going to get personal, oh ZoneGod
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.6 ---------------
)
) From: BruceyJ aol.com
) Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:59 EST
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)
) In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 00:49:59 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
) ((
) It is good to hear Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical teachers admitting
) that anything goes, and that there is no critical appraisal of ideas in SWA
) schools. ))
)
) I think, Mr Kopp, that you should be a bit more careful in your choice of
) words - where did I say that anything goes?
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.7 ---------------
)
) From: BruceyJ aol.com
) Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:46:02 EST
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)
) In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 12:13:41 MEZ, Dan says:
)
) ((
) STALEY
) "Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
) we would know how to work with the child..."
)
) Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
) the human being."
) ))
)
) It might help if YOU tried to understand the human being.
)
) Bruce
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.8 ---------------
)
) From: BruceyJ aol.com
) Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:57 EST
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)
) In einer eMail vom 17.01.99 00:49:09 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
) ((
) I'm a little unclear here, Bruce: exactly what about Charlie's intuition do
) you believe is a "correct" explanation for the moon illusion?
) ))
)
) Since Stephen is an astronomer his explanations are to be taken more literally
) than mine! I meant, somewhat tongue in cheek, that all optical illusion is
) open to several interpretations. Coloured shadows is perhaps a more obvious
) example, especially on a waldorf-critics list. Is the shadow cast by a white
) light in the presence of otherwise red light red, green or black/grey?
)
) There is only one real way of finding this out, and that is by doing the
) experiment yourself. But even then there are possible variations. Those who
) "know" the answer should maybe hold back for a couple of days to let those who
) want to try for themselves. It is worth it, believe me!
)
) Bruce
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.9 ---------------
)
) From: BruceyJ aol.com
) Subject: Re: critics list
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:45:56 EST
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)
) In einer eMail vom 16.01.99 23:40:48 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
)
) (( There are well over 500 waldorf schools worldwide,
) )and
) )IMO the majority give parents EVERY opportunity to make an informed
) )opinion.
)
) Michael KOPP says:
)
) Please provide evidence of the "facts" that you allege: that the majority
) of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools worldwide provide sufficient
) consumer education.
)
) Also please state what statistical and survey methods were used by you, or
) to which you refer, in making this statement.
)
) Also please state what statistical meaning you attach to the term
) "majority". Simple, two-thirds, absolute, whatever. If the "majority" of
) over 500 schools DO give good information, that leaves a _very substantial
) *minority*_ -- some hundreds -- of schools that do NOT give honest pictures
) of their true nature.
) ))
)
) Michael Kopp needs to know (I thought it was common knowledge) that IMO means
) in my opinion.
)
) Bruce
)
) --------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1033.10 ---------------
)
) From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
) Subject: Re: Betty Staley explains it
) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 20:09:24 +0000
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) References: (199901171050.CAA01129 lists1.best.com)
) In-Reply-To: (199901171050.CAA01129 lists1.best.com)
)
) Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
) )STALEY
) )"Steiner's idea was that if we could truly understand the human being, then
) )we would know how to work with the child..."
) )
) )Isn't that just amazing arrogance? All we have to do is "truly understand
) )the human being."
)
) Plain common sense to my way of thinking, Dan. What better route to
) knowing how to work with anyone or anything than understanding it? Do
) you suggest that we can know how to work with children if we have no
) understanding of human beings? I suggest to you that Steiner's use of
) the conditional ("if") suggests that he knew how damned difficult this
) understanding is to attain -- you call that arrogance?
)
) I make no secret that I believe my teaching would be greatly improved if
) I had more than the fairly rudimentary understanding of the human being
) which I now possess (and the longer I live, the more rudimentary I
) realise it is!).
)
) --
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
) + Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
) + (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
)
) --------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1033 ---------------
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1034 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1035 --------------
001 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: please remove me from your e-mail list- I do not wish to g
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: other anthroposophical lists
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
007 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
008 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
009 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
010 - Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmow - Re: Another attack on science
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.1 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and
Minds]
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:46:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901172342.PAA04181 lists1.best.com)
Herman de Tolleneare used a strategically incomplete quote of mine to begin
his most recent post:
)The factual information presented as history in a waldorf school involves
)nothing about Atlantis, or Lemuria, or root-races or any of the other
)anthroposophical mystic history
Herman, never missing an opportunity to inject the race card and trot out
his portfolio, concludes:
))Nothing? In the Dutch national daily Trouw, Wednesday 4 February 1998, the
))editor for Education, Edwin Kreulen, a former student at the The Hague
))Waldorf school, wrote a long article, "My education towards racism".
))
))I posted this before on this list. I repost parts of it in reply to Robert
))Flannery [and in reply to a remark by a Waldorf supporter on this list of
))hardly ever hearing criticism of Waldorf from ex-Waldorf students].
))
))Is Kreulen's school an exceptional case among Dutch Waldorf schools in
))teaching Atlantis and 'root-races'? No. As I wrote before on this list, it
))is the "flagship" school of Dutch Waldorf; the first one founded by Max
))Stibbe, founder of the Waldorf movement in both The Netherlands and South
))Africa in the 1920s-1930s, and author of articles in the Dutch Waldorf
))paper defending South African Apartheid policy in the 1970s.
(snip exegesis of unpleasant racial anthroposophical stereotyping and
typecasting)
I was discussing history, and I believe this rehash involves what was
called "racial ethnography", but that's ok. In my earlier post, I was
pointing out that on occasion, anthroposophy is mistakenly taught in the
schools. This Dutch version of anthroposophy is particularly ugly, but we
might as well look it straight in the eye every time Herman brings it back.
Here's my entire paragraph which Herman chose to quote partially. I've
highlighted the section he left out:
)The factual information presented as history in a waldorf school involves
)nothing about Atlantis, or Lemuria, or root-races or any of the other
)anthroposophical mystic history *(unless some well-meaning miscreant has
)crossed that same line described above in reference to science)*.
The Dutch miscreants definitely crossed that line.
For the sake of anyone dropping in since the last time we went over this,
I'll give a brief recap (which Herman can correct as he sees fit). This
whole issue created a huge stir in the Netherlands, after it was reported
in the Dutch media earlier in this decade. Teaching of this type was
documented in a small minority of schools within the country (we argued
inconclusively about how small a minority it was), and a great upheaval
within waldorf and anthroposophical circles in the Netherlands ensued.
Reforms were instituted, and a judicial investigation later concluded that
the incident was isolated, and the waldorf schools were not in fact racist.
Herman, I agree with everyone else that this stuff is awful and
inexcusable. Aside from the fact that it is the most reprehensible example
I've seen of an extension of Steiner's worst racism into the classroom,
what point are you trying to make with regard to my original post?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 20:02:23 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901172216.OAA08086 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey says:
) I am still intrigued by the horizon as a threshold experience.
"Threshold" to what? How would you suggest one cross such a threshold,
Charlie?
Or does Anthroposophy have a secret inner sect which believes the world is
flat?
)Has anybody ever tried to duplicate the moon illusion with a vertical
)horizon?
)I have looked at the moon at the horizon with my head turned
)sideways(pity my neighbors),
)but I won't tell you what happens.
)Try it!
)
)Yours in the spirit of fun and mystery,
)Charlie
Well, Charlie, I don't know what you saw when you looked at the Moon
sideways, but if you still saw a "larger" Moon, you didn't go far enough.
(And if you saw a normal size Moon, scientifically falsifying the Moon
illusion, and you continued with your mumbo jumbo about their being
something "magical" or supernatural about the supposed "larger" moon, then
you would be dishonest.)
As a teaser to my forthcoming science article on the Moon illusion, I can
tell you that if you had turned your back on the rising moon, bent over far
enough, and looked at it between your legs, the illusion that the moon was
"larger" would have disappeared!
(Of course, it might have spoiled the blancmange.)
Try it!
Yours in the spirit of scientific experimentation,
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: please remove me from your e-mail list- I do not wish to get
any more of your messages
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:14:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901172102.NAA02031 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901180228.SAA22986 lists1.best.com)
Geez, copying a whole digest to the list just to ask to be unsubscribed.
People do things to lists like this without even being aware of it.
I always send in commands with my password when someone asks like this. If
I don't they'll just crap on us again.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: other anthroposophical lists
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:24:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901172222.OAA11312 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901180228.SAA22955 lists1.best.com)
Sune, you wrote,
The [spiritualscience] list you mention is not an "anthroposophical"
list, also not considered to be that by the moderator, but describes its
goals on http://www.eGroups.com/list/spiritualscience/info.html as "An
opportunity to discuss Christian Esotericism with the assistance of the
Elder Brothers of Humanity".
The guy who channels the elders also posts about them to anthropos-science,
which is where I read references to his list spiritualscience (my hyphen
was a mistake).
You're smart to distance yourselves from that nonsense. You do get the
parallel with the mahatma letters, don't you? Steiner was all wrapped up in
that conceit for years, but couldn't stomach Olcott saying the Masters had
appeared to him on his deathbed instructing that Annie Besant succeed him
as head of Theosophy. Sounds like sour grapes, to me, or a good eye for
opportunity. It was the beginning of the separation of Anthroposophy from
Theosophy, took about four years.
Regarding the propriety of my post, Tom and Joel have been, and in Joels
case presently are, correspondents here. This is neighborhood news, sorry
it's bad. I am truly concerned about Tom. He's relished being the class
clown, but he's way out of order recently.
All the lists I read are publicly accessable. It is silly to expect
information published on them to be treated as confidential; it's
-published-.
My policy accords with copyright law: all web sites, newsgroup and listserv
postings are automatically copyrighted by the authors, but the contents may
be discussed and quotations may be made for critical and educational
purposes.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:36:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901170208.SAA13104 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey, you said,
)The horizon (a horizon) would seem to be little more than a line. What is
)it about a line that makes something seem twice as large?
)Cars in front of me don't look suddenly smaller upon turning onto a road
)with no line
)(I think!).
I think the effect has to do with altitude, being above the horizontal
where we normally look. Maybe we should ask why does the moon appear to
shrink when it's high in the sky?
)Jeeze! What's wrong with admitting that there is something really cool
)and mysterious about our relationship with the moon?
Because that's a silly idea.
) How about the fact that the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon
)during an eclipse?
It doesn't, the earth's shadow on moon is bigger, and has a wide penumbra too.
You're thinking about eclipses of the sun, the most marvellous coincidence
in the universe, indeed. Ah, but even there the fit is quite inexact. I
enjoyed the 1991 eclipse from Oaxaca, where it lasted 6 minutes in
totality. The moon was quite a bit bigger than the sun, that time. A couple
of years ago an annular (moon smaller than sun) was visible from Los
Angeles (I didn't see it).
)Of course, it's because these bodies are x-sized and y-distance apart,
)but what are the chances of this happening arbitrarily?
Well, it didn't really happen. To me the gross irrationality and
imprecision of the solar system indicates that the universe is -not-
designed or operated by superior beings. It would take stupid gods, like
maybe the Greeks on a bender, to screw up the solar system as it is. Kepler
was unable to admit to this fact, he couldn't stand it. If we could afford
a real clockmaker god, we could have total eclipses every month!
) I just think that there are still mysteries out there.
There are. My suggestion, based on my reading of history, is that a search
for natural causes is the most likely to succeed.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:20:18 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery writes:
)Michael Kopp writes about Waldorf schools as duplicitous:
)
))No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and
))sinister)
))grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
))Anthroposophical cultists.
))
))This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
))totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist). The
))difference is that with the Catholics or fundamentalist Christians you
))KNOW
))what you're buying. As a parent duped by SWA false advertising and
))deception of the state school authorities (our school was integrated with
))the state system) I am outraged by this attempt to steal my children from
))a
))normal existence.
And FLANNERY says:
)Michael, why do you suppose the government of New Zealand has chosen to
)treat the waldorf school(s) inclusively?
And KOPP replies:
It didn't. If it had, I would have said it had, and been hugely outraged,
and picketed Parliament.
School integration here is not at all like the charter movement in the
United States. It's almost more like a voucher system, except the money
goes directly to the integrated schools, rather than to individual families.
The integration movement here was an outgrowth of the strong Catholic
Church affiliation of the largest segment of the upper-middle-class, the
farmers, who were stalwarts of, particularly, the conservative National
party. They did most of the lobbying to get state money for religious
schools.
About a decade ago, a liberal government, Labour, went more conservative,
socially, and liberal, economically, than even the right wing and
instituted a complete education reform, called Tomorrow's Schools. One of
its planks was self-government (given with one had and taken away with the
other -- parents still have little direct influence on their children's
curriculum). It was, mainly, an exercise to unload the cost of education
onto parents, who have had to pick up about a third to half the former
government funding, through bake sales, school fairs and the like. Boards
of trustees became businesses to run the schools.
Another plank of this reformation was integration: parochial and secular
private schools, already existing, could apply to the government to become
affiliated with the state system, and the state would pay the teachers'
salaries and some of the cost of plant maintenance. Schools would still be
private, teachers could still be accredited otherwise than in the state
system, and they could keep any "special character" (i.e., religious)
curriculum they had.
In exchange, the integrated schools would be required to teach the full
state curriculum and syllabus (learning prescription), although teaching
methods were left up to the schools.
This government funding of private/religious schools is not so
out-of-character here as it is in the U.S. Like Britain, the mother
country, New Zealand has almost a state religion, no written Constitution,
no First Amendment, and the public schools have little to restrict them
from religious observance. Public school children still sing "God Save the
Queen", and the NZ National Anthem, "God Defend New Zealand".
However, no state school has adopted any special character curriculum, in
the fashion of U.S. schools decried on this list for adopting Waldorf. It
would not be possible. It would also not be possible for a group of parents
to "take over" a state school's BOT and change its character to a special
purpose. (That has actually happened, in a few rural, low-income areas
where, particularly, there is a heavy indigenous population, and Maori have
exerted political muscle. The management of these schools has invariably
been truly incompetent and dangerous, and the teaching and educational
education suspect, and they have always been taken over by the government
and run by a commissioner until a new and more trustworthy BOT can be
appointed.)
FLANNERY:
)There is no reason to believe
)your government is unaware of criticisms such as those you raise.
KOPP:
Yes there is. The Government (politicians) doesn't want to know, and
neither does the self-serving bureaucracy.
I am the only public critic of Waldorf in this country of whom I am aware.
And I have no high public profile like Dan Dugan does in the States. I
don't even have a Web site of my own about Waldorf ... yet. I cannot
command the ear of politicians, except my own district's member of
Parliament, who is a friend of the school.
This is a country which has a culture of making life particularly
unpleasasnt for those who dissent. Remember, it is a small State the size
of the state of California, with the population of a medium-sized city in
California (3.75 million).
I live in the capital city, Wellington. I was a national public radio
network news correspondent until I got too close to exposing some political
military/industrial/foreign-relations shenanigans, and became involved in
union activities and was made redundant during a precedent-setting,
union-busting contract negotiation, before a new National Government passed
laws effectively gelding all unions. After that I never worked in major
media again. Everyone knows everyone, and no-one who wants to have a
secure, old-boy career, raises waves. Those who do are exiled, internally
or externally. The best and brightest here co-opt or opt-out and go to
Australia or Britain. I am well known for my independence. Which is to say,
I am poison to mainstream info-tainment media. Sixty percent of New
Zealand's print press is 41-percent-owned by Rupert Murdoch. You in America
don't know who Rupert is? Ask Stephen Tonkin. He bought Maggie Thatcher and
the British press, chewed it up and spit it out, and now he's a Yank and
has his fingers into every type of U.S. and world-wide media. He's the
world's biggest media baron.
And if there are elements of the school inspectorate which ARE aware of my
sort of complaint, they don't talk about it or make an issue of it,
probably because the Steiner schools are, compared to the other problem
schools, well-managed, solvent, supported and run by upper-middle-income
white people of the class which supplies the government itself with its
mandates and employees.
I have written to the schools inspectorate during their last examination of
my former Steiner school, with my complete history in our Steiner school,
and my concerns. I have not even had the courtesy of a reply. They would
rather sweep such problems (me, not the Steiner school) under the rug.
FLANNERY:
)I would
)imagine they looked at waldorf and anthroposophy pretty carefully
)beforehand, and made an informed decision to integrate at least one school
)into the state system.
KOPP:
No, they wouldn't have had a clue. The integration application
documentation, and the school visits, had the same character as all other
false advertising and duplicity by Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
schools. If you wish, I can quote these documents here. They are
extraordinary in what they do not say.
So the state's decision was NOT an informed one.
And, as I said above, the state did not integrate Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophpy into the state system; it simply gave state funding to one
of many private schools on condition of teaching the state curriculum and
allowing more or less open entry (although the school is allowed to suggest
to parents that they should be accepting of the special character before
enrolling).
The school sought integration for the money and no other reason; it has
acknowledged this publicly. And it has publicly worried about "diluting"
the special character -- Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy, by whatever name
-- with the mandates and requirements of the state and its curriculum.
In our case, when we enrolled, we were told we did NOT even have to accept
the special character, because it only "informed" the special character
curriculum, and was not "taught" in any part of the classroom. We were told
we didn't even need to know anything about SWA. I specifically demanded
these assurances, and received them verbally. (I, of course, made it my
business to find out as much as possible, both before and after enrolling
-- to little avail, despite my journalist's usual thoroughness.)
FLANNERY:
)From what you have described over the years, it actually sounds to me like
)the state authorities made a pretty poor choice. Now, I don't have any
)connections in NZ to whom I could go for a second opinion on the
)quality-of-education issue in this school--I'll take Michael's word for it.
)
)But I always wonder, if it's really as bad as he says it is, why hasn't the
)state retracted its support?
KOPP:
(Well, thank you, Robert, for taking my word for something. That's more
than most defenders of the faith have granted me in the three years I've
been here. However, there is another Steiner school person from New Zealand
on this list, John Suggate, from the Christchurch school, who rarely posts,
and has never engaged me publicly or privately. He has started another
discussion list for Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical teachers, but is it
moribund. Because all Steiner schools, as they are called here, are members
of the NZ Rudolf Steiner School Association, he would have reasonably close
links with, and knowledge of, my former school.)
As I've said on the list many times before, the state school inspectorate
HAS faulted our former Steiner school in both of its biannual inspections
during its five years of integration.
Specifically, the inspectors have remarked on the failure of the school to
fully and properly deliver the state curriculum, to state standards, and
with state or approved alternative measurement of pupil achievement.
They have also remarked on the school's loose management structure, with
only a "nominal" prinicipal, which is mandated by the law; and the lax
administration of pupil records and assessments.
At the same time, they have been full of praise for all the wonderful
_appearances_ of superiority that we all know are the public relations
gimmicks of the Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical movement: clean, tidy,
warm, friendly, caring, arty, nicely decorated, holistic, etc. The
workbooks the inspectors look at are the best of the lot, colourful,
wonderful penmanship, lots of arty drawings. I doubt that they actually
_read_ much of the stenographic or fantastic writings.
They have also complimented the school on its apparently happy community
and the good communication between parents and school. All I can say about
this is that appearances are deceiving, and there is no real communication
of substantive matters.
Contrast, for instance, the school newsletters produced in the years before
the school was integrated with the ones produced after our arrival. The
latter are brief, PR-oriented, announcement-only sheets. The earlier are
chatty, personal, lengthy (sometimes up to 20 pages), full of
Anthroposophical insights and concerns, full of Anthroposophist parents'
stories about their biodynamic gardening and Weleda medicine and the
school's Anthroposophical physician's health tips.
I interpret this overnight change to the Anthroposophical Mafia going
underground when the school became open to the public, so as not to alarm
the new families who would be pressured for "fees" of up to $1,500 per
year, despite the legal status of such requests being restricted to
voluntary contributions.
My feeling is that the inspectors are so out of their depth, and
unknowledgeable about the true -- or even nominal -- nature of the SWA
pedagogy, that they are incapable of making professionally sound
judgements. I do not think, for instance, that they have a sense of the
pervasiveness and meaning of the use of
religious myth in place of the teaching of secular history. Nor do they
see, except in a cursory way, that the secular, state curriculum is thus
subverted, and not taught to the state's specifications.
In short, I think the inspectors have been snowed -- or have chosen to be.
No inspectorate likes to have problem schools in its district.
I intend to fully investigate the school inspectorate's dealings with my
former school, and the rigour of their methods.
But problems do exist, and parents do complain, and there is an
undercurrent of displeasure on the part of parents who think their kids are
not getting a "good" education. Few parents are as self-educated about the
problems of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical dogma as am I. But even
those do not raise waves, for the reasons I have cited above. They simply
vote with their feet, and take their kids elsewhere, whether the kids want
to go or not.
I've previously mentioned that we stayed as long as we did, despite my
anger, because the decision was left to our kids, and they simply wanted to
stay with their friends. But when both of their classes dwindled to only 60
percent of what they were when we came, and some good kids left, and my
kids finally realised that there was something rotten in Denmark, we left.
Quoting KOPP:
))Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
))criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
))in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of
))every
))day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
))everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
FLANNERY:
)So far as the children are concerned, the evident anthroposophical
)"purpose" that supposedly informs every minute of every day mostly involves
)inculcating three habits: 1) learning to listen, 2) awareness of the needs
)of others, and 3) how to negotiate problems. The techniques for imparting
)these traits could be considered "anthroposophical" in a waldorf school.
The major ones missing, of course, are the ability to read books for
content and comprehension and information-gathering, and the ability to
synthesise learned information and ones own ideas into coherent expression
of ideas.
Robert is dead on with the first, but the purpose of being a "good
listener" is not to dissent or question or criticise or be skeptical. I
never heard of kids stopping a teacher during a lecture to question or
discuss. I especially never heard of kids above, say, class three,
interrupting a teacher during a story. I have seen these story tellings,
presented to parents on festive nights. They are mesmerising. All well and
good for theatre. Probably not so good for education, especially if the
education purports to be for making one "free". It smacks more to me of Big
Brother (in the Apple Macintosh computer ad of 1984, to be exact!).
The first also _failed_: "tuning-out" on the teacher was more rampant in
our Steiner school than in any public classroom I know (including my own
when I was a teacher). The second is incomprehensible to me, especially in
terms of the state curriculum. What, Robert, exactly, are you talking
about? And the third, if there was an attempt to teach it (of which I am
unaware) failed miserably, as there was the usual class and interpersonal
rivalry, unmediated by the warm fuzzies of such quaint Steiner anachronisms
as having everyone shake hands with the teacher (and sometimes each other)
before class.
FLANNERY:
)The factual knowledge that is delivered (and delivered efficiently if these
)three qualities are in place) has nothing to do with anthroposophy.
KOPP:
This is a preposterous statement in light of the evidence presented by
every critic on this list of their own children's lessons in a Steiner/
Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school.
My own litany included:
* the teaching of religious myth as history (I can post this main lesson,
about Ahura Mazda, if desired);
* the teaching of science without the important hypothesis-test-conclusion
parts of the scientific method, using such "observational" experiments as
the fringe-colours-in-the-fish-tank;
* an otherwise stable and competent maths and chemistry teacher's assertion
that alchemy (chemical transmutation of elements, not atomic) was real, and
we could still do it if we could recover the esoteric knowledge of the
powerful ancients;
* an English teacher (one of the foremost Anthroposophists in the school)
asserting that the Egyptian pyramids were built by using acoustic energy --
sound -- to move the massive stone blocks; and
* the teaching -- also in an English class, no less -- that the development
of Greek epic poetic rhythm, dactylic hexameter, was based on the
[astrological] theory of the relationship between the "platonic year", or
precession of the equinoxes, and the human physiological rhythms of
heartbeats-per-breath and breaths-per-life (I can post the text of this
lesson as well).
Come on, Robert, you can't deny these things happen elsewhere, and are not
isolated.
FLANNERY:
)That said, I recognize that there have been and will continue to be cases
)in which teachers "teach" anthroposophy to the children. Whether this
)arises out of zealousness, ignorance, or some combination of the two, it
)goes completely against both the clearly stated and generally practiced
)tenets of waldorf education.
KOPP:
What is your source or your personal authority for making this claim
Robert? Are you aware of studies of internal curricular discipline
undertaken by the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America -- or any
other academic, particularly impartial, institution or person? If so,
please cite them.
Where are the "clearly stated ... tenets of waldorf education"? Who
promulgates them? Who ensures they are uniformly observed by all schools --
especially when the hundreds of widely spread schools are said by
Anthroposophist to be relatively autonomous?
Please provide EVIDENCE -- otherwise your claim is a mere unsubstantiated
apologia.
FLANNERY:
)Such transgressions usually occur in science
)classes, and reflect a need for more rigorous and extensive science
)instruction in waldorf teacher training programs and continuing education
)seminars.
KOPP:
As I have demonstrated, these "transgressions" also occur regularly in
history, English and other classes. They are not confined to science.
And their appearance in science is not a mistake, but an adherence to the
Anthroposophical dogma. Fringe colours is the basic demonstration of the
Goethean claim that colour arises from the interaction of light and
darkness, designed to sow doubt about Newtonian physics. This is not simply
educational method or Steiner pedagogy; it is Steiner's Anthroposophical
religion.
There are "scientists" on this list who adhere to and prate this
Anthroposophical Science line; there are "scientists" who have left their
science jobs to go to Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical seminary, and
whose prose changed from personal to party line after their first year of
such brainwashing about science.
It is not isolated; it is endimic, and by design.
FLANNERY:
)It's also important to recognize that while the actual factual content does
)not involve anthroposophy, the choice of subjects and the order in which
)they are taught can arise out of anthroposophical considerations.
KOPP:
I will snip this part of the argument for another post, as it deals with
the religious-myth-taught-as-history-lesson claim I make above. I will post
this separately, with the lesson. Be patient, and remind me.
[snip]
FLANNERY:
)Since the understanding that waldorf springs from a foundation of
)anthroposophy has always been clear, it's too easy for Michael and others
)of his critical bent to make the vague claim that some form of
)"mind-control seepage" occurs. Stephen Tonkin has shown the disingenuous
)nature of this claim on a number of occasions.
)
)I would invite you, Michael, to show cause. Instead of just making a
)blanket accusation that mind control is constantly practiced through the
)course of the day in a waldorf school via anthroposophy, give me examples.
KOPP:
Thus do the apologists and defenders of the faith dismiss critics: ignore
the specific complaints, say they are vague, claim that they are invalid
because they proceed from a generally accepted fact, claim they are
isolated and rare, and belittle the critics as disingenuous.
(I'd like Robert to quote any Stephen Tonkin accusation of my complaints or
criticism as "disingenuous" -- at least after Stephen started taking me
seriously and stopped his knee-jerk reactionary putdowns while he was under
the influence of Anthroposophical Mafia Don David "Lefty" Schlesinger's
hit-man team. In fact, Stephen _has_ taken my complaints seriously, which
surprises and humbles me, given the vitriol that once passed between us,
both ways, and the respect I have for him now, as a scientist and
rationalist, despite his continued belief that there is _something_ in
Steiner.)
FLANNERY:
)Describe specific practices that you or anyone else is aware of that
)regularly (or irregularly) impart anthroposophical dogma to the students in
)a waldorf school.
)
)I await your reply (or that of anyone else who cares to jump in) with some
)excitement.
KOPP:
Well, if the above litany doesn't constitute "specific practices", and if
they don't "impart Anthroposophical dogma", and Robert can't -- or won't --
see that, then we will have to leave it to the judgement of the rational
reader who is looking for evidence and critical comment instead of the
platitudes of the apologists.
Of course the critics will never satisfy the defenders of the faith. Never
once on this list have I ever seen a Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophic
adherent admit error or doubt where dogma or pedagogy is concerned.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.7 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:36:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp provided lots of information about the situation regarding
public support of the waldorf school in Wellington. I found it both
helpful and enlightening. I don't have much to say about it, as I think it
speaks well for itself. I make a point of answering Michael to let him
know publicly how much I appreciate the tone, as well as the content, of
this post.
)School integration here is not at all like the charter movement in the
)United States. It's almost more like a voucher system, except the money
)goes directly to the integrated schools, rather than to individual families.
(big snip)
)FLANNERY:
)
))I would
))imagine they looked at waldorf and anthroposophy pretty carefully
))beforehand, and made an informed decision to integrate at least one school
))into the state system.
)
)KOPP:
)
)No, they wouldn't have had a clue. The integration application
)documentation, and the school visits, had the same character as all other
)false advertising and duplicity by Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
)schools. If you wish, I can quote these documents here. They are
)extraordinary in what they do not say.
I would be interested in seeing these. I'll leave it up to you as to
whether you think them more appropriate for private email, or the list
generally.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.8 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 99 10:18:22 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
M.Kopp writes:
)
)Or does Anthroposophy have a secret inner sect which believes the world is
)flat?
Ohmygod. Are you saying that it's not flat?
I looked it up in the dictionary and it didn't say *anything* about
being--gasp-- un-flat
I suppose that, next, you'll be telling me that the moon isn't flat
either!
I guess it could be square. I mean...if it were round, the horizon would
be curved, right?
Time for another research project.
Get to it, Michael!!
Peace,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.9 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 99 10:21:25 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Kopp writes:
)As a teaser to my forthcoming science article on the Moon illusion, I can
)tell you that if you had turned your back on the rising moon, bent over far
)enough, and looked at it between your legs, the illusion that the moon was
)"larger" would have disappeared!
Mooning the moon!!!!!
I love it!
As if my neighbors don't think I'm wacky enough!
Best,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1035.10 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmoweb.net)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 10:19:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901152310.PAA24463 lists1.best.com)
Charlie Frey wrote:
)
) Aaaaaarrrghhh!
) Thank God, Einstein (and you friend Sagan, although to a much lesser
) degree) were given a heaping helping of imagination and introspection!
) Science, done well, is 99% imagination.
Although I've heard criticism of Sagan by anthroposophical/science
people for his rationality, it's interesting to note his appreciation
for what lies beyond the rational. It's a nice anecdote that what seems
to have first pricked his interest in astronomy was his reading the
Edgar Rice Burroughs series of Mars novels when he was a kid growing up
in Brooklyn. When I had a small seminar in Astronomy with Sagan at
Cornell, long before he became well-known, Edgar Rice Burroughs was part
of our required reading list. You can also observe his awe of the
"numinous" in his writing -- I think he used that word in the novel
Contact.
)What has happened to the moon since man has visited it? What once was
)alive in the heart of man,is now dead in his mind. For millenia it was
)the stuff that dreams are made of, now it has been exposed as a burnt-out
)cinder. Are we improved by that knowledge?
I don't think scientific knowledge of the moon or stars takes away any
of the romance or the awe. Ignorance of scientific facts is not a
prerequisite to expansive feelings about the universe and our place
within it.
--
Robert Tolz
Email: rtolz cosmoweb.net
Web: http://www.cosmoweb.net/~rtolz
Tel: (212) 754-9400
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1035 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1036 --------------
001 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
002 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Re: Another attack on science
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Another attack on science
006 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
007 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Another attack on science
008 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
009 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
010 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - Re: Another attack on science..A response
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.1 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:33:53 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901172216.OAA08086 lists1.best.com)
(199901180708.XAA14441 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901180708.XAA14441 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)As a teaser to my forthcoming science article on the Moon illusion, I can
)tell you that if you had turned your back on the rising moon, bent over far
)enough, and looked at it between your legs, the illusion that the moon was
)"larger" would have disappeared!
Hey, I didn't know that! You would have to tell us at new moon, so
there's a fortnight to wait until the next full (which, at this time of
year, at this latitude, rises in broad daylight -- and could well be
clouded out!). I *will* try it sometime, even if I have to wait until
next autumn.
FWIW, the next full will also be a lunar eclipse; only penumbral, but it
might be interesting to see if you can note a change of brightness (I
generally can't for penumbrals).
Thanks, Michael.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.2 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 99 13:31:04 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Mr. Tolz writes
) Although I've heard criticism of Sagan by anthroposophical/science
)people for his rationality, it's interesting to note his appreciation
)for what lies beyond the rational.
I meant nothing more by what I said than to avoid putting Sagan on par
with Einstein.
) I don't think scientific knowledge of the moon or stars takes away any
)of the romance or the awe. Ignorance of scientific facts is not a
)prerequisite to expansive feelings about the universe and our place
)within it.
I've got to learn to keep my mouth (fingers?) shut. (g)
I never meant to imply that scientific knowledge makes all things dead,
which is what my words have been taken to mean. I probably should have
been more clear; this is a medium wherein anything but the most direct
composition breeds ambiguity and misunderstanding.
I see no problem with science *in conjunction with* looking at something
through the eyes of an ancient, or a child; but I do not feel obliged to
speak from both perspectives at all times, as if I were in a classroom.
Please pardon my musings.
I grew up fascinated with the moon. It was the first word I said. I
loved it when it was huge and close to the horizon, and when it was lacey
and transparent during the day.
I also watched the first man walk on it, leave his footprints,
golfballs, camera, garbage, and a plaque(complete with grammatical error,
courtesy of conservative wise-guy, William Safire) for what may well be
eternity.
If I feel that we were better off not going, you'll all just have to
excuse me.
No, I don't believe in halting science, but I reserve the right to make
my own conclusions concerning what it has done.
In some cases, it's just better to not know--unfortunately, we seldom
know which cases will be so, until afterward.
We will soon clone a human; of this, you can be sure. I feel that the
results of this are best left unknown.
Yes, I do attack science at times. I attack it when its motives are
tainted--when it cares only about ego, or profit. We went to the moon to
beat the Russians, and we will clone a human because we can. May God
protect us from that kind of science--whether we deserve it or not.
Love on y'all,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons&moonies
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:43:13 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901172216.OAA08086 lists1.best.com)
(199901180708.XAA14441 lists1.best.com)
(199901181754.JAA11914 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181754.JAA11914 lists1.best.com)
I wrote:
)(which, at this time of
)year, at this latitude, rises in broad daylight
What the hell am I talking about? Of course it doesn't! (It does for
Michael, though)
... I'll have to think of an excuse for making that one -- how does
"temporarily deceived by Lucifer" sound? No? Oh well...(g)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 07:51:35 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181330.FAA22419 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery says:
))FLANNERY:
))
)))I would
)))imagine they looked at waldorf and anthroposophy pretty carefully
)))beforehand, and made an informed decision to integrate at least one
)))school
)))into the state system.
))
))KOPP:
))
))No, they wouldn't have had a clue. The integration application
))documentation, and the school visits, had the same character as all other
))false advertising and duplicity by Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
))schools. If you wish, I can quote these documents here. They are
))extraordinary in what they do not say.
FLANNERY:
)I would be interested in seeing these. I'll leave it up to you as to
)whether you think them more appropriate for private email, or the list
)generally.
Well, it runs to over a hundred pages of mostly bureaucratic
educationalese. But when I have some time -- after I attend to some other
issues on the list -- I'll get it out and winnow it for the bits I think
are appropriate. Unless you want to pay for photocopying and mailing the
whole thing to you?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:01:26 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901152310.PAA24463 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181520.HAA06516 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz writes:
)Charlie Frey wrote:
)
))
)) Aaaaaarrrghhh!
)) Thank God, Einstein (and you friend Sagan, although to a much lesser
)) degree) were given a heaping helping of imagination and introspection!
)) Science, done well, is 99% imagination.
)
) Although I've heard criticism of Sagan by anthroposophical/science
)people for his rationality, it's interesting to note his appreciation
)for what lies beyond the rational. It's a nice anecdote that what seems
)to have first pricked his interest in astronomy was his reading the
)Edgar Rice Burroughs series of Mars novels when he was a kid growing up
)in Brooklyn. When I had a small seminar in Astronomy with Sagan at
)Cornell, long before he became well-known, Edgar Rice Burroughs was part
)of our required reading list. You can also observe his awe of the
)"numinous" in his writing -- I think he used that word in the novel
)Contact.
Michael KOPP says:
But Sagan does not, in any writing, including Contact, indicate a belief in
anything but the natural world. In fact, I read the whole of his ouevre as
stating that he finds the Universe enormous and mysterious, but that he
does not think there is anything supernatural about it, and our conception
of supernatural powers is nothing but an infantile approach to the unknown,
which will pass like mists rising under the heat of the illumination of
knowledge learned from science.
Read Science As a Candle in the Darkness, too, Robert.
TOLZ, quoting Frey:
))What has happened to the moon since man has visited it? What once was
))alive in the heart of man,is now dead in his mind. For millenia it was
))the stuff that dreams are made of, now it has been exposed as a burnt-out
))cinder. Are we improved by that knowledge?
TOLZ:
) I don't think scientific knowledge of the moon or stars takes away
)any
)of the romance or the awe. Ignorance of scientific facts is not a
)prerequisite to expansive feelings about the universe and our place
)within it.
KOPP:
But of course that's not the issue here. Poetry and all the other arts --
in which I include philosophy and metaphysics -- address the mystery of
existence from a viewpoint which cannot be challenged because it is
insubstantial and psychological.
That's wonderful. I'm happy that evolution has provided us with such an
ability, to complement the rational, scientific capacities we have
developed to go beyond irrationality in our search for understanding. There
must be some evolutionary advantage in this development.
But the issue here is is the abandoning of rationality by a religious,
cult-like, esoteric, backward-looking, anti-science, superstitious school
movement. Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthropsophical schools (SWA) are therefore
dangerous to the young because they rob them of the education they need for
dealing with an increasingly complex life.
The issue here is that this cult-lke, hidden-religion movement is, by
stealth, worming its way into public schools, and duping parents to send
their children to private schools, through false advertising.
Do not misrepresent Sagan. While I'm unaware of him ever mentioning
Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy by name, he certainly attacks the
irrationality of similar esoteric cults and movements.
The reason critics take this all so seriously is that it is indeed possible
for unreason to win out. Look how many people are seduced by SWA.
Sagan's legacy is a warning that the candle of reason is flickering. We
can't let it go out.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp,
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.6 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:26:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
Stand by for another long salvo here.
Does anyone read these things besides the two parties at issue? I know I
delete the lengthy soliloquies on the meaning of science and cognition as
soon as they hit my "in" box. I'd appreciate some feedback on this
question, so I have a better understanding of whether or not it's worth my
while.
By way of introduction, I will break my "no more than 2 carats in quoted
material" rule to remind anyone with the stomach for this of the statement
that began it all:
)Quoting KOPP:
)
)))Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)))criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)))in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of
)))every
)))day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)))everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
)
)FLANNERY:
)
))So far as the children are concerned, the evident anthroposophical
))"purpose" that supposedly informs every minute of every day mostly involves
))inculcating three habits: 1) learning to listen, 2) awareness of the needs
))of others, and 3) how to negotiate problems. The techniques for imparting
))these traits could be considered "anthroposophical" in a waldorf school.
[All single carat quotes come from Michael Kopp]
)The major ones missing, of course, are the ability to read books for
)content and comprehension and information-gathering, and the ability to
)synthesise learned information and ones own ideas into coherent expression
)of ideas.
I realize that you don't intend to be argumentative with this comment, and
instead are using the opportunity to drop in a standard critique of waldorf
as "anti-intellectual". I would nonetheless suggest these skills are
covered under 3), above. However, 1) and 2) also play critical roles.
Like so many other aspects of waldorf education, the interrelationships
within the pedagogy impart a synergistic quality to the instruction, which
serves to strengthen the experience for the children. I'll provide an
example:
Reading is a funny sort of skill. Some say it's not taught. I guess it
depends on what one's definition of "taught" is.
If by "taught" one means formal instruction in the mechanics involved in
mastering a skill, most children in a waldorf school do not require
teaching in reading. They develop the skill on their own after being
"taught" phonics and decoding, and being provided with a basic sight
vocabulary. Some pick it up even more quickly when they are given a
written copy of verses which they have memorized through oral repetition.
Reading comprehension follows a similar pattern. As a child gains
experience with reading, comprehension grows. Recognizing words comes
first, then comes the recognition of content. The greater a child's
familiarity with words, the easier it is for her to grasp content. Some
children who have difficulty reading go so slowly that it is nearly
impossible for them to retain content from one word to the next.
Children who are good listeners are patient, because developing listening
skills builds patience. Patient children don't get frustrated so easily.
Patient readers stay focused longer on the page, and consequently develop
comprehension skills more readily. Listening skills also teach respect for
the words of another, which further enhances focus and motivation in
reading.
An "awareness of the needs of others" implicitly carries an understanding
of relationships. If a young child understands relationships between
people first, he or she can transfer that experience and learn to recognize
relationships between concepts or ideas. If a child has steadily developed
this kind of awareness, comprehension in lots of disciplines will grow,
including reading.
Similar arguments would follow in the areas of synthesis and expression.
)Robert is dead on with the first, but the purpose of being a "good
)listener" is not to dissent or question or criticise or be skeptical. I
)never heard of kids stopping a teacher during a lecture to question or
)discuss. I especially never heard of kids above, say, class three,
)interrupting a teacher during a story.
"Listening" involves a range of possible behaviors. All teachers
appreciate good listening skills, and find their lesson content much better
received with a minimum of interruptions. Optimal listening would be
largely defined, of course, by the type of lesson taking place.
Stories have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Most are carefully
structured, unless you're improvising, and even then you have a skeletal
framework to build from. Interruptions can be usefully incorporated into
the story if you're skillful enough, and they are infrequent. As a general
rule, stories are not helped along by interruptions.
In first and second grade, my class almost never interrupted during a
story. They'd sit there wide-eyed (and sometimes open-mouthed) and just
take it in. This year, they are beginning to comment and question
more--I'm allowing them a certain amount of this freedom within reasonable
limits. When the story line shows signs of being subsumed by the
interjections, we save the questions. The children all understand the
drill, and usually wait for the end in any case.
Whenever I lecture (and I've been conducting lectures with this class since
the first day of first grade), interruptions are always permitted as long
as the children remember to raise their hands. Sometimes, if I'm covering
a particularly tricky point or if the questions have devolved into a series
of "I have a dog, too!"-type comments, I'll ask them to wait until the end.
Overall, the questions, critiques, skepticism and dissent which arise from
these youngsters are very helpful for all parties. These comments offer up
perspective, depth, and engage critical thinking skills. The children
usually carry the discussion outside of the lesson.
Sometimes a child will point out a flaw in my argument or
presentation--when this occurs, I am effusive in my gratitude, knowing they
learn that no one is infallible and the assistance of a group strengthens
the work of one. By my reaction, it reinforces the notion that mistakes
are ok, so long as one learns from them. Some children will become more
attentive in an effort to "catch the teacher". Sometimes I purposely plant
an error to see how alert they are, or add a little humor to the material.
Children who volunteer an alternative point of view also do a great service
in the course of a lesson. Sometimes a child will express an opinion that
is very unpopular with the rest of the class, and they have an opportunity
to practice tolerance. If a child misstates a fact, I will correct this.
Comments from the children often stimulate further discussion or at least
an awareness of expanded possibilities or points of view. It's interesting
to note that Michael characterizes this as a defect of waldorf education,
in that it promotes an "anything is possible" mentality. It's not that
anything is possible, but more accurate to say that any point of view has
possibilities.
The other week, as part of our third-grade Old Testament block, I had just
finished telling the story where Isaac mistakenly blesses Jacob. In this
tale, the devil hinders Esau in his search for food and thereby buys time
for Jacob. One of the children immediately raised her hand, and asked "Do
you mean the devil and God sometimes work together?" My only answer was
"that's certainly what it sounds like, doesn't it?" Heads were bobbing and
eyes were wide all over the room.
If I attempted to quash questioning, dissent, or skepticism in my class I
would lose an enormous amount of what makes a classroom lively and keeps
children engaged. As Michael knows so well, I would also quash a bit of
the hunger for knowledge and experience which is one of the hallmarks of
waldorf-educated children.
)The second is incomprehensible to me, especially in
)terms of the state curriculum. What, Robert, exactly, are you talking
)about?
Pardon my incredulity, but are you saying you don't understand what I mean
by "an awareness of the needs of others"?
I'm talking about learning how to function socially. The importance of
following rules and instructions. Empathy. What are relationships and how
do they work. There are individuals who are great at negotiating problems,
but have little ability or understanding of how to work well with others.
Many american suburban children today are a tad, shall we say, egocentric;
consequently there is a pressing need to expand their awareness beyond
themselves.
Remember, Michael, the context of this question was how anthroposophy
manifests itself in the classroom--I'm not attempting to address these in
terms of state curriculum.
)FLANNERY:
)
))The factual knowledge that is delivered (and delivered efficiently if these
))three qualities are in place) has nothing to do with anthroposophy.
)
)KOPP:
)
)This is a preposterous statement in light of the evidence presented by
)every critic on this list of their own children's lessons in a Steiner/
)Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school.
(snip Michael's list of anthroposophy being taught in the Wellington school)
)Come on, Robert, you can't deny these things happen elsewhere, and are not
)isolated.
That's why the sentence you quote above was immediately followed by the one
you quote below. I linked the two so that my blanket statement would be
accompanied by a disclaimer--just because of the incidents you and others
have related.
Michael Kopp has examples of anthroposophy in the classroom, Herman de
Tolleneare has examples, Dan Dugan has examples. Deby Snell wanted to have
examples, but got caught in a stretch when pressed for details. I don't
deny these things happen elsewhere, but I *would* characterize them as
isolated.
The evidence that has been presented on this list leads me to believe that
anthroposophy mistakenly creeps into main lesson work when either 1) an
individual school has not been able to standardize their curriculum and
monitor it effectively, leaving individuals to fall back on their own
skills, which may be inadequate, or 2) an established school which is
recognized as a leader in its region falls out of bounds in a portion of
its curriculum, and other schools in the area emulate these faulty
practices in their lessons.
Michael and Dan seem to have experiences of the type described in 1), and
Herman has shown us an example of 2). I'd appreciate hearing about any
other examples that might be floating around out there.
In a worldwide movement of somewhere between 500 and 700 schools, using a
curriculum which has been refined for almost 80 years, I would expect to
see many more incidences if it were not isolated.
I do, in fact, think this will always be an area where waldorf teachers
will have to remain vigilant, and I expect new examples will crop up from
time to time. After all, it only takes one teacher or one school to
promote a faulty lesson, that can then serve to renew the claim that
waldorf teaches anthroposophy.
Until the waldorf schools tighten up teacher training, until effective
mentoring becomes better established in individual schools, and until the
loose associative federations become avenues for regular curriculum review
and development amongst the schools, we will leave ourselves open to that
argument.
)
)FLANNERY:
)
))That said, I recognize that there have been and will continue to be cases
))in which teachers "teach" anthroposophy to the children. Whether this
))arises out of zealousness, ignorance, or some combination of the two, it
))goes completely against both the clearly stated and generally practiced
))tenets of waldorf education.
)
)KOPP:
)
)What is your source or your personal authority for making this claim
)Robert? Are you aware of studies of internal curricular discipline
)undertaken by the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America -- or any
)other academic, particularly impartial, institution or person? If so,
)please cite them.
)Please provide EVIDENCE -- otherwise your claim is a mere unsubstantiated
)apologia.
My evidence is no different than yours, or Dan's, or Herman's. It's
anecdotal, and based on my personal experience. Here's my resume:
I'm a waldorf teacher. I don't teach anthroposophy in the classroom.
My three children are in a waldorf school. I've never seen anthroposophy
in their main lesson books. They don't regurgitate anthroposophical
principles to me or their mother at the dinner table.
I teach in a large waldorf school, where I've never seen anthroposophy
taught at any level across twelve grades and preschool classes.
As a faculty, we frequently work together on curriculum and are encouraged
to observe other classes. I've observed classes in other waldorf schools.
I've yet to see waldorf taught in a classroom or hear anyone describe a
lesson that included it.
I've attended national and international teachers' conferences where
workshops and seminars are held on curriculum.
I've attended a large number of waldorf teaching seminars over the years.
I've been a parent in two waldorf schools. I've been a board member in one
of those schools. I'm currently a board member of a waldorf teacher
training center.
I completed waldorf teacher training, and maintain a loose connection with
others who are teaching in the U.S. and Canada, and discuss curriculum
issues with them.
I have never seen an example of anthroposophy entering the curriculum in
any of these instances.
)
)Where are the "clearly stated ... tenets of waldorf education"? Who
)promulgates them? Who ensures they are uniformly observed by all schools --
)especially when the hundreds of widely spread schools are said by
)Anthroposophist to be relatively autonomous?
)
The educational cycles of Rudolf Steiner are the source for the tenets of
waldorf education. In these books, teachers are regularly admonished to
maintain the boundaries between anthroposophy and what is taught in the
classroom. They are promulgated by the teacher training institutes, the
schools themselves, and the continued study of the written material.
No one body ensures that this demarcation is guaranteed. The waldorf
schools are autonomous by design, and will remain so (at least so long as
they remain private). Frankly, I think that the activity on this list will
do as much to ensure that this doesn't happen again as any self-policing on
our part.
So far as curriculum studies are concerned, I expect academic interest will
grow as the charter school movement expands and matures. I'm not holding
my breath waiting for AWSNA to fund any of the studies sorely needed within
waldorf education.
)FLANNERY:
)
))Since the understanding that waldorf springs from a foundation of
))anthroposophy has always been clear, it's too easy for Michael and others
))of his critical bent to make the vague claim that some form of
))"mind-control seepage" occurs. Stephen Tonkin has shown the disingenuous
))nature of this claim on a number of occasions.
))
))I would invite you, Michael, to show cause. Instead of just making a
))blanket accusation that mind control is constantly practiced through the
))course of the day in a waldorf school via anthroposophy, give me examples.
)
)KOPP:
)
)Thus do the apologists and defenders of the faith dismiss critics: ignore
)the specific complaints, say they are vague, claim that they are invalid
)because they proceed from a generally accepted fact, claim they are
)isolated and rare, and belittle the critics as disingenuous.
Here are your specific complaints that drew my attention in the first place:
)No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and sinister)
)grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
)Anthroposophical cultists.
)
)This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
)totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist). The
)difference is that with the Catholics or fundamentalist Christians you KNOW
)what you're buying. As a parent duped by SWA false advertising and
)deception of the state school authorities (our school was integrated with
)the state system) I am outraged by this attempt to steal my children from a
)normal existence.
)Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
)day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
I'm not ignoring any of these. In fact, I've been fixated on them since
they first appeared on my screen nearly three days ago.
They're certainly not vague to me, though you seem to have confused two
separate issues. You're combining the question of anthroposophy *taught*
in the classroom (as part of the main lesson content) with the topic of
anthroposophical techniques or philosophies of education (which you
characterize as permeating every minute of every day, and resulting in some
form of mind control).
I am not saying that your claims of waldorf mind control are invalid
because they proceed from the generally accepted fact of anthroposophy as
the underlying philosophy in waldorf education. I'm saying it's too easy
for you to make this claim without any evidence--remember, I'm separating
the issues of anthroposophy as it may be *taught* in the classroom and
anthroposophy as it *informs* or *guides* the teacher in the classroom.
We have evidence of the former in the anecdotes from you, Dan, and Herman.
I recognize these as valid. They're clear. If you think this is evidence
of brainwashing or mind control, I don't agree. I just think it's evidence
of lousy teaching and weak standards.
I'm asking for evidence on the second issue. Here are your remarks again,
just as they appeared in your original post. What do you base comments
like this on?
)No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and sinister)
)grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
)Anthroposophical cultists.
)
)This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
)totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist). The
)difference is that with the Catholics or fundamentalist Christians you KNOW
)what you're buying. As a parent duped by SWA false advertising and
)deception of the state school authorities (our school was integrated with
)the state system) I am outraged by this attempt to steal my children from a
)normal existence.
)
)Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
)day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
I suppose you could be saying that in teaching such things as sound power
built the pyramids [*], obtuse thinking that allows for an "anything goes"
mentality was encouraged. If that's your point, I won't challenge it.
Examples like this are not a grab for children's hearts, minds, and souls.
It's simply miseducation. Miseducation is not a synonym for mind control.
Your last paragraph is most relevant to this issue:
)Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
)day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
Doesn't sound to me as if you're describing main lesson book work here.
"Every minute of every day" and "everything" are pretty inclusive
phraseology.
I recall your critique of my criticism:
)Thus do the apologists and defenders of the faith dismiss critics: ignore
)the specific complaints, say they are vague, claim that they are invalid
)because they proceed from a generally accepted fact, claim they are
)isolated and rare, and belittle the critics as disingenuous.
I hope it's plain that I'm not ignoring this specific complaint of yours.
I understand your claim, it's clear. You say waldorf schools brainwash
their students.
I already addressed your third claim, above. Here it is again, in case
someone missed it. "I am not saying that your claims of waldorf mind
control are invalid because they proceed from the generally accepted fact
of anthroposophy as the underlying philosophy in waldorf education. I'm
saying it's too easy for you to make this claim without any
evidence--remember, I'm separating the issues of anthroposophy as it may be
*taught* in the classroom and anthroposophy as it *informs* or *guides* the
teacher in the classroom."
As for the claim that this is isolated, and the fact that I think you're
being disingenuous in raising it--show cause as to why this is not so!
Forget about the trash that was taught in Wellington for the time being,
and read your own words:
)Graduates of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools probably don't
)criticise their education because its dogma has been thoroughly inculcated
)in them by the stealthy inclusion of Anthrosophy into every minute of every
)day's curriculum and activity. Nothing is as it seems in SWA schools:
)everything has its Anthroposophical purpose.
Instead of just making a blanket accusation that mind control is constantly
practiced through the course of the day in a waldorf school via
anthroposophy, give me examples. Describe specific practices (not lessons,
but teaching practices) that you or anyone else is aware of that impart
anthroposophical dogma to the students in a waldorf school.
If you're unwilling or unable to do this, explain to me how you believe
that the examples brought by you and Dan and Herman are the rule, rather
than the exception, and how these instances support your claims of mind
control.
[*] I don't believe that this represents anthroposophy--I've never heard
this claim attributed to Steiner or any of his followers. I suspect this
one is just good old new-age detritus.
)
)(I'd like Robert to quote any Stephen Tonkin accusation of my complaints or
)criticism as "disingenuous"
I didn't say Stephen called your claim disingenuous. In fact, this is the
first time I can recall you picking up the
"anthroposophy-in-every-minute-of-every-day" which seems to be one of Deby
Snell's favorite dogs. Stephen has answered her every time she brings it
up.
)FLANNERY:
)
))Describe specific practices that you or anyone else is aware of that
))regularly (or irregularly) impart anthroposophical dogma to the students in
))a waldorf school.
))
))I await your reply (or that of anyone else who cares to jump in) with some
))excitement.
)
)KOPP:
)
)Well, if the above litany doesn't constitute "specific practices", and if
)they don't "impart Anthroposophical dogma", and Robert can't -- or won't --
)see that, then we will have to leave it to the judgement of the rational
)reader who is looking for evidence and critical comment instead of the
)platitudes of the apologists.
)
)Of course the critics will never satisfy the defenders of the faith. Never
)once on this list have I ever seen a Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophic
)adherent admit error or doubt where dogma or pedagogy is concerned.
)
)
)Cheers from Godzone,
)
)Michael Kopp
)Wellington, New Zealand
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.7 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:32:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901181820.KAA03459 lists1.best.com)
) I also watched the first man walk on it, leave his footprints,
)golfballs, camera, garbage, and a plaque(complete with grammatical error,
)courtesy of conservative wise-guy, William Safire) for what may well be
)eternity.
Not to change the subject or anything, but what's the story about the
grammatical error, Charlie?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.8 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Waldorf in NZ (was Hearts and Minds)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:55:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901181330.FAA22419 lists1.best.com)
(199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901182010.MAA05376 lists1.best.com)
)Well, it runs to over a hundred pages of mostly bureaucratic
)educationalese. But when I have some time -- after I attend to some other
)issues on the list -- I'll get it out and winnow it for the bits I think
)are appropriate. Unless you want to pay for photocopying and mailing the
)whole thing to you?
No, thanks. I can wait until you get it out on video.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.9 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:26:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901182020.MAA13603 lists1.best.com)
I failed in proofing the tail end of my last post (the BIG one) and didn't
properly finish it off. Here's what was supposed to be the real ending.
)(I'd like Robert to quote any Stephen Tonkin accusation of my complaints or
)criticism as "disingenuous"
I didn't say Stephen called your claim disingenuous. In fact, this is the
first time I can recall you picking up the
"anthroposophy-in-every-minute-of-every-day" which seems to be one of Deby
Snell's favorite dogs. Stephen has answered *her* every time she brings it
up.
I think his argument goes something like this (please correct me if I'm
wrong, Stephen):
If you discount the validity of the spiritual world because it is
unquantifiable and not perceptible to normal sensory experience, how can
you claim that the unseen, unfelt and unheard has a definite influence on
children in a classroom?
This is also part of the question I'm asking you, Michael, unless you can
substantiate your claim that "every minute of every day", "everything"
practiced in a waldorf classroom imparts anthropsophical dogma to the
students.
)FLANNERY:
)
))Describe specific practices that you or anyone else is aware of that
))regularly (or irregularly) impart anthroposophical dogma to the students in
))a waldorf school.
))
))I await your reply (or that of anyone else who cares to jump in) with some
))excitement.
)
)KOPP:
)
)Well, if the above litany doesn't constitute "specific practices", and if
)they don't "impart Anthroposophical dogma", and Robert can't -- or won't --
)see that, then we will have to leave it to the judgement of the rational
)reader who is looking for evidence and critical comment instead of the
)platitudes of the apologists.
)
)Of course the critics will never satisfy the defenders of the faith. Never
)once on this list have I ever seen a Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophic
)adherent admit error or doubt where dogma or pedagogy is concerned.
Did you see my answer to Herman de Tolleneare earlier today, where I said
(in reference to some pretty dogmatic stuff that was placed in Dutch main
lesson books by waldorf pedagogues):
"Herman, I agree with everyone else that this stuff is awful and
inexcusable. Aside from the fact that it is the most reprehensible example
I've seen of an extension of Steiner's worst racism into the classroom,
what point are you trying to make with regard to my original post?"
Seems to meet your qualifiers of a) admitting error or doubt, and b) where
dogma or pedagogy is concerned. Do I win the door prize?
P.S. I would like to suggest that Dan be moderator of such a regular
sweepstakes feature on this list. Michael, as always, will be the bouncer.
[please excuse that last remark in the spirit of good grace which now
reigns on the waldorf-critics list]
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1036.10 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science..A response
Date: 18 Jan 1999 16:22:13 -0500
)KOPP:
)You are welcome to use any other system of thought and exploration that you
)wish. Please let me know when you (or any other non-scientist) makes a
)fundamental discovery about the laws of nature which merits a Nobel prize
)using that alternative method.
How about Thomas Jefferson, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr.
(at least 1 of the 3 received Nobels (for Peace) (?) but you only want someone
who merits one)
)Please provide evidence of how, for instance, a system such as
)Anthroposophy has aided in some scientific breakthrough which is accepted
)by the whole world in the same fashion as, say, Newton's laws.
the intuitions of unalienable rights, nonviolent resistance, and love and
respect for each other.
By no means are these scientific breakthroughs, but these three men and their
intuitions have done an enormous amount to shape the whole of the world (and
probably with only the slightest impact in the scientific arena)
)Please provide an example of someone "in history who has taken civilization
)a step further" [..] on the basis of imagination and introspection
)ALONE;
do the above count?
I think RS would include intuitions on empathy and individuality and service
as ideas that through experience reveal themselves to be laws of nature (of
humans), if not foundations/refinements of the above "laws".
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1036 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1037 --------------
001 - Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmow - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1036
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: other anthroposophical lists
003 - Herman de Tollenaere (her - Gurus [fwd]
004 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and Mind
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
007 - ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netco - Fwd: Re: Another attack on science
008 - Kristin Brown (KBrown osi - RE: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
009 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
010 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - The Devil Made Me Do It
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.1 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz cosmoweb.net)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1036
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:16:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901182124.NAA00517 lists1.best.com)
) Michael KOPP says:
)
) But Sagan does not, in any writing, including Contact, indicate a belief in
) anything but the natural world. In fact, I read the whole of his ouevre as
) stating that he finds the Universe enormous and mysterious, but that he
) does not think there is anything supernatural about it, and our conception
) of supernatural powers is nothing but an infantile approach to the unknown,
) which will pass like mists rising under the heat of the illumination of
) knowledge learned from science.
....
) Do not misrepresent Sagan. While I'm unaware of him ever mentioning
) Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy by name, he certainly attacks the
) irrationality of similar esoteric cults and movements.
Rationality.
That seems to be one of the pivot points of much of the discussion
here. You might recall that the book Contact differed significantly
from the movie. If I recall correctly, the heroine of the written work
was more of a mathematician than a ham operator, and messages from
another civilization were deciphered not from radio transmissions but
from patterns found in irrational numbers -- quite a mindblowing idea.
Sagan may not have intentionally wanted to suggest that there is
meaning in that which lies beyond the rational, but that's certainly
what he wrote.
--
Robert Tolz
Email: rtolz cosmoweb.net
Web: http://www.cosmoweb.net/~rtolz
Tel: (212) 754-9400
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: other anthroposophical lists
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:47:38 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199901172222.OAA11312 lists1.best.com) (199901180932.BAA22897 lists1.best.com)
Dan wrote:
) Regarding the propriety of my post, Tom and Joel have been, and in Joels
) case presently are, correspondents here. This is neighborhood news, sorry
) it's bad. I am truly concerned about Tom. He's relished being the class
) clown, but he's way out of order recently.
Yet, you follow the example of this person you describe as "way out of
order" in breaking (http://www.intuition.org)
"The fundamental rule for participation in the Intuition Network
discussions ... to treat all other participants with respect and
courtesy -- and even warmth and support -- at all times."
by describing his activity in relation to other members on the list to a
completely other list, to which he not is subscribed, without him
knowing it(?) and without informing him(?).
) My policy accords with copyright law: all web sites, newsgroup and listserv
) postings are automatically copyrighted by the authors, but the contents may
) be discussed and quotations may be made for critical and educational
) purposes.
Copyright law is not the only set of rules regulating mailing lists.
The other "law" is Netiquette.
Some sites describe this:
The Internet's Guidelines of Life in Cyberspace: "Mailing Lists" at
http://globalnetlink.com/NETIQUETTE/milis.htm
"As some clubs tend to be secretive about information passed among
members, you should not share list mail with outsiders unless you get
the author's permission. The author most likely intended the e-mail for
a specific audience."
and
http://www.isu.edu/departments/comcom/helpdesk/docs/Unix/Web_Services/DOC_14.449.htmldescribing
"Netiquette for Mailing Lists/Discussion Groups":
"- Follow any and all guidelines that the listowner has posted; the
listowner establishes the local "netiquette" standards for her/his
list."
(See above for the anthroposophia guideline)
) All the lists I read are publicly accessable. It is silly to expect
) information published on them to be treated as confidential; it's
) -published-.
Look at for example how one of the big free mailing list providers
function; http://www.Egroups.com and their options for setting policies.
Putting posts to the mailing lists of the provider in the same category
as "Published" web pages in the sense you do is only _ONE_ of the
viewing options and _NOT_ the default, which is "The messages can be
read on the Web" _"by members only"_.
So, it is not the _general_ policy of mailing lists.
I think few list owners would accept the quotation policy you have set
for your list of giving yourself the right of quoting whatever you
consider particularly ridiculous statement from other lists where you
are a member without asking.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.3 ---------------
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Gurus [fwd]
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:46:59 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Why We Love Gurus
They seduce us by telling us what we want to hear: we're wonderful and
we'll live forever. What's wrong with that? Plenty.
Newsweek Magazine, October 20, 1997
By Wendy Kaminer
Trance channeler Kevin Ryerson is describing the hierarchy of spiritual
guides. I have signed up for a lecture and a workshop with that the Saints
are a step below Ascending Masters, who are below angels and Archangels.
People listen intently, in the belief, I guess, that they're receiving
information. "Where do gurus fit in?" someone asks. Gurus are teachers,
Ryerson responds; then he; quotes Oprah Winfrey, who reportedly said that
gurus are here "not tot teach us about their divinity but to teach us about
our own."
I still haven't sensed any divinity within myself or anyone else, but the
pop-guru business is certainly flourishing. And I think Oprah (if she said
that) understands the guru's appeal. He, or she, does sometimes demand a
show of humility from the acolyte and a stab at purifying confession: the
Promise Keepers will reclaim their power after they admit their sins. But
gurusóand they hate to be called thatóalways confirm our essential
godliness. They lead by flattery. "Most women I know are priestesses and
healers ... We are all of us sisters of a mysterious order," Marianne
Williamson writes, inviting readers to identify with her. The most powerful
charismatics are those who simultaneously invite identification and
idolatry. Then, if they are divine, so are we.
Indeed, the measure of our psychic or spiritual superiority is usually our
openness to the guru's teachings. Consumers of the New Age are assured that
they represent the spiritual avant-garde who will lead us into the next
millennium. By studying "The Celestine Prophecy," you become "part of the
evolutionary process," best-selling author James Redfield confirms.
The guru offers us the opportunity to become leaders of our culture by
becoming followers of his teachings. They frequently renounce any special
authority or desire to lead, but that is merely a matter of form. The
American personal-development tradition demands a nod toward
egalitarianism. Gurus may welcome us initially as fellow travelers on a
path to enlightenment, but we walk several paces behind. They are paid to
talk while we pay to listen. In fact, gurus presume a great deal of
authoritative, personal knowledge: they unabashedly explain the mysteries
of the universe. I've heard "Creation theologist" Matthew Fox expound on
the science of angels. They move at the speed of light, like photons, he
said. No one questioned his assertions. Most of these teachers are hostile
to challenges. I have rarely seen an expert leave much time for questions
after a talk. When audience participation is allowed, I've never heard
anyone ask a probing critical question. When I've respectfully argued with
the experts or, Goddess forbid, corrected them, they have reacted with
angry surprise.
The skeptic's resistance to the guru's truth is usually attributed to fear,
defensiveness and a reliance on intellect over emotion; we should trust our
hearts and not our heads. We're encouraged to trust our dreams and longings
for transcendence as well. If you imagine a past life, you've probably
lived one. Psychiatrist John Mack suggests that we take stories of UFO
abductions seriously if they are "felt to be real" by the self-described
abductees.
Gurus often tell us exactly what we want to hear. "There is no death." That
is the primary message of spirituality gurus. Better yet, this relief from
fear of death is easily obtained. The spiritual peace and enlightenment
offered by pop gurus doesn't require a lifetime of discipline. It requires
only that you suspend your critical judgment, attend their lectures and
workshops and buy their books or tapes.
What's wrong with a phenomenon that brings comfort to so many people?
That's a bit like asking what's wrong with a lobotomy, a steady diet of
happy pills. The rise of charismatic authority figures is always
disconcerting, especially when they malign rationalism and exhort us to
abandon critical thinking in order to realize spiritual growth. Pop gurus
prey on existential anxieties and thrive when our fear of being alone and
mortal in an indifferent universe is stronger than our judgment. No one who
seeks worship, however covertly, deserves respect. Argue with them, please.
KAMINER is the author of "I'm Dysfunctional, You're Dysfunctional," among
other books, and is a commentator on National Public Radio.
------------------------------------------------------
Herman de Tollenaere
------------------------------------------------------
My Internet site on Asian history and "new" religions:
http://stad.dsl.nl/~hermantl/
See also, on occult tendencies' impact on society:
http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/simpoeng.htm
------------------------------------------------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.4 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Waldorf, Atlantis, and root-race history [was: Hearts and Minds]
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:35:18 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901172342.PAA04181 lists1.best.com)
(199901180242.SAA29278 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901180242.SAA29278 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com) wrote:
)Herman, never missing an opportunity to inject the race card and trot out
)his portfolio,
Sects maniac?
(No, not a mis-spelling -- nor, I regret to say, is it original)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:21:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901182020.MAA13603 lists1.best.com)
(199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901182123.NAA29069 lists1.best.com)
)I failed in proofing the tail end of my last post (the BIG one) and didn't
)properly finish it off. Here's what was supposed to be the real ending.
)
)
)
))(I'd like Robert to quote any Stephen Tonkin accusation of my complaints or
))criticism as "disingenuous"
)
)I didn't say Stephen called your claim disingenuous. In fact, this is the
)first time I can recall you picking up the
)"anthroposophy-in-every-minute-of-every-day" which seems to be one of Deby
)Snell's favorite dogs. Stephen has answered *her* every time she brings it
)up.
)This is also part of the question I'm asking you, Michael, unless you can
)substantiate your claim that "every minute of every day", "everything"
)practiced in a waldorf classroom imparts anthropsophical dogma to the
)students.
Robert,
Perhaps we should explore this further. I've eaten a few hats in my life
time - in fact have developed a taste for them. I'd love to eat my hat
again. A few questions off the top of my tired brain. (Mother in hospital,
caring for Uncle with Alzheimers...)
There are a few Waldorf teachers on this list. Can each of you give us a
class schedule for a typical day inside your classrooms? What grade do you
currently teach? Do you always begin with a "morning verse"? How is math
taught? Reading? Science? Knitting? Do you perform Eurythmy in your school?
Music? What songs are taught? How many verses are recited each day? What is
the content of the verses? How many of you have "nature tables" in your
classroom? How many books exist [in your classroom]?
Best,
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:55:11 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
(199901182020.MAA13603 lists1.best.com)
(199901182123.NAA29069 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901182123.NAA29069 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com) wrote:
)I think his argument goes something like this (please correct me if I'm
)wrong, Stephen):
)
)If you discount the validity of the spiritual world because it is
)unquantifiable and not perceptible to normal sensory experience, how can
)you claim that the unseen, unfelt and unheard has a definite influence on
)children in a classroom?
Essentially correct -- I think the qualifying clause "because it is
unquantifiable and not perceptible to normal sensory experience" is
redundant to the argument.
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.7 ---------------
From: ckzfrey (ckzfrey ix.netcom.com)
Subject: Fwd: Re: Another attack on science
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 99 21:25:24 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
Date: 01/18 2:32 PM
Received: 01/18 9:14 PM
From: Robert Flannery, litvas icu.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) I also watched the first man walk on it, leave his footprints,
)golfballs, camera, garbage, and a plaque(complete with grammatical error,
)courtesy of conservative wise-guy, William Safire) for what may well be
)eternity.
Not to change the subject or anything, but what's the story about the
grammatical error, Charlie?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
Aaaahhhh!
I was hoping someone would ask.
It is proper, when referring to a year, to put the "AD" before the year,
rather than after.
AD 1999 not 1999 AD.
Keep the change,
Charlie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.8 ---------------
From: Kristin Brown (KBrown osisystemsinc.com)
Subject: RE: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:37:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="---- =_NextPart_001_01BE4354.A99024A4"
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.
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4354.A99024A4
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Yes Robert,
There are probably many of us out here in the ether monitoring this
electronic tennis match. I generally hold my tongue ( and my fingers)
because of my very limited exposure to WE. (a daughter who spent 1 full
year of Kindy and a son who was asked to leave after 2 months)
I was NOT informed of the religious/spiritual nature of the Waldorf program.
My questions about the meaning and purpose "angelic" mobile figures and veil
paintings, crucifixes and morning verses in the kindy classroom produced a
wildly different response from the teacher than my daughter had expressed to
me.
I had thought that the "heart" reference in all of the promotional and
parent educational material referred to social and emotional development,
not spiritual.
I do have a question for you. Are the Old Testament stories presented as a
history block or a literature block? Or are the two somehow blurred?
From the children's' response, I assume they believe the stories
(characters, situations, dialog, etc.) to be real and fact. How did (do)
you preface these "stories"? Additionally, from your response to the little
folks comments, you did not say, "Hey guys, it's a made up story. I can't
say that God and the devil are real. Since they aren't real, the mutual
cooperation described here is impossible and a fantasy too." You leave them
open to believing the stories as fact.
Although you may not see it, simply by approving of, and providing these
stories as an authority figure, you are in fact introducing and encouraging
religious-anthroposophical elements.
I, for one, would NEVER want those stories to be presented as historical
fact. There are certainly more a propos examples of documented, substantial
historical/social cooperation to relay to 9 and 10 year olds.
Additionally, I would NEVER want these stories to be presented as samples of
wonderful literature. Again, there is an immense selection of
age-appropriate, moral, colorful (pick your adjective here) material to
present to these kids.
Kristin Brown
Kbrown osisystemsinc.com
)FLANNERY:
)
))So far as the children are concerned, the evident anthroposophical
))"purpose" that supposedly informs every minute of every day mostly
involves
))inculcating three habits: 1) learning to listen, 2) awareness of
the needs
))of others, and 3) how to negotiate problems. The techniques for
imparting
))these traits could be considered "anthroposophical" in a waldorf
school.
[All single carat quotes come from Michael Kopp]
)The major ones missing, of course, are the ability to read books
for
)content and comprehension and information-gathering, and the
ability to
)synthesise learned information and ones own ideas into coherent
expression
)of ideas.
I realize that you don't intend to be argumentative with this
comment, and
instead are using the opportunity to drop in a standard critique of
waldorf
as "anti-intellectual". I would nonetheless suggest these skills
are
covered under 3), above. However, 1) and 2) also play critical
roles.
Like so many other aspects of waldorf education, the
interrelationships
within the pedagogy impart a synergistic quality to the instruction,
which
serves to strengthen the experience for the children. I'll provide
an
example
The other week, as part of our third-grade Old Testament block, I
had just
finished telling the story where Isaac mistakenly blesses Jacob.
In this
tale, the devil hinders Esau in his search for food and thereby buys
time
for Jacob. One of the children immediately raised her hand, and
asked "Do
you mean the devil and God sometimes work together?" My only answer
was
"that's certainly what it sounds like, doesn't it?" Heads were
bobbing and
eyes were wide all over the room.
If I attempted to quash questioning, dissent, or skepticism in my
class I
would lose an enormous amount of what makes a classroom lively and
keeps
children engaged. As Michael knows so well, I would also quash a
bit of
the hunger for knowledge and experience which is one of the
hallmarks of
waldorf-educated children.
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4354.A99024A4
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN")
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1")
(META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.0.1460.9")
(TITLE)RE: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")Yes Robert, (/FONT)
(BR)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")There are probably many of us out =
here in the ether monitoring this electronic tennis match. I =
generally hold my tongue ( and my fingers) because of my very limited =
exposure to WE. (a daughter who spent 1 full year of Kindy and a =
son who was asked to leave after 2 months)(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I was NOT informed of the =
religious/spiritual nature of the Waldorf program. My questions =
about the meaning and purpose "angelic" mobile figures and veil =
paintings, crucifixes and morning verses in the kindy classroom =
produced a wildly different response from the teacher than my daughter =
had expressed to me.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I had thought that the "heart" =
reference in all of the promotional and parent educational material =
referred to social and emotional development, not spiritual.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I do have a question for you. =
Are the Old Testament stories presented as a history block or a =
literature block? Or are the two somehow blurred?(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")From the children's' response, I =
assume they believe the stories (characters, situations, dialog, etc.) =
to be real and fact. How did (do) you preface these =
"stories"? Additionally, from your response to the little folks =
comments, you did not say, "Hey guys, it's a made up story. I =
can't say that God and the devil are real. Since they aren't =
real, the mutual cooperation described here is impossible and a fantasy =
too." You leave them open to believing the stories as =
fact.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")Although you may not see it, simply =
by approving of, and providing these stories as an authority figure, =
you are in fact introducing and encouraging religious-anthroposophical =
elements. (/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I, for one, would NEVER want those =
stories to be presented as historical fact. There are certainly =
more a propos examples of documented, substantial historical/social =
cooperation to relay to 9 and 10 year olds. (/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")Additionally, I would NEVER want =
these stories to be presented as samples of wonderful literature. =
Again, there is an immense selection of age-appropriate, moral, =
colorful (pick your adjective here) material to present to these =
kids.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style") (/FONT)
(BR)(B)(I)(FONT FACE=3D"Verdana")Kristin Brown(/FONT)(/I)(/B)
(/P)
(P)(U)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" FACE=3D"Bookman Old =
Style")Kbrown osisystemsinc.com(/FONT)(/U)
(UL)
(P)(A NAME=3D"_MailData")(/A)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial")>FLANNERY:(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>>So far as =
the children are concerned, the evident anthroposophical(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial")>>"purpose" that supposedly informs =
every minute of every day mostly involves(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>>inculcating =
three habits: 1) learning to listen, 2) awareness of the needs(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>>of others, =
and 3) how to negotiate problems. The techniques for =
imparting(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>>these =
traits could be considered "anthroposophical" in a waldorf =
school.(/FONT)
(/P)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")[All single carat =
quotes come from Michael Kopp](/FONT)
(/P)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>The major ones =
missing, of course, are the ability to read books for(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>content and =
comprehension and information-gathering, and the ability to(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>synthesise =
learned information and ones own ideas into coherent expression(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")>of =
ideas.(/FONT)
(/P)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")I realize that you =
don't intend to be argumentative with this comment, and(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")instead are using =
the opportunity to drop in a standard critique of waldorf(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")as =
"anti-intellectual". I would nonetheless suggest =
these skills are(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")covered under 3), =
above. However, 1) and 2) also play critical roles.(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")Like so many other =
aspects of waldorf education, the interrelationships(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")within the pedagogy =
impart a synergistic quality to the instruction, which(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")serves to =
strengthen the experience for the children. I'll provide =
an(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")example(/FONT)
(/P)
(BR)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")The other week, as =
part of our third-grade Old Testament block, I had just(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")finished telling =
the story where Isaac mistakenly blesses Jacob. In =
this(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")tale, the devil =
hinders Esau in his search for food and thereby buys time(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")for Jacob. =
One of the children immediately raised her hand, and asked =
"Do(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")you mean the devil =
and God sometimes work together?" My only answer was(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")"that's =
certainly what it sounds like, doesn't it?" Heads were =
bobbing and(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")eyes were wide all =
over the room.(/FONT)
(/P)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")If I attempted to =
quash questioning, dissent, or skepticism in my class I(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")would lose an =
enormous amount of what makes a classroom lively and keeps(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")children =
engaged. As Michael knows so well, I would also quash a bit =
of(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")the hunger for =
knowledge and experience which is one of the hallmarks of(/FONT)
(BR)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial")waldorf-educated =
children.(/FONT)
(/P)
(P)
(/P)
(/UL)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4354.A99024A4--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.9 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:04:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901182123.NAA29069 lists1.best.com)
(199901182020.MAA13603 lists1.best.com)
(199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901190120.RAA26442 lists1.best.com)
)There are a few Waldorf teachers on this list. Can each of you give us a
)class schedule for a typical day inside your classrooms? What grade do you
)currently teach? Do you always begin with a "morning verse"? How is math
)taught? Reading? Science? Knitting? Do you perform Eurythmy in your school?
)Music? What songs are taught? How many verses are recited each day? What is
)the content of the verses? How many of you have "nature tables" in your
)classroom? How many books exist [in your classroom]?
How much spare time do you imagine we have?
Seriously, some of these questions can be answered quickly, but some are
the subject of weeks worth of courses in teacher training.
In the interest of a bipartisan search for the truth, here are the quick
answers I can provide.
I teach third grade. I always begin with a morning verse, and we do have
eurythmy in our school. We say a grace at snack and another grace at lunch
which count as verses. I don't have a nature table in my room. There are
about 300 books in my class.
Here's the morning verse (it's a "standard" in the early grades to open the
day):
The sun with loving light
Makes bright for me each day
The soul with spirit power
Gives strength unto my limbs.
In sunlight shining clear
I reverence, O God
The strength of human power
Which thou so graciously
Have planted in my soul.
That I with all my might
May love to work and learn
From thee comes light and strength
To thee rise love and thanks.
Here's the snack verse (nonstandard, I usually change it every year):
Blessed art thou, O lord our God
King of the Universe
Who bringeth forth bread from the Earth
Here's the lunch verse (also nonstandard):
Give us O lord, thankful hearts
That never forget your goodness to us.
Give us O lord, grateful hearts
That do not waste time complaining.
We also do recitation in our morning circle, which changes with some
regularity. Right now, were doing "John Barleycorn".
There was three kings into the east
Three kings both great and high
And they hae sworn a solemn oath
John Barleycorn should die.
They took a plough and ploughed him down
Put clods upon his head
And they hae sworn a solemn oath
John Barleycorn was dead.
But the cheerful Spring came kindly on
And show'rs began to fall
John Barleycorn got up again
And sore surprised them all.
The sultry suns of Summer came
And he grew thick and strong
His head we'el armed wi' pointed spears
That no one should him wrong.
The sober Autumn entered mild
And he grew wan and pale
His bended joints and drooping head
Showed he began to fail.
etc.
We do a lot of songs. I've used most of the book "Sing through the
Seasons" published by the Plough Publishing House.
Seriously, Deby, you'll have to do the rest of this work yourself. I asked
for your evidence of anthroposophy "in every minute of every day" where
"everything" is used to impart anthroposophical dogma to the children. I
didn't volunteer to outline all I know about third grade so that you could
pick through it.
Since you're either making or trying to support a claim of mind control,
you should be able to provide the evidence, without asking me to outline my
schedule, curriculum, and methodology in detail so that you can analyze it
like a Rorschach blot.
I'm certain that the only outcome of such an expedition (besides swallowing
up chunks of my time and effort so large as to make 25-meg posts look
trivial) would be your unveiling of something similar to Dan's "eurythmy
swastika" of years past.
Can't see how that's an effective use of anyone's time, in any case.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1037.10 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: The Devil Made Me Do It
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:35:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1295405566==_ma============"
In-Reply-To: (199901190242.SAA09376 lists1.best.com)
--============_-1295405566==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)I do have a question for you. Are the Old Testament stories presented as
)a history block or a literature block? Or are the two somehow blurred?
It's not a distinction generally recognized by children of this age in a
waldorf school, but the block is technically referred to as "Literature
Arts". I made no preamble to these tales, save to hold up a copy of a
Bible and let them know that many people think of this as the greatest
story of all time.
)
)From the children's' response, I assume they believe the stories
)(characters, situations, dialog, etc.) to be real and fact. How did (do)
)you preface these "stories"? Additionally, from your response to the
)little folks comments, you did not say, "Hey guys, it's a made up story.
)I can't say that God and the devil are real. Since they aren't real, the
)mutual cooperation described here is impossible and a fantasy too." You
)leave them open to believing the stories as fact.
At the age of nine or ten, I leave them open to as much as I reasonably
can. The modern world seems to be in the business of reducing their
options at an early age, and I do what I can to counteract that at this
stage. On the other hand, I don't want to impose my bias on them either,
if I can reasonably avoid it.
)Although you may not see it, simply by approving of, and providing these
)stories as an authority figure, you are in fact introducing and
)encouraging religious-anthroposophical elements.
Not quite. There are certainly religious elements to Saint stories in
second grade, and Old Testament stories in third grade, but there's no
promotion of anthroposophy in this. Most of the texts I used in second
grade were old Catholic hagiographies, and this year I'm relying very
heavily on a series of books by Louis Ginzberg called "Legends of the Jews"
(Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998).
Last year I avoided stuff like the stigmata, and this year I steer clear of
the Talmudic prohibitions.
)
)I, for one, would NEVER want those stories to be presented as historical
)fact. There are certainly more a propos examples of documented,
)substantial historical/social cooperation to relay to 9 and 10 year olds.
Seems clear what your button is, Kristin, and I guess that's why you're no
longer at the waldorf school (was it Hawthorne Valley, if my memory serves
me correctly from your last post, long ago?).
Whether or not these are presented as historical fact probably has a lot to
do with the presentation of the teacher. I think my children look at these
the same way they looked at fairy tales in first grade (but it's a bit more
complicated, since many have heard these stories in church, too).
)
)Additionally, I would NEVER want these stories to be presented as samples
)of wonderful literature. Again, there is an immense selection of
)age-appropriate, moral, colorful (pick your adjective here) material to
)present to these kids.
Well, all I know is the boys in my class have suddenly become very
conscious doing the right thing by one another, and the whole class hangs
on every word. The children discuss the various implications of these
stories constantly, and they argue about whether God or devils or angels or
Pharoahs really do or did exist.
I agree that there is a larger selection of age-appropriate/moral/colorful
material available. I sincerely question whether there is any more
powerful material available, given the timely, moral and colorful qualities
of the Old Testament. It's exactly what great literature should be:
compelling enough to hold you through the story, and dynamic enough to
allow it to reverberate within you for years to come.
Keep the faith.
(sorry, but it's been a long day at the keyboard)
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1295405566==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
(excerpt)I do have a question for you. Are the Old Testament stories
presented as a history block or a literature block? Or are the two
somehow blurred?
(/excerpt)
It's not a distinction generally recognized by children of this age in
a waldorf school, but the block is technically referred to as
"Literature Arts". I made no preamble to these tales, save to hold up
a copy of a Bible and let them know that many people think of this as
the greatest story of all time.
(excerpt)
)From the children's' response, I assume they believe the stories
(characters, situations, dialog, etc.) to be real and fact. How did
(do) you preface these "stories"? Additionally, from your response to
the little folks comments, you did not say, "Hey guys, it's a made up
story. I can't say that God and the devil are real. Since they aren't
real, the mutual cooperation described here is impossible and a fantasy
too." You leave them open to believing the stories as fact.
(/excerpt)
At the age of nine or ten, I leave them open to as much as I reasonably
can. The modern world seems to be in the business of reducing their
options at an early age, and I do what I can to counteract that at this
stage. On the other hand, I don't want to impose my bias on them
either, if I can reasonably avoid it.
(excerpt)Although you may not see it, simply by approving of, and
providing these stories as an authority figure, you are in fact
introducing and encouraging religious-anthroposophical elements.
(/excerpt)
Not quite. There are certainly religious elements to Saint stories
in second grade, and Old Testament stories in third grade, but there's
no promotion of anthroposophy in this. Most of the texts I used in
second grade were old Catholic hagiographies, and this year I'm relying
very heavily on a series of books by Louis Ginzberg called "Legends of
the Jews" (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998).
Last year I avoided stuff like the stigmata, and this year I steer
clear of the Talmudic prohibitions.
(excerpt)
I, for one, would NEVER want those stories to be presented as
historical fact. There are certainly more a propos examples of
documented, substantial historical/social cooperation to relay to 9 and
10 year olds.
(/excerpt)
Seems clear what your button is, Kristin, and I guess that's why you're
no longer at the waldorf school (was it Hawthorne Valley, if my memory
serves me correctly from your last post, long ago?).
Whether or not these are presented as historical fact probably has a
lot to do with the presentation of the teacher. I think my children
look at these the same way they looked at fairy tales in first grade
(but it's a bit more complicated, since many have heard these stories
in church, too).
(excerpt)
Additionally, I would NEVER want these stories to be presented as
samples of wonderful literature. Again, there is an immense selection
of age-appropriate, moral, colorful (pick your adjective here) material
to present to these kids.
(/excerpt)
Well, all I know is the boys in my class have suddenly become very
conscious doing the right thing by one another, and the whole class
hangs on every word. The children discuss the various implications of
these stories constantly, and they argue about whether God or devils or
angels or Pharoahs really do or did exist.
I agree that there is a larger selection of
age-appropriate/moral/colorful material available. I sincerely
question whether there is any more powerful material available, given
the timely, moral and colorful qualities of the Old Testament. It's
exactly what great literature should be: compelling enough to hold you
through the story, and dynamic enough to allow it to reverberate within
you for years to come.
Keep the faith.
(sorry, but it's been a long day at the keyboard)
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1295405566==_ma============--
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1037 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1038 --------------
001 - Kristin Brown (KBrown osi - RE: The Devil Made Me Do It
002 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: other anthroposophical lists
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
004 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - RE: The Devil Made Me Do It
005 - "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit t - Waldorf and the problem of Knowledge
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Class schedule (was: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (lon
007 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Another attack on science..A response
008 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: The Devil Made Me Do It
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Moon illusion/ Twaddle alert!/lost horizons
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.1 ---------------
From: Kristin Brown (KBrown osisystemsinc.com)
Subject: RE: The Devil Made Me Do It
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:23:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="---- =_NextPart_001_01BE4363.8443CFD4"
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.
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4363.8443CFD4
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Nope, we attended the Waldorf School of Atlanta. By the way, I was raised
Catholic, and Unitarian Universalist. As a teen, I checked out Buddhism,
Wicca, Church of God and B'Hai. As for keeping the faith, I seem to keep
more than a lot of regular church-goers I know. Except it's faith in
myself.
Quite frankly, I can appreciate the Bible stories as interesting tales, but
not the greatest or best written "narratives." Even in my catholic Sunday
school classes, I could take them or leave them. I suppose I wanted to hear
something that was not an effort to convince/convert/coerce me.
I'll bite again. "The greatest story of all time..." HMMMM... From what I
remember of the class progression outline provided to kindy parents at the
end of the school session (parents of kids rising to 1st grade.) The saints
stories and the Old testament stories pretty much are the Total package when
it comes to literature offerings in those grades.
I am not certain about this. I was still recovering from my surprise over
the overwhelmingly Christian curriculum being presented to the kindy parent
group for the first time.
As an educator, Robert, do you feel that these stories are absolutely the
best possible selections upon which to base an entire year of study (well, 2
years of study Saints and O.T.)? If you believe they are the greatest
story of all time, your sincerity and conviction will undoubtedly flavor
your recitation of the tales. I don't know that I would consider 2 full
years of Christian literature to be expanding their options, or being open
to the kids. Have you ever considered teaching a different set of stories
which illustrate the same lesson for that time period, or is the curriculum
for those grades established and "set"?
)At the age of nine or ten, I leave them open to as much as I
reasonably can. The modern )world seems to be in the business of reducing
their options at an early age, and I do what I )can to counteract that at
this stage. On the other hand, I don't want to impose my bias on )them
either, if I can reasonably avoid it.
Whether or not these are presented as historical fact probably has a
lot to do with the presentation of the teacher. I think my children look at
these the same way they looked at fairy tales in first grade (but it's a bit
more complicated, since many have heard these stories in church, too).
Peace
Kristin Brown
Kbrown osisystemsinc.com
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4363.8443CFD4
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN")
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1")
(META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.0.1460.9")
(TITLE)RE: The Devil Made Me Do It(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")Nope, we attended the Waldorf =
School of Atlanta. By the way, I was raised Catholic, and =
Unitarian Universalist. As a teen, I checked out Buddhism, Wicca, =
Church of God and B'Hai. As for keeping the faith, I seem to keep =
more than a lot of regular church-goers I know. Except it's faith =
in myself.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")Quite frankly, I can appreciate the =
Bible stories as interesting tales, but not the greatest or best =
written "narratives." Even in my catholic Sunday school classes, =
I could take them or leave them. I suppose I wanted to hear =
something that was not an effort to convince/convert/coerce me. =
(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I'll bite again. "The =
greatest story of all time..." HMMMM... From what I =
remember of the class progression outline provided to kindy parents at =
the end of the school session (parents of kids rising to 1(SUP)st(/SUP) =
grade.) The saints stories and the Old testament stories pretty =
much are the Total package when it comes to literature offerings in =
those grades.(/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")I am not certain about this. =
I was still recovering from my surprise over the overwhelmingly =
Christian curriculum being presented to the kindy parent group for the =
first time. (/FONT)(/P)
(P)(FONT FACE=3D"Bookman Old Style")As an educator, Robert, do you feel =
that these stories are absolutely the best possible selections upon =
which to base an entire year of study (well, 2 years of study Saints =
and O.T.)? If you believe they are the greatest story of =
all time, your sincerity and conviction will undoubtedly flavor your =
recitation of the tales. I don't know that I would consider 2 =
full years of Christian literature to be expanding their options, or =
being open to the kids. Have you ever considered teaching a =
different set of stories which illustrate the same lesson for that time =
period, or is the curriculum for those grades established and =
"set"?(/FONT)(A NAME=3D"_MailData")(/A)(/P)
(BR)
(UL)
(P)(U)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")>(/FONT)(/U)(FONT =
COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")At the age of nine or ten, I leave =
them open to as much as I reasonably can. The modern(/FONT)(U) =
(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")>(/FONT)(/U)(FONT =
COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")world seems to be in the business of =
reducing their options at an early age, and I do what I(/FONT)(U) (FONT =
COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")>(/FONT)(/U)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" =
FACE=3D"Arial")can to counteract that at this stage. On the other =
hand, I don't want to impose my bias on(/FONT)(U) (FONT =
COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")>(/FONT)(/U)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" =
FACE=3D"Arial")them either, if I can reasonably avoid it. (/FONT)(/P)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(P)(FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" FACE=3D"Arial")Whether or not these are =
presented as historical fact probably has a lot to do with the =
presentation of the teacher. I think my children look at these =
the same way they looked at fairy tales in first grade (but it's a bit =
more complicated, since many have heard these stories in church, =
too).(/FONT)(U) (/U)(/P)
(BR)
(/UL)
(P)(B)(I)(U)(FONT FACE=3D"Verdana")Peace(/FONT)(/U)(/I)(/B)
(BR)(B)(I)(U)(FONT FACE=3D"Verdana")Kristin Brown(/FONT)(/U)(/I)(/B)
(/P)
(UL)
(P)(U)(U)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" FACE=3D"Bookman Old =
Style")Kbrown osisystemsinc.com(/FONT)(/U)(/U)
(/P)
(/UL)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
------ =_NextPart_001_01BE4363.8443CFD4--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.2 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: other anthroposophical lists
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:26:10 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901172222.OAA11312 lists1.best.com)
Dan,
You forgot to mention baby Liam's successful heart surgery. Liam is the
baby son of Lee And Shino Noonan, who recently learned to walk. He was born
with a hole in his heart which was successfully closed on my daughter's
birthday, January 14th.
Debra
******************************
)I've just caught up on reading the other anthropop lists I follow, and I
)must say the Internet world of Anthroposophy is quite chaotic. Items:
)
)* Catherine, a deep thinker and major contributor to anthroposophia, has
)been temporarily banned there for an ad hominem.
)
)* The moderator of anthroposophia has announced throwing in the towel and
)the list will be moving to a new server.
)
)* Tom Mellett sent a hoax suicide note to several correspondents; Joel
)Wendt called the police. Another correspondent, who alleges Tom threatened
)her family, was very upset that the police didn't commit him for
)observation.
)
)* The mailing list spiritual-science features dispatches dictated by the
)"Elder Brothers," shades of the old days of Theosophy when letters were
)received regularly from "The Masters."
)
)* anthropos-science, overburdened with lengthy Anthroposophical
)discussions, has split into two lists, the new one called anthropos-views.
)
)* correspondents to anthropos-science have outed one of their number as a
)Scientologist.
)
)* Waldorf-school-net hardly exists, seeing a post every couple of weeks.
)
)In contrast, the SJU Waldorf School list continues with healthy discussions
)of real issues, becoming ever more open. Gerry Palo takes the role of
)Waldorf authority, laing down the doctrine with erudite moderation.
)
)-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:29:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp, you wrote,
)* the teaching of religious myth as history (I can post this main lesson,
)about Ahura Mazda, if desired);
and,
)* the teaching -- also in an English class, no less -- that the development
)of Greek epic poetic rhythm, dactylic hexameter, was based on the
)[astrological] theory of the relationship between the "platonic year", or
)precession of the equinoxes, and the human physiological rhythms of
)heartbeats-per-breath and breaths-per-life (I can post the text of this
)lesson as well).
Please do!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.4 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: RE: The Devil Made Me Do It
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 05:14:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1295381590==_ma============"
In-Reply-To: (199901190428.UAA00598 lists1.best.com)
--============_-1295381590==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)
)As an educator, Robert, do you feel that these stories are absolutely the
)best possible selections upon which to base an entire year of study (well,
)2 years of study Saints and O.T.)? If you believe they are the greatest
)story of all time, your sincerity and conviction will undoubtedly flavor
)your recitation of the tales. I don't know that I would consider 2 full
)years of Christian literature to be expanding their options, or being open
)to the kids. Have you ever considered teaching a different set of stories
)which illustrate the same lesson for that time period, or is the
)curriculum for those grades established and "set"?
Second grade is not exclusively Saint stories. The best part of the year
(from the children's point of view) was the extensive time we spent with
the East African Anansi stories. I used these in my math blocks--they
loved the humor of the predicaments in which the spider constantly found
himself, how his over-reaching constantly got him in trouble. A large
portion of the second grade language arts curriculum also involved Fables,
principally Aesop's. These also were well received. The Saint stories
were a bit of a letdown for me (possibly because I was a "forced-march"
Catholic as a child).
If you read my earlier post a bit more carefully, you will note that I
never said the Bible was the greatest story of all time. I mentioned to
the children that in surveys, many others had called it one of their
favorite stories. I didn't give my personal opinion to them. The Bible is
not one of my favorite books--I've never read it until this year, and the
New Testament psalms sometimes give me the heebie-jeebies for the same
reason I have issues with the Saint stories.
Most significantly, the OT is definitely not Christian literature, at least
not the version I'm going with. Ginzberg's books are incredibly rich, much
fuller than standard Bible versions, and represent a full panoply of Jewish
oral and written tradition. The only time I've worked out of mainstream
Bible text was for the opening block on Genesis.
No doubt the Saint stories are Christian, but the OT curriculum is more
accurately described as Jewish. Hindi and Buddhist literature are covered
in fifth grade, and some teachers do a block on China which would include
Taoist material and Confucianism. The historical religious survey in a
waldorf school is a bit more inclusive than you might suspect.
A number (I'm not sure how many, but it's probably less than half) of
waldorf teachers in second grade dispense with the Saint stories, and
substitute biographies of individuals who take significant moral stands
(Ghandi, King, et al). I avoided this last year, because it struck me as
PC pandering. Now I'm not so sure. . . the Saint curriculum is an open
question for me right now.
Teachers are always free to substitute, but they should understand what
value a particular part of the curriculum provides, and replace it with
something of equal or greater value. Not many waldorf teachers would be
willing to tamper with large chunks of the curriculum, however, since it
seems so well-met by the children in nearly every case, and the teacher is
simultaneously excited by it (if this turns out not to be the case, it may
be taken as a sign that a change might be in order). I think it's also
very hard to do this your first time through an eight-year cycle, since you
don't really have the experience to say what works and what doesn't until
you're there (but you're certainly free to adjust midstream, which I have
done).
Last year, I started out with the idea that I would do none of Aesop's
fables. I had worked with them in a second grade class during my teacher
training practicum, and found them unsatisfying. Too short, too canned,
too simplistic. However, about halfway through the year I realized that
the Anansi stories (which are also fables, but from a different part of the
world than Aesop's) were going over like gangbusters, and the children were
thriving on the morality play in each one. So, by the second half of the
year I was doing Aesop's fables, but fleshing them out and trying to make
them into more of a story. By the time second grade ended, I wished I
could continue for another month or two. Of final note, by the time we
started third grade, the opportunity had passed, and the children were no
longer so ripe for these tales.
There's a great deal of practicality and wisdom in a waldorf curriculum.
It's not inviolate, but to say the children are met with the proper
material at the proper time is more than just a public relations platitude.
Thanks for maintaining your good humor in all this, Kristin. If you're
interested, write me off-line about Atlanta--we may have a number of people
in common.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1295381590==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
(excerpt)
As an educator, Robert, do you feel that these stories are absolutely
the best possible selections upon which to base an entire year of study
(well, 2 years of study Saints and O.T.)? If you believe they are the
greatest story of all time, your sincerity and conviction will
undoubtedly flavor your recitation of the tales. I don't know that I
would consider 2 full years of Christian literature to be expanding
their options, or being open to the kids. Have you ever considered
teaching a different set of stories which illustrate the same lesson
for that time period, or is the curriculum for those grades established
and "set"?
(/excerpt)
Second grade is not exclusively Saint stories. The best part of the
year (from the children's point of view) was the extensive time we
spent with the East African Anansi stories. I used these in my math
blocks--they loved the humor of the predicaments in which the spider
constantly found himself, how his over-reaching constantly got him in
trouble. A large portion of the second grade language arts curriculum
also involved Fables, principally Aesop's. These also were well
received. The Saint stories were a bit of a letdown for me (possibly
because I was a "forced-march" Catholic as a child).
If you read my earlier post a bit more carefully, you will note that I
never said the Bible was the greatest story of all time. I mentioned
to the children that in surveys, many others had called it one of their
favorite stories. I didn't give my personal opinion to them. The
Bible is not one of my favorite books--I've never read it until this
year, and the New Testament psalms sometimes give me the heebie-jeebies
for the same reason I have issues with the Saint stories.
Most significantly, the OT is definitely not Christian literature, at
least not the version I'm going with. Ginzberg's books are incredibly
rich, much fuller than standard Bible versions, and represent a full
panoply of Jewish oral and written tradition. The only time I've
worked out of mainstream Bible text was for the opening block on
Genesis.
No doubt the Saint stories are Christian, but the OT curriculum is more
accurately described as Jewish. Hindi and Buddhist literature are
covered in fifth grade, and some teachers do a block on China which
would include Taoist material and Confucianism. The historical
religious survey in a waldorf school is a bit more inclusive than you
might suspect.
A number (I'm not sure how many, but it's probably less than half) of
waldorf teachers in second grade dispense with the Saint stories, and
substitute biographies of individuals who take significant moral stands
(Ghandi, King, et al). I avoided this last year, because it struck me
as PC pandering. Now I'm not so sure. . . the Saint curriculum is an
open question for me right now.
Teachers are always free to substitute, but they should understand what
value a particular part of the curriculum provides, and replace it with
something of equal or greater value. Not many waldorf teachers would
be willing to tamper with large chunks of the curriculum, however,
since it seems so well-met by the children in nearly every case, and
the teacher is simultaneously excited by it (if this turns out not to
be the case, it may be taken as a sign that a change might be in
order). I think it's also very hard to do this your first time through
an eight-year cycle, since you don't really have the experience to say
what works and what doesn't until you're there (but you're certainly
free to adjust midstream, which I have done).
Last year, I started out with the idea that I would do none of Aesop's
fables. I had worked with them in a second grade class during my
teacher training practicum, and found them unsatisfying. Too short,
too canned, too simplistic. However, about halfway through the year I
realized that the Anansi stories (which are also fables, but from a
different part of the world than Aesop's) were going over like
gangbusters, and the children were thriving on the morality play in
each one. So, by the second half of the year I was doing Aesop's
fables, but fleshing them out and trying to make them into more of a
story. By the time second grade ended, I wished I could continue for
another month or two. Of final note, by the time we started third
grade, the opportunity had passed, and the children were no longer so
ripe for these tales.
There's a great deal of practicality and wisdom in a waldorf
curriculum. It's not inviolate, but to say the children are met with
the proper material at the proper time is more than just a public
relations platitude.
Thanks for maintaining your good humor in all this, Kristin. If you're
interested, write me off-line about Atlanta--we may have a number of
people in common.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--============_-1295381590==_ma============--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.5 ---------------
From: "Joel A. Wendt" (hermit tiac.net)
Subject: Waldorf and the problem of Knowledge
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 07:04:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Critics List-mates,
Previously I wrote concerning the distinction between dogmatic
anthroposophy and non-dogmatic anthroposophy, and the confusion created
when dogmatic anthroposophy dominates a particular Waldorf environment.
There is an analogous problem on the critics list. Certain aspects
of Mickael Kopp's recent posts are a case on point.
Without doubt the reasoning processes underlying the discipline we
understand as natural science have been very effective in obtaining much
practical knowledge about how the world works, otherwise we would not
have all the wonderous technological and medical advances of modern
civilization. However, a problem arises when the basis, upon which
natural science produces valid knowledge, is misunderstood and then
misapplied. This repeatedly happpens on this list when various claims
are made that certain assertions of Waldorf advocates, made about the
schools, need to be proven by some kind of statistical (social
"science") methodology; or when critics take single instances of Waldorf
"errors" and generalize to the whole system.
Let me try to make the above more concrete by examining specific
examples. Before doing that, however, it is necessary to make a few
observations about normal human psychology as regards the relationship
between perception (experience) and cognition (thinking). It is at this
generally unobserved threshold that various kinds of errors can sneak
into our processes of judgment.
The individual human being stands in the world with certain
capacities, such as the following: the ability to observe the world
through the senses organs, the ability to make reasoned judgments about
these observations, the ability to experience "feelings" as regards the
world, the ability to act upon the world, the ability to self observe
inner processes and states; the ability to transform (discipline -act
upon) certain inner processes, and so forth.
These abilities are interrelated, and have interdynamic
characteristics. For example, strong feelings will often cloud the
abiliity to make valid reasoning judgments. When members of this list,
critics or otherwise, live in their feelings of anger, the quality of
the reasoning - thinking -- will lessen. Another example, an
unwillingness (lack of discipline) to use language in a precise fashion
can lead to confusion in communication. Anyone who is married, or
lives in the frequent dramas of human relationships, knows the truth of
these matters.
Dan, Michael and other critics are justly proud of the advancement
of human civilization that has preceeded from human reason. But very
often, in the inter human relational dynamics of this list, the quality
of reasoning suffers, often because of a lack of clarity in the thinking
driven by the strong underlying, and undisciplined, emotions.
Returning to the need for concrete examples, let us consider the
following statement made recently by Michael Kopp: (this is from a
message received this last Saturday)
"Please provide evidence of the "facts" that you allege: that the
majority
of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools worldwide provide
sufficient
consumer education.
Also please state what statistical and survey methods were used by you,
or
to which you refer, in making this statement.
Also please state what statistical meaning you attach to the term
"majority". Simple, two-thirds, absolute, whatever. If the "majority" of
over 500 schools DO give good information, that leaves a _very
substantial
*minority*_ -- some hundreds -- of schools that do NOT give honest
pictures
of their true nature."
On the surface this seems to be a quite reasonable request. Michael
is simply asking that assertions about the general conditions of Waldorf
education world wide be backed up by credible social scientific
methodology.
I see no problem here, except for two things. First, such a
standard cuts the other way. That is, if Michael wants Waldorf
advocates to follow such rules, then the critics must also follow such
rules. To generalize about the whole of Waldorf from single instances,
which is the basis for much of the critics' work, fails at the same
knowledge threshold. For example, Michael's unhappy experience in NZ
with his own children can't be generalized to the whole Waldorf
movement, without violating the above "evidentary" demand. In fact,
general statements by either Waldorf advocates, or critics, all fail at
this level of fact finding. No one knows, one way or the other, what
kind of total picture of Waldorf would be obtained if some kind of
serious social science investigation were made regarding all kinds of
assertions (about Waldorf duplicity or not, and so forth). Everyone on
this list is mutually ignorant of the truth of such matters.
The second problem with this demand of Michael's is more subtle.
Among scientists (and Stephen Tonkin is one) there are legitimate
questions whether surveys of the type practiced in the field of
so-called social science actually can lead to "scientific" knowledge at
all. So, even if we were able to do what Michael asks, there are good
and valid reasons for thinking that surveys of the type contemplated
would not give us factual information anyway, but probably only a
collection of data about the distribution of subjective points of view
and beliefs. But that is a whole other problem.
Some readers of this list may wonder what the point of all this is.
As I have stated previously on a number of occassions, I think the
Critics and Plans are very important social forces that can help some of
the dognmatic true believers in Waldorf to wake up to certain problems
within the schools and the Waldorf Movement. The Critics, by demanding
the kinds of things they demand, put pressure on the Waldorf Movement to
get its act together -- something I believe it very much needs to do.
However, when the critics overreact, or overstate, or otherwise
shoot their own legitimate questions in the foot, then their (the
critics) effectiveness is diminished. For this reason I have pointed
out the above in the hope that both sides will cease their general
claims and begin to dialogue more carefully and with more discipline.
Wide sweeping generalizations are pretty useless, and do not constitute
knowledge; but are rather just uniformed opinion, often viciously
demeaning of other people's true being (for example, Michael Kopp's
assertions about Waldorf and Steiner practitioners being universally
unreasoning, superstitious and cultic and will be leading us to fascism
and the end of civilization: (message from Michael as of last Wednesday)
"But I have no doubt that the "seeking" for oneself that Steiner
supposedly
espoused -- nay, commanded -- will in the fullness of time turn into as
great a mesmerising force as, say ... Scientology, or ... Krishna
Consciousness.
While I make fun of this eventuality, I am not laughing: from such roots
do
great oaks of repression grow, and from such trunks of oppression in the
guise of freedom does the newspeak of fascism branch to canopy rational
civilisation and shut out the light of reason."
Not bad writing, but very problematic if one is looking for
something which gets at the truth about Steiner, anthroposophy, human
nature or civilization.
warm regards,
joel a. wendt
the narrow gate: http://www.tiac.net/users/hermit/index.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Class schedule (was: [Proofed ending of] Hearts and Minds (long rebuttal))
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:40:55 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199901182020.MAA13603 lists1.best.com)
(199901181228.EAA25309 lists1.best.com)
(199901170136.RAA29424 lists1.best.com)
(199901162234.OAA02045 lists1.best.com)
(199901161910.LAA21772 lists1.best.com)
(199901182123.NAA29069 lists1.best.com)
(199901190120.RAA26442 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199901190120.RAA26442 lists1.best.com)
Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) wrote:
)There are a few Waldorf teachers on this list. Can each of you give us a
)class schedule for a typical day inside your classrooms?
Monday:
0840 Main Lesson. I'm currently supervising a student on teaching
practice. The topic is European geography. Today's main lesson included
recitation (currently Auden's "Night Mail" -- the pupils are working in
groups on different bits of it, towards a "performance piece. Whilst
listening, it occurred to me that the rhythm could easily be adapted to
a rap -- I wonder what would have happened if Benjamin Zephaniah had
been commissioned to write it), handchimes (a Handel Gavotte for
handbells in 2 parts), drawing of relief map of Europe, a dictation (the
first in over a week -- all the written work last week was "own writing"
-- and *is* corrected!) on Scottish industry. When I take ML, we usually
sing -- before Christmas we did a few carols, before that a Hebridean
tramping song called "The Peat Fire Flame".
1040 Break ("recess" to the colonials, I believe). I was on playground
duty.
1100 English. Taken by a colleague whose class (7/8) I took for maths.
She was working on formal grammar: imperfect, perfect, and future-
perfect tenses today. I taught geometry related to "angle at the centre
is twice the angle at the circumference" (see later)
1140 Maths. Calculations related to time. (Train timetables, "number of
day" calculations, etc. -- pretty standard "reinforcement practice"
fare)
1220 German. Taken by a colleague -- I don't speak a foreign language. I
spent the time "topping up" class first aid kits with plasters,
bandages, gloves, etc. (I am the school's Health and Safety Officer and
First Aider)
1300 Lunch.
1315 Break
1350 Handwork (this swaps half-termly with woodwork). We have been hit
by the flu epidemic; lots of pupils and some teachers off ill -- I and a
few parents took classes 3 & 4 into the forest where the pupils built
"natural woodland shelters" (involves a fairly steep learning curve re
mechanical/structural principles)
1530 Finish
We try to have "academic" subjects in the morning and arts and crafts
and games in the afternoon.
) What grade do you
)currently teach?
Class 6
) Do you always begin with a "morning verse"?
Yes.
) How is math
)taught?
Rigorously, with *lots* of practice!.
Let me take the example of the geometry lesson mentioned above. First we
recalled the "angle in a semi-circle" theorem (it is a special case of
what we were to do). Then the children drew circles and constructed
angles at circumference and centre subtended by same arc. They measured
them and the "rule" became apparent. I then went through the formal
proof of it, encouraging children to see the next step before I got
there. I noted a general lack of confidence (but not of ability) in the
algebraic manipulation required to evolve the 360-(180-2a)-(180-2b)
expression, and a weakness amongst the less able pupils to simplify it,
and made a note that I need to do some reinforcement work in that area.
The pupils then saw how the "angle in a semicircle" is a special case
then, in the short time left, they answered a few questions on it,
including one where the set-up is "disguised", by having the
construction with 3 lines (a diameter, a radius and a chord) instead of
the 4 they had been used to. In the next lesson I will give them a few
more questions on it, then move on to "the angles on the circumference
subtended by the same arc are equal" and, the time after, "the opposite
angles of a cyclic quadrilateral are supplementary". Then a few lessons
and homeworks of lots of examples. After that I will go to algebra, and
make sure I do it in such a way as to reinforce that stuff I mentioned
above. We will return to circle geometry next term, where we will do
some of the theorems and constructions involving tangents, which will
automatically include a revision of what we have been doing this week.
This is fairly typical of the way I work in maths. Criticisms and
suggestions for improvement from other teachers are welcome.
) Reading?
I've not taught this in the younger grades, but a combined approach is
taken, which is largely based on "learn the sound of the letters, then
put them together and make the word." By class 6, one is no longer
"teaching" it, since the pupils have been fluent readers for some years.
They do, however, have a class reader which they work from in English
lessons.
)Science?
In class 6: "Procedure, Observation, Conclusion". I instruct (or
perform) the first, sometimes ask leading questions with the middle one
(if there is something I want them to notice and they don't seem to be
doing so spontaneously), and make sure the children can justify the
last.
Later on: we'll look at formulating and testing hypotheses. I tend to
base as much as I can on questions the pupils ask: e.g. pupil asks "What
if..?"; I reply, "What do you think might happen?"; the pupils (everyone
tends to have an opinion at this stage (g)) tell me; I ask, "How can we
find out/test it?" and thus it develops rather smoothly from the pupils'
interest and it is only much later I bring to their consciousness what
they have *actually* been doing in terms of scientific method and
hypothesis testing.
)Knitting?
Done in class one.
) Do you perform Eurythmy in your school?
The pupils have weekly eurythmy lessons, but rarely give performances
(maybe once or twice a year).
)Music?
Throughout the school. Two-note and pentatonic pipes in class 1,
diatonic pipes in 2, recorders in 4. Most pupils play another
instrument.
) What songs are taught?
Everything from rounds to carols to tricky classical 4-parters to folk
songs (traditional and modern) to humorous songs to "world music".
)How many verses are recited each day?
Generally one -- the morning verse. Some classes have a finishing verse.
Religion lessons (the norm in the UK, where we do not have this "Church
and State" schism) usually start with a verse.
) What is
)the content of the verses?
The sort of thing that PLANS would call "religious" -- to be frank,
where the religion lesson verse is concerned, so would I. (g)
) How many of you have "nature tables" in your
)classroom?
Yes. Mine has on it a pot with heather growing in it, a large ammonite-
in-limestone I dug up in my garden, a lump of granite, a lump of
Devonian sandstone and a rather fine piece of amethyst. I'm still
seeking some nice metamorphic rock -- I'll probably get a lump of slate
next time I go to the West Country; marble is a tad too common in WSs
(g).
)How many books exist [in your classroom]?
At a guess, somewhere between 150 and 200, possibly more. Divided about
2:3 between reference books and fiction. We are currently having a drive
to increase and update both reference and fiction books -- one aim is to
have a "Children's Britannica" encyclopaedia set in classes 6 to 8, and
something of a slightly simpler level for classes 4 and 5, plus lots of
resource material for project and main lesson work. The Dorling-
Kindersley "Eyewitness" series is generally highly regarded for this
purpose (as is some other stuff, but the DK stuff appears to be of a
consistently high standard).
In relation to this, it may also interest you that I teach some basic
computer skills to class 8 (WP, spreadsheets, database, DTP).
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1038.7 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Another attack on science..A response
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 19:46:33 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199901182124.NAA00515 lists1.best.com)
Luke Schelly offers some non-scientists who he says have made the world
better by "intuition":
))KOPP:
)
))You are welcome to use any other system of thought and exploration that
))you
))wish. Please let me know when you (or any other non-scientist) makes a
))fundamental discovery about the laws of nature which merits a Nobel prize
))using that alternative method.
SCHELLY:
)How about Thomas Jefferson, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr.
)(at least 1 of the 3 received Nobels (for Peace) (?) but you only want
)someone
)who merits one)
KOPP:
Come on, don't be cute. I said "fundamental discovery about the laws of
nature", not the laws of society and culture and man.
Of course these men advanced human civilisation. Of course they would be
deserving of a Nobel prize. Of course I believe that.
Schelly quoting Kopp:
))Plea