return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1313 --------------
001 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Open Letter to Dan
004 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Open Letter to Dan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1313.1 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 20:38:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob Williams posted:
)Kathy, I don't have an argument with your experience of your training, but
)lest some others who are not familiar with RSC Public School Waldorf
)Teachers Training get a skewed impression, I'd like to offer some possible
)clarification based on my two weeks in 1997. I may be off base here in
)suggesting that my experience has any relevance to 1995, so let me know.
I also don't know is there is any relevance between your experience in '97
and what was happening in '95. During the school year '95/'96 there was a
great deal of turmoil at the Sacramento public Waldorf campus (Oak Ridge)
and my campus in Marysville. This resulted in a many meetings, heated
discussions, newspaper articles, etc., etc. Common sense tells me that RSC
knew they had to change the content of the training or risk losing all
funding.
)During *my* two
)weeks at the Public School Training (1997), there were several programs
)going on simultaneously, and I think one of those programs was with your
)old school. All groups met in the early morning for choir and a lecture.
)Then the groups went their separate ways for the day's classes. The group
)that I assume was from your old school seemed to have a whole different
)program that included much more of the Anthroposophical underpinnings.
Why am I not surprised? Interesting that this continued 2 years after the
ruckus in '95.
)I was in yet another group made up of public school teachers, charter
school
)teachers, and parents. I don't remember any carbonic acid kind of talk in
)my training. I do remember being impressed by my group leader's dedication,
)flexibility, and knowledge. I felt that I was in the presence of someone
)who truly looked at children first and who had thought deeply about
)education.
It sounds as if the experience was a very positive one for you.
I also found the topics and strategies dovetailed nicely with
)many different educational ideas from Lindamood-Bell Visualizing and
)Verbalizing concepts to learning styles.
Who made the comparison between the Waldorf pedagogy and Lindamood-Bell
techniques? Was it from your experience or did the instructor make the link?
I ask this because I found that my instructors made a point of telling us
that Waldorf dovetailed with Piaget, Gesell, current brain research, current
research on oral language, etc., etc. When I conducted my own research on
these alleged linkages, I found that
only a slight comparison could be made and that there were areas that were
vastly different from the Waldorf pedagogy as compared to the school of
thought to which the comparison was made. I felt as if these comparisons
were made in order to give Waldorf more credence.
Finally, I never felt judged or
)shunned because of my lack of knowledge of or interest in Anthroposophy.
I wouldn't think there would be a judgement. The judgement/shunning begins
when you question a concept or ask for further information re: the
anthroposophical underpinnings of particular exercises. In fact, I suspect
that very little or no mention was made of Anthroposophy during your
training. Were you at least informed of its influence?
)Might your experience in the RSC Public School Waldorf Teachers Training
)have been different than the majority of public school teachers who go
)through the training without being a part of a special "Waldorf project?"
I don't know. I suspect that the approach has changed somewhat since the
public school training came under the spotlight. I also suspect that the
majority of the public school teachers that attended, at least during the
time I was there, simply listen, take it in, and use it or don't. In other
words, I don't think that most participants question what is being taught to
them, either in the sense of a "doubting Thomas" or simply for a deeper
explanation. I operated in this mode for several years. It was only when RSC
began to *take over* our school and the trainings became mandatory and more
intense that I began to question the training that I was being forced to
endure. I had never been very interested in the training, but when it became
apparent that it was going to be our sole pedagogical focus I sat up and
began to seriously take notice.
)Finally, I would love to know more about why you characterize the whole
)approach as "downright unsound in terms of academic value." That seems a
)bit overstated. Is there nothing of value in the approach?
Perhaps it is a bit overstated. I type fast and don't have much time to
devote to my responses. (Iam also in that situation at present as the family
is calling me rather insistently to dinner.)I will say that they lacked
sound academic content from the very beginning and I initially found them
boring for that reason. Sure I liked the singing and I enjoyed playing the
recorder since I had learned this at CSUS and had been playing with my
students prior to Waldorf, but there wasn't much there other than the same
painting techniques, the singing, the story telling, the stepping in rhythm,
over and over and over again. It was repetitious and dull. In the beginning
I thought we would be given something of substance eventually, but it never
happened. I like to sing in rounds as much as the next person and to water
color and handwork is my means of artistic expression, but I couldn't see
the value in traveling hundreds of miles over the course of each school year
to participate in the same activities ad infinitum. They were simply not
giving me any information regarding the delivery of an arts-based education
that I didn't already have or already do . . . sans Anthroposophy. When I
was finally given some substance it was Anthroposophical nonsense. (I would
like to qualify that last statement . . . I don't truly think that most
religious beliefs are nonsense, Anthroposophy included, but it is nonsense
to teach them to public school teachers with the desire to have them embued
in public school curriculum.)
Sorry this is rushed. I hope I answered your question.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1313.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 11:53:34 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
)
) Bob Williams posted:
)
) )Might your experience in the RSC Public School Waldorf
) Teachers Training
) )have been different than the majority of public school
) teachers who go
) )through the training without being a part of a special
) "Waldorf project?"
)
) I don't know. I suspect that the approach has changed
) somewhat since the
) public school training came under the spotlight.
Kathy,
Do you think any changes that might have occurred in the approach
since you were there should have any bearing on the PLANS lawsuit?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1313.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 18:00:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905110923.CAA05680 lists1.best.com)
(199905101943.MAA22418 lists1.best.com)
(199905101633.JAA22786 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905151250.FAA15235 lists1.best.com)
)With some regret, I withdraw my earlier invitation regarding your visit to
)my parent meeting this fall. The Lower School faculty does not support
)this proposition, and has communicated their decision to me after some
)weeks of ongoing deliberation. The decision was not clear-cut, but no
)consensus could be reached on the propriety of giving you a forum.
Thought you had "freedom," did you, Robert?
)We are all looking forward to your talks and workshops scheduled for
)November, which will occur on our campus. It is my hope that you will make
)contact with other members of our faculty at that time, and such networking
)will allow mutually beneficial relations in the future.
See you then.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1313.4 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 14:26:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905151250.FAA15235 lists1.best.com)
(199905110923.CAA05680 lists1.best.com)
(199905101943.MAA22418 lists1.best.com)
(199905101633.JAA22786 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905161718.KAA06640 lists1.best.com)
))With some regret, I withdraw my earlier invitation regarding your visit to
))my parent meeting this fall. The Lower School faculty does not support
))this proposition, and has communicated their decision to me after some
))weeks of ongoing deliberation. The decision was not clear-cut, but no
))consensus could be reached on the propriety of giving you a forum.
)
)Thought you had "freedom," did you, Robert?
In any truly cooperative venture, freedom often involves a sacrifice of
personal considerations. We try to work as a community.
If I had the entire scenario to play over again, I would've run the idea of
inviting you by my colleagues before I asked you. Since the idea occurred
to me while we were out on summer vacation, I compounded the problem by
acting unilaterally. I apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused
you.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1313 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1314 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Open Letter to Dan
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Open Letter to Dan
003 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Open Letter to Dan
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Open Letter to Dan
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: web counter 25,721
006 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: moral values
007 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Open letter to Dan
008 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Anthroposophical Medicine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 19:00:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905161718.KAA06640 lists1.best.com)
(199905151250.FAA15235 lists1.best.com)
(199905110923.CAA05680 lists1.best.com)
(199905101943.MAA22418 lists1.best.com)
(199905101633.JAA22786 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905161818.LAA01272 lists1.best.com)
Robert, you wrote,
)If I had the entire scenario to play over again, I would've run the idea of
)inviting you by my colleagues before I asked you. Since the idea occurred
)to me while we were out on summer vacation, I compounded the problem by
)acting unilaterally. I apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused
)you.
No inconvenience here. I'm afraid you, however, will now be under suspicion
of being a troublemaker with your College of Teachers.
Can you imagine another kind of school where a teacher wouldn't be allowed
to bring a guest speaker to a class parents meeting?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 15:05:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Dan Dugan [mailto:dan dandugan.com]
)
) Can you imagine another kind of school where a teacher
) wouldn't be allowed
) to bring a guest speaker to a class parents meeting?
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
I have no trouble imagining it at all.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.3 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 15:41:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905161818.LAA01272 lists1.best.com)
(199905161718.KAA06640 lists1.best.com)
(199905151250.FAA15235 lists1.best.com)
(199905110923.CAA05680 lists1.best.com)
(199905101943.MAA22418 lists1.best.com)
(199905101633.JAA22786 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905171818.LAA21674 lists1.best.com)
)No inconvenience here. I'm afraid you, however, will now be under suspicion
)of being a troublemaker with your College of Teachers.
I don't think my image has suffered. My colleagues already know me as
outspoken, opinionated, and courageously foolish.
So far as the school is concerned, what's most telling is the process. In
the course of our discussion, I made my views clear, it became obvious that
I did not represent the majority position, and we resolved the issue
without rancor. It didn't go my way, but there were no temper tantrums or
namecalling or personal attacks or even hard feelings.
The process was respected. Ultimately we grow in relation to one another
within the group, even as we recognize our differences as individuals.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dan
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 23:06:51 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905161718.KAA06640 lists1.best.com)
(199905151250.FAA15235 lists1.best.com)
(199905110923.CAA05680 lists1.best.com)
(199905101943.MAA22418 lists1.best.com)
(199905101633.JAA22786 lists1.best.com) (199905171818.LAA21674 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Can you imagine another kind of school where a teacher wouldn't be allowed
) to bring a guest speaker to a class parents meeting?
You _really_ sound innocent. Some small show.
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.n1314.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: web counter 25,721
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 17:06:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On May 12, 1999, the PLANS web site had registered 25,721 visitors since
August 12, 1996. That's 1229 visitors in the last month, averaging 41 per
day.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.6 ---------------
From: "Duane Koons" (dkoons gundluth.org)
Subject: Re: moral values
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:29:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I understand that waldorf supportors have generally been against the use of
standardized tests However widespread use of standardized testing didn't
occur until after Steiner's death. Does anyone know the origin of this
opposition to testing? Did Steiner have anything specific to say about
standardized tests? Thanks Duane
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.7 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Open letter to Dan
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 10:54:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
One additional thought on the question of Dan not being able to
visit a parents meeting at Robert Flannery's class...
As most of you probably know, I am a parent at the same school where
Robert Flannery teaches. I have participated in a number of parent
meetings, usually 4 to 5 per year for each grade that my 2 kids attend.
These parent meetings fill the need for parents to talk as a group with the
teacher on subjects pertaining to the class; i.e., curriculum, class
dynamics and so forth. I've never been to a class meeting which was not
centered *on the class*, nor would I want to.
I'm looking forward with great anticipation to Dan's visit in the
fall, but IMHO a class meeting is not the right venue. With all due respect
to Robert Flannery, I suspect the parents in his class would not have been
happy with having their normal business interrupted.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1314.8 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:09:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Even though I don't give the SJU Waldorf list much more than a
passing glance, there was a recent post on a subject which has been of
interest on this list. Apparently, the British medical journal "The Lancet"
has published an article on anthroposophical medicine:
The Lancet (05/01/99) Vol. 353, No. 9163, P. 1485; Alm, Johan S.; Swartz,
Jackie; Lilja, Gunnar; et al., has an article titled, "Atopy in Children of
Families With an Anthroposophic Lifestyle"
I visited the website (http://www.thelancet.com/newlancet/) but as a
non-subscribing person, I was unable even to obtain an abstract. The
contributor to the SJU list did include an abstract, and I will presume it
to be "fair use" to quote that abstract here for those who might be
interested:
"Researchers studied children at two anthroposophic schools near
Sweden to investigate the prevalence of atopy in children from
anthroposophic families and the influence of an anthroposophic
lifestyle on atopy prevalence. The concept of anthroposophy,
which was established in the early 20th century by Rudolf
Steiner, has been applied to many facets of life, including
education, medicine, and agriculture. Physicians following the
school limit the use of antibiotics, antipyretics, and
vaccinations. In the study, 295 children from Steiner schools
were compared to 380 children from neighboring schools on the
basis of history of atopic and infectious diseases, use of
antibiotics and vaccinations, and social and environmental
allergens. The data show that 90 percent of the control students
had had antibiotics, while only about 50 of the Steiner children
had. In addition, whereas 93 percent of the controls had been
vaccinated against measles, mumps, and rubella, only 18 percent
of the children at Steiner schools had received the vaccine, and
over 60 percent of the Steiner students had had measles in the
past. Using skin-prick tests and blood tests, the researchers
determined the children from Steiner schools had a lower
prevalence of atopy than children from other families. They
noted that lifestyle factors related to anthroposophy may reduce
the risk of childhood atopy."
"Atopy" (I had to look it up): "A probably hereditary allergy
characterized by symptoms (as asthma, hay fever, or hives) produced upon
exposure to the exciting antigen without inoculation."
Note that the abstract does not imply an endorsement of
anthroposophical medicine, and I suspect that the full article probably
suggests that more research would be necessary to determine why children of
the anthroposophical families had fewer allergic reactions than the control
group.
It's also unclear to me from the abstract how the children in the
two groups compared in being stricken with measles, mumps and rubella.
Bob Tolz
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1314 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1315 --------------
001 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
002 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
003 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - vklos (vklos cwix.com) - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
005 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
007 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
009 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
010 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.1 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 14:37:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have noticed that Anthroposophical medicine closely parallels
naturopathic medicine. The basic tenet of both "methods" seems to be that,
by feeding a child healthy food and supporting their immune system in its
development (with herbs, supplements, and other treatments such as
homeopathy, instead of directly changing it with vaccines), you can ensure
better health than with standard medicine and all of its antibiotics,
shots, and surgeries. Anthroposophical medicine does have a few weird
beliefs, I think, but the basic approach to health is probably sound from a
naturopathic view.
I'm not an anthroposophist, but, hey, it works for me.
Since my family switched to a naturopathic physician we have used
antibiotics but once; even then, it was the naturopath who prescribed them
for my first sinus infection, which I allowed to get really bad before
seeking treatment because I did not know what it was. Using naturopathic
medicine we have cured several sinus infections (the first one which came
back after the one treated with antibiotics, probably because they tend to
make the bacteria stronger), ear infections, bronchitis, carpal tunnel....
all with supplements, herbs, homeopathy, and dietary changes. I am director
of a preschool, and I can honestly say that my kid is one of the healthiest
around.
It seems to me that, if these Anthro people are breastfeeding their babies,
then feeding them organic, whole foods, and avoiding potentially unhealthy
pathogens (such as pesticides, chemical food additives, and the
formaldehyde and animal DNA that are often found in vaccines, among other
things), it would make simple sense that their kids would be in some way
healthier than those in the control group.
The interesting thing to research, since this particular article was about
allergies, would be to compare how many of the Anthro kids were breastfed
versus those in the control group. From what I've researched on my own as
to the benefits of breastfeeding, that alone could be the reason for the
difference....possibly. Nutrition is a biggie after infancy, too.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.2 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 00:51:42 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905181504.IAA18299 lists1.best.com)
Bob Tolz wrote:
) Even though I don't give the SJU Waldorf list much more than a
)passing glance, there was a recent post on a subject which has been of
)interest on this list. Apparently, the British medical journal "The Lancet"
)has published an article on anthroposophical medicine:
)
)The Lancet (05/01/99) Vol. 353, No. 9163, P. 1485; Alm, Johan S.; Swartz,
)Jackie; Lilja, Gunnar; et al., has an article titled, "Atopy in Children of
)Families With an Anthroposophic Lifestyle"
This title blows me away. I don't know what an Anthroposophic lifestyle is,
because I've never heard of it. It reminds me of an article written in the
1960's by a Norwegian professor about "the long haired lifestyle." Long
hair was supposed to make you behave in a certain way and make you
vulnerable to specific social, psychological, and medical pathologies (like
drug addiction and passivity).
Atopy is, According to my Webster, hereditary allergy with symtoms such as
asthma, hives, etc. So anthroposophy is supposed to make you more likely to
catch such allergies and diseases? And this bullshit is being served on a
"members only" website? I didn't even get in as a non-subscriber without a
password. "Authorization failed for non-subscriber access."
Do any of you critics know some of those sinister, secretive creeps?
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.3 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 01:05:51 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905181504.IAA18299 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz wrote:
) Even though I don't give the SJU Waldorf list much more than a
) passing glance, there was a recent post on a subject which has been of
) interest on this list. Apparently, the British medical journal "The Lancet"
) has published an article on anthroposophical medicine:
)
) The Lancet (05/01/99) Vol. 353, No. 9163, P. 1485; Alm, Johan S.; Swartz,
) Jackie; Lilja, Gunnar; et al., has an article titled, "Atopy in Children of
) Families With an Anthroposophic Lifestyle"
)
) I visited the website (http://www.thelancet.com/newlancet/) but as a
) non-subscribing person, I was unable even to obtain an abstract. The
) contributor to the SJU list did include an abstract, and I will presume it
) to be "fair use" to quote that abstract here for those who might be
) interested:
)
) "Researchers studied children ...
A more full abstract can be found via Free Medline at
http://www.medportal.com/ by searching with "Swartz" and "atopic"
According to the abstract that can be found at
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=10232315&form=6&db=m&Dopt=b:
"Lancet 1999 May 1;353(9163):1485-8
Atopy in children of families with an anthroposophic lifestyle.
Alm JS, Swartz J, Lilja G, Scheynius A, Pershagen G
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institute and Hospital,
Stockholm, Sweden. Johan.Alm sos.ki.se
[Medline record in process]
BACKGROUND: Increased prevalence of atopic disorders in children may be
associated with changes in types of childhood infections, vaccination
programmes, and intestinal microflora. People who follow an
anthroposophic way of life use antibiotics restrictively, have few
vaccinations, and their diet usually contains live lactobacilli, which
may affect the intestinal microflora. We aimed to study the prevalence
of atopy in children from anthroposophic families and the influence of
an anthroposophic lifestyle on atopy prevalence.
METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 295 children aged 5-13 years at two
anthroposophic (Steiner) schools near Stockholm, Sweden, were compared
with 380 children of the same age at two neighbouring schools in terms
of history of atopic and infectious diseases, use of antibiotics and
vaccinations, and social and environmental variables. Skin-prick tests
were done for 13 common allergens, and we took blood samples from
children and their parents for analysis of allergen-specific serum
IgE-antibodies.
FINDINGS: At the Steiner schools, 52% of the children had had
antibiotics in the past, compared with 90% in the control schools. 18%
and 93% of children, respectively, had had combined immunisation against
measles, mumps, and rubella, and 61% of the children at the Steiner
schools had had measles. Fermented vegetables, containing live
lactobacilli, were consumed by 63% of the children at Steiner schools,
compared with 4.5% at the control schools. Skin-prick tests and blood
tests showed that the children from Steiner schools had lower prevalence
of atopy than controls (odds ratio 0.62 [95% CI 0.43-0.91]). There was
an inverse relation between the number of characteristic features of an
anthroposophic lifestyle and risk of atopy (p for trend=0.01).
INTERPRETATION: Prevalence of atopy is lower in children from
anthroposophic families than in children from other families. Lifestyle
factors associated with anthroposophy may lessen the risk of atopy in
childhood.
PMID: 10232315, UI: 99247275"
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.n1315.4 ---------------
From: vklos (vklos cwix.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 22:36:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
please take me off your list
thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
)Bob Tolz wrote:
)
)) Even though I don't give the SJU Waldorf list much more than a
))passing glance, there was a recent post on a subject which has been of
))interest on this list. Apparently, the British medical journal "The
Lancet"
))has published an article on anthroposophical medicine:
))
))The Lancet (05/01/99) Vol. 353, No. 9163, P. 1485; Alm, Johan S.; Swartz,
))Jackie; Lilja, Gunnar; et al., has an article titled, "Atopy in Children
of
))Families With an Anthroposophic Lifestyle"
)
)This title blows me away. I don't know what an Anthroposophic lifestyle is,
)because I've never heard of it. It reminds me of an article written in the
)1960's by a Norwegian professor about "the long haired lifestyle." Long
)hair was supposed to make you behave in a certain way and make you
)vulnerable to specific social, psychological, and medical pathologies (like
)drug addiction and passivity).
)
)Atopy is, According to my Webster, hereditary allergy with symtoms such as
)asthma, hives, etc. So anthroposophy is supposed to make you more likely to
)catch such allergies and diseases? And this bullshit is being served on a
)"members only" website? I didn't even get in as a non-subscriber without a
)password. "Authorization failed for non-subscriber access."
)
)Do any of you critics know some of those sinister, secretive creeps?
)
)
)
)
)Tarjei Straume
)
)Greetings from Uncle Taz
)
)http://www.uncletaz.com/
)
)Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
)plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
)skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
)
)
)
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.5 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:12:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob Williams:
)) )Might your experience in the RSC Public School Waldorf
)) Teachers Training
)) )have been different than the majority of public school
)) teachers who go
)) )through the training without being a part of a special
)) "Waldorf project?"
Kathy Sutphen responds:
)) I don't know. I suspect that the approach has changed
)) somewhat since the
)) public school training came under the spotlight.
Bob Tolz:
) Do you think any changes that might have occurred in the approach
)since you were there should have any bearing on the PLANS lawsuit?
Kathy:
I assume you're asking me this: If there have, indeed, been changes and RSC
has managed to tidy up their Public School Training and exorcise the obvious
(to the unknowing) Anthroposophical links, would I then think that the PLANS
lawsuit would now have no validity re: the illegality of usurping public
school funds to teach public school teachers religiously based pedagogical
technique.
My answer is no. I believe that RSC is illegally procuring public school
funds because they are a sectarian insitution and the Waldorf pedagogy is
designed specifically to enhance the spiritual evolution/growth of
children's souls per Anthroposophical religious belief. I have absolutely no
doubt, whatsoever, that RSC does *not* inform their attendees and/or their
funding school districts, of the religious beliefs underlying *all* of the
activities that they have the teachers participate in. I also believe there
are several problems with the training at RSC that go over and beyond the
fact that they are a religious institution and their pedagogy is based on
religious belief. I also believe that they intentionally engage in a program
of false advertising and strive to enlist more and more school districts
into *buying (as in $$$) into* their training sessions.
Hope this answers your question.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 23:40:07 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) Bob Tolz:
) ) Do you think any changes that might have occurred in the approach
) )since you were there should have any bearing on the PLANS lawsuit?
)
) Kathy:
) I assume you're asking me this: If there have, indeed, been
) changes and RSC
) has managed to tidy up their Public School Training and
) exorcise the obvious
) (to the unknowing) Anthroposophical links, would I then think
) that the PLANS
) lawsuit would now have no validity re: the illegality of
) usurping public
) school funds to teach public school teachers religiously
) based pedagogical
) technique.
Correct
)
) My answer is no. I believe that RSC is illegally procuring
) public school
) funds because they are a sectarian insitution and the Waldorf
) pedagogy is
) designed specifically to enhance the spiritual evolution/growth of
) children's souls per Anthroposophical religious belief. I
) have absolutely no
) doubt, whatsoever, that RSC does *not* inform their attendees
) and/or their
) funding school districts, of the religious beliefs underlying
) *all* of the
) activities that they have the teachers participate in. I also
) believe there
) are several problems with the training at RSC that go over
) and beyond the
) fact that they are a religious institution and their pedagogy
) is based on
) religious belief. I also believe that they intentionally
) engage in a program
) of false advertising and strive to enlist more and more
) school districts
) into *buying (as in $$$) into* their training sessions.
So, to sum up, you believe it's irrelevant to your lawsuit whether
or not the pedagogy has a secular purpose, correct?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.7 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 23:47:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Tarjei Straume [mailto:tastraum online.no]
)
) Atopy is, According to my Webster, hereditary allergy with
) symtoms such as
) asthma, hives, etc. So anthroposophy is supposed to make you
) more likely to
) catch such allergies and diseases? And this bullshit is being
) served on a
) "members only" website? I didn't even get in as a
) non-subscriber without a
) password. "Authorization failed for non-subscriber access."
You need to correct your eyeglass prescription, Tarjei. The
abstract suggests that the "anthroposophical lifestyle," whatever that is,
might make you *less* likely to have allergic reactions.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 06:09:50 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905190342.UAA19584 lists1.best.com)
Bob Tolz wrote:
) You need to correct your eyeglass prescription, Tarjei. The
)abstract suggests that the "anthroposophical lifestyle," whatever that is,
)might make you *less* likely to have allergic reactions.
I stand corrected, but it's still enigmatic and nonsensical. It could be
that a biodynamic vegetarian diet has certain medical benefits like that,
but that kind of diet is not restricted to anthropops, and most anthropops
have a more or less mixed diet, including junk food. Eurythmy, perhaps, may
have unrecognized health benefits, but it would be very strange indeed if
it had anything to do with allergies. No, I don't get it, this
anthroposophical lifestyle. Is it anything like the long-haired lifestyle?
Anything to do with fashion, movies, sports? It must have to do with
recreational activities of some sorts. Does it have anything to do with the
spiritual exercises reccommended by Steiner? Has anyone published a book
describing this anthroposophical lifestyle?
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.9 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 22:04:20 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905190336.UAA15398 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz writes:
)) Bob Tolz:
)) ) Do you think any changes that might have occurred in the approach
)) )since you were there should have any bearing on the PLANS lawsuit?
))
)) Kathy:
)) My answer is no. I believe that RSC is illegally procuring
)) public school
)) funds because they are a sectarian insitution and the Waldorf
)) pedagogy is
)) designed specifically to enhance the spiritual evolution/growth of
)) children's souls per Anthroposophical religious belief. I
)) have absolutely no
)) doubt, whatsoever, that RSC does *not* inform their attendees
)) and/or their
)) funding school districts, of the religious beliefs underlying
)) *all* of the
)) activities that they have the teachers participate in. I also
)) believe there
)) are several problems with the training at RSC that go over
)) and beyond the
)) fact that they are a religious institution and their pedagogy
)) is based on
)) religious belief. I also believe that they intentionally
)) engage in a program
)) of false advertising and strive to enlist more and more
)) school districts
)) into *buying (as in $$$) into* their training sessions.
)
) So, to sum up, you believe it's irrelevant to your lawsuit whether
)or not the pedagogy has a secular purpose, correct?
)
) Bob Tolz
Michael KOPP says:
Objection. Counsel is leading the witness. The question calls for a
conclusion by the witness.
Furthermore, counsel has no standing in the court. Furthermore, the suit is
not Kathy Sutphen's suit, it is PLANS' suit, and Kathy Sutphen is not
PLANS, although she may be associated with it in some way.
For those who don't know, Tolz is a lawyer, practicing in New York State,
while PLANS' suit is in California. But Tolz, a parent of children in a
Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school and a staunch defender of the SWA
faith, has been in contact privately with at least some of the attorneys
involved in the California suit.
I think it's obvious Tolz is on a fishing expedition. The question is, what
is he fishing for, and why, and what will he do with the catch when he has
it?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp (amicus curiae)
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1315.10 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 10:31:16 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) Bob Tolz wrote:
)
) ) You need to correct your eyeglass prescription, Tarjei. The
) )abstract suggests that the "anthroposophical lifestyle,"
) whatever that is,
) )might make you *less* likely to have allergic reactions.
)
[Tarjei Straume]
) I stand corrected, but it's still enigmatic and nonsensical.
) It could be
) that a biodynamic vegetarian diet has certain medical
) benefits like that,
) but that kind of diet is not restricted to anthropops, and
) most anthropops
) have a more or less mixed diet, including junk food.
) Eurythmy, perhaps, may
) have unrecognized health benefits, but it would be very
) strange indeed if
) it had anything to do with allergies. No, I don't get it, this
) anthroposophical lifestyle.
I agree with you. It would seem to me that the study probably
invites more research on the use of antibiotics and vaccinations rather than
on the anthroposophical lifestyle. If, however, more reserved use of
antibiotics and vaccinations is a tenet of anthroposophical medicine (or
homeopathic medicine), then the article may compel further consideration by
mainstream medicine of other tenets of those particular medical practices.
Bob Tolz
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1315 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1316 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
002 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
003 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
004 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
005 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
007 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
008 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 10:31:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) )
) ) So, to sum up, you believe it's irrelevant to your
) lawsuit whether
) )or not the pedagogy has a secular purpose, correct?
) )
) ) Bob Tolz
)
) Michael KOPP says:
) Furthermore, counsel has no standing in the court. Furthermore,
) the suit is not Kathy Sutphen's suit, it is PLANS' suit, and
) Kathy Sutphen is not PLANS, although she may be associated with
) it in some way.
I've missed you Michael. It's too quiet around here when you're
absent.
Forgive me my over-broad statement. Strike my comment about "your
lawsuit" and change it to "your (in your capacity as an officer of PLANS)
lawsuit."
) For those who don't know, Tolz is a lawyer, practicing in New
) York State,
) while PLANS' suit is in California. But Tolz, a parent of
) children in a
) Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school and a staunch
) defender of the SWA
) faith, has been in contact privately with at least some of
) the attorneys
) involved in the California suit.
Change "staunch defender of the faith" to "Waldorf Critic Critic
(TM)".
Change "at least some of the attorneys" to "all of the attorneys".
)
) I think it's obvious Tolz is on a fishing expedition. The
) question is, what
) is he fishing for, and why, and what will he do with the
) catch when he has
) it?
Fishing expedition? That's a term I think Bob Jones used once with
me and was never kind enough to explain what he meant by it in the context
of the discussion we were then having. I know, Bob Jones and Michael Kopp
are actually the same person, using different names! ;-)
The only fishing expedition I'm engaged in here is to explore the
legal issues, which I thought was of at least passing interest to the
participants on this list.
As I've reported, PLANS attorney advised me that the defendants have
now filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the PLANS case. I've
requested a copy of the summary judgment motion papers from both sides, but
haven't received anything yet.
In an earlier conversation, the PLANS lawyer had indicated to me
that he believed that PLANS could easily show constitutional transgressions
and that it would be the burden of the defendant to show that those
transgressions no longer exist or that it was possible for the pedagogy to
be taught without transgressions.
When Kathy was having a discussion with another list-member
regarding changes in how things were being done, it brought to mind her (in
her capacity as an officer of PLANS) attorney's comments. I wanted to get
her individual thinking on the issue. That's what I was fishing for, and I
got it. Her analysis is not exactly the same as her (in her capacity as an
officer of PLANS) attorney's analysis, but that doesn't trouble me.
Kathy's position appears to be that the problem with Waldorf in the
public schools is one which is not capable of being remedied in a
constitutionally satisfactory way, because the entire underpinnings are too
religious, and there are too many entanglements (economic and otherwise)
with the Rudolf Steiner College, which she considers to be a religious
institution.
In several discussions during the year I've been participating in
the list, I've stressed that I think that a judge is likely to respect the
judgment of a school district if its managers determine that a pedagogy has
strong secular purposes, regardless of where the pedagogy stemmed from.
Kathy and I obviously disagree on that, and, as it turns out, it looks like
that's going to be one of the central issues to be determined in Kathy's (in
her capacity as an officer of PLANS) lawsuit.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.2 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 09:13:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905191428.HAA24128 lists1.best.com)
On 19 May 99, at 10:31, Tolz, Robert wrote:
) As I've reported, PLANS attorney advised me that the defendants have now
) filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the PLANS case. I've
) requested a copy of the summary judgment motion papers from both sides,
) but haven't received anything yet.
When you do, could you summarize the arguments for us (or at
least, for me)? I'm very interested.
[Caution - technical legal discussion follows, which may not mean
much to non-lawyers on the list.]
In California, summary judgment is handled a bit differently from
federal courts. Basically, it's considerably more difficult to prevail
on a summary judgment motion in California court. I'm not very
familiar with federal court procedure, as I've never practiced in
federal court, but in California courts, a defendant can only prevail
on a summary judgment motion by showing that either (a) the
plaintiff cannot meet an element of the cause of action, or (b) an
affirmative defense applies under the undisputed facts.
I'm sure this is the same as everywhere, but in California, you can't
prevail by simply asserting that the plaintiff has no evidence to
support a particular contention, and then put the burden on the
plaintiff to come forward with evidence in opposition to the motion.
You need an actual admission from the plaintiff that he has no
evidence to support the assertion. Usually this is obtained in
discovery, in response to an interrogatory asking the plaintiff to
state "all facts to support your contention that..."
Also, I believe that in federal court, the court may find a fact to be
undisputed if there is no substantial evidence to the contrary. In
California, the fact is undisputed only if there is no evidence at all
to the contrary. As long as there is evidence which supports the
contention, the motion will be denied even if the evidence is very,
very weak.
) In an earlier conversation, the PLANS lawyer had indicated to me
) that he believed that PLANS could easily show constitutional
) transgressions and that it would be the burden of the defendant to show
) that those transgressions no longer exist or that it was possible for the
) pedagogy to be taught without transgressions.
Showing that it is possible for the pedagogy to be taught without
transgressions would not entitle the district to summary judgment,
although it might avoid a permanent injunction against the school
being a Waldorf school. Instead, the injunction might be more
narrowly drawn to enjoin only the constitutional transgressions.
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.n1316.3 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:56:09 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905191428.HAA24128 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz says:
) I've missed you Michael. It's too quiet around here when you're
)absent.
Michael KOPP says:
I'll speak to the cloning researchers here in Godzone, Robert, and see if I
can't make a few more of me for your pleasure.
TOLZ:
) Change "staunch defender of the faith" to "Waldorf Critic Critic
)(TM)".
KOPP:
No. You _are_ a DOF. Your "criticism" of "Waldorf Critics" is the standard
DOF line, sharpened by your courtroom cross-examination technique, and an
instinct to go for the jugular (c.f., your telling me I'm sounding
paranoid). You're better at debating than you are at understanding or
criticizing in rational terms
TOLZ [regarding his personal contact with attorneys in the PLANS lawsuit in
California]:
) Change "at least some of the attorneys" to "all of the attorneys".
KOPP:
Now, isn't that interesting? A man with a thinly-veiled bias against one of
the litigants in a civil suit on the opposite side of the country just
happens to chat up all the lawyers involved in the suit. Professional
privilege, I guess, goes a long way in the brotherhood of the law.
Wonder what would happen if I, as a journalist with an open and declared
bias against one of the litigants in that suit rang up the attorneys and
chatted them up? Wonder what Tolz would have to say about that, if I
published my findings in this forum?
[KOPP]
)) I think it's obvious Tolz is on a fishing expedition. The
)) question is, what
)) is he fishing for, and why, and what will he do with the
)) catch when he has
)) it?
TOLZ:
) Fishing expedition? That's a term I think Bob Jones used once with
)me and was never kind enough to explain what he meant by it in the context
)of the discussion we were then having. I know, Bob Jones and Michael Kopp
)are actually the same person, using different names! ;-)
KOPP:
And which one of the names or personas is the real one, if either? And who
is Robert Tolz? Perhaps he's really Tarjei Straume, or Stephen Tonkin, or
... David "Lefty" Schlesinger, come back from the departed ....
TOLZ:
) The only fishing expedition I'm engaged in here is to explore the
)legal issues, which I thought was of at least passing interest to the
)participants on this list.
KOPP:
While the case is pending? When you are hardly a disinterested party?
And "exploring the legal issues" by trying to get one of the minor parties
to the suit to talk about the issues in the suit, and justify them, out of
court?
Pull the other one, Mr Tolz.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp (today, at least, perhaps ...)
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.4 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 18:49:44 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Gee, Mister Kopp, NOW I remember why I removed myself from this list a year
ago!
Do you really have nothing better to do than personally attack others
online? You sound like a stressed-out, hormonal teenager in an unsupervised
chatroom! "Go for the jugular," indeed!
Look who's talking.
I AM a *Waldorf critic*, but I am truly interested in the debate, thank you
very much. You seem to think you speak for everyone who is skeptical of
Waldorf that receives these e-mails. Well, you don't. I want to argue as
much as the next guy, but why does it have to get so ugly? What is this
list for? Is it truly a critics list where people can discuss the issues
involved, or is it more of a private club, bitch-fest that would be more
appropriately located in some chat room on Yahoo?
Some of your posts - and I am directing this to all who post on this list,
not just Michael Kopp - fairly drip with bitterness, not to mention plain
ol' *meanness*.
Now, I realize that you've been discussing a lawsuit, so I guess there's
nothing new or surprising there, but is it really neccessary to behave as
viciously as if it were your own personal divorce or something?
Lighten up, and do try to be civil.
Remarks obviously designed to inflame, like "You're better at debating than
you are at understanding or criticizing in rational terms" simply aren't
helpful to anybody. Is not debate one way to understanding? I find this
brand of 'criticizing' abhorrent. Please, let's stick to the debate,
instead of descending to spiteful name-calling. If you want people to
listen to your opinions, you need to remember they probably *won't* listen
if you scream in their faces (literally or figuratively).
I can't find any other site or list to discuss Waldorf in a critical light,
but I simply don't have the stomach for this personal attack crap. I've
been back exactly one day and I've already begun to think that you folks
are just as crazy as the Antrhopops!
Pandora
Robert Tolz says:
) I've missed you Michael. It's too quiet around here when you're
)absent.
Michael KOPP says:
I'll speak to the cloning researchers here in Godzone, Robert, and see if I
can't make a few more of me for your pleasure.
TOLZ:
) Change "staunch defender of the faith" to "Waldorf Critic Critic
)(TM)".
KOPP:
No. You _are_ a DOF. Your "criticism" of "Waldorf Critics" is the standard
DOF line, sharpened by your courtroom cross-examination technique, and an
instinct to go for the jugular (c.f., your telling me I'm sounding
paranoid). You're better at debating than you are at understanding or
criticizing in rational terms
TOLZ [regarding his personal contact with attorneys in the PLANS lawsuit in
California]:
) Change "at least some of the attorneys" to "all of the attorneys".
KOPP:
Now, isn't that interesting? A man with a thinly-veiled bias against one of
the litigants in a civil suit on the opposite side of the country just
happens to chat up all the lawyers involved in the suit. Professional
privilege, I guess, goes a long way in the brotherhood of the law.
Wonder what would happen if I, as a journalist with an open and declared
bias against one of the litigants in that suit rang up the attorneys and
chatted them up? Wonder what Tolz would have to say about that, if I
published my findings in this forum?
[KOPP]
)) I think it's obvious Tolz is on a fishing expedition. The
)) question is, what
)) is he fishing for, and why, and what will he do with the
)) catch when he has
)) it?
TOLZ:
) Fishing expedition? That's a term I think Bob Jones used once with
)me and was never kind enough to explain what he meant by it in the context
)of the discussion we were then having. I know, Bob Jones and Michael Kopp
)are actually the same person, using different names! ;-)
KOPP:
And which one of the names or personas is the real one, if either? And who
is Robert Tolz? Perhaps he's really Tarjei Straume, or Stephen Tonkin, or
... David "Lefty" Schlesinger, come back from the departed ....
TOLZ:
) The only fishing expedition I'm engaged in here is to explore the
)legal issues, which I thought was of at least passing interest to the
)participants on this list.
KOPP:
While the case is pending? When you are hardly a disinterested party?
And "exploring the legal issues" by trying to get one of the minor parties
to the suit to talk about the issues in the suit, and justify them, out of
court?
Pull the other one, Mr Tolz.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp (today, at least, perhaps ...)
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.5 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 20:52:24 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-
If, however, more reserved use of
)antibiotics and vaccinations is a tenet of anthroposophical medicine (or
)homeopathic medicine), then the article may compel further consideration by
)mainstream medicine of other tenets of those particular medical practices.
)
) Bob Tolz
. When an individual family declines to immunize its children, those
children still get all the benefits of immunization (because all their
comrades are immunized), with none of the risks, because the risks are
passed on to those families who accept the immunization. From a spiritual
standpoint refusing immunization may be desirable, but from a societal
standpoint it is unethical.
Alan S. Fine MD
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:06:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Michael Kopp [mailto:mkopp xtra.co.nz]
) instinct to go for the jugular (c.f., your telling me I'm sounding
) paranoid).
[Bob Tolz]
For the umpteenth time, I've never said you sound paranoid. When
are you going to stop confusing me with other people?
)
) Wonder what would happen if I, as a journalist with an open
) and declared
) bias against one of the litigants in that suit rang up the
) attorneys and
) chatted them up? Wonder what Tolz would have to say about that, if I
) published my findings in this forum?
I'd say, "Thank you."
)
) While the case is pending? When you are hardly a disinterested party?
I have no stake or interest in (though I am interested in) the
outcome of the litigation.
Bob Tolz (not Robert Flannery)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.7 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:02:06 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905200148.SAA08595 lists1.best.com)
"Pandora" writes:
)Gee, Mister Kopp, NOW I remember why I removed myself from this list a year
)ago!
KOPP:
Gee, and "Pandora" never even had the benefit of the gentle correction I
have offered to other new posters such as Lisa (MomOf2Gals in Baltimore)
when they came on the list and spouted nonsense or unmitigated, canned,
regurgitated, party line Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposphical defenses.
Ummm, "Pandora", just why did you come back? Surely you hadn't heard that I
had suddenly become a fan of SWA or had developed a sugar coating, or that
I had shuffled off to meet my date with my karmic destiny?
"PANDORA"
)Do you really have nothing better to do than personally attack others
)online? You sound like a stressed-out, hormonal teenager in an unsupervised
)chatroom! "Go for the jugular," indeed!
)
)Look who's talking.
KOPP:
Stressed out? You bet. It's stressful being a rationalist in a world that
is turning into a fairy tale on the other side of the looking glass.
Hormonal teenager? Nah, I'm 55 and probably over the male menopause by now,
so it ain't hormones. Unless it's those of my son and daughter, 19 and 16,
who suffered five years of SWA educational madness before we could
disengage, and who are still suffering academically, socially, culturally,
and emotionally because of what happened to them in our Steiner school.
Don't you read the archives? Nah, I thought not. You crybabies are all
alike.
Chatroom? Unsupervised? Never use chat. As for unsupervised, yeah, I think
that's exactly why I like this list: it's totally free of the kind of mind
control your type wants to exercise on critics. Been there, done that, with
a fascist listmom named David "Lefty" Schlesinger, who ran the Waldorf list
as his pre-censored personal fiefdom of Steiner worship. (It's not much
better now. Why don't you go join that one, and try being a "Waldorf
critic" there?)
"PANDORA"
)I AM a *Waldorf critic*,
KOPP:
Really? To be a critic implies the application of some critical method
other than gee-whiz. Something like science. Something like reason.
Here are some quotes from your first post since (apparently) "returning" to
this list:
)Anthroposophical medicine does have a few weird beliefs,
)I think, but the basic approach to health is probably
)sound from a naturopathic view.
Translation: Anthroposophical medicine is proved effective by the
principles of naturopathy. In other words, one mumbo jumbo is proved by
another anti-rational, unscientific, mumbo jumbo.
)I'm not an anthroposophist, but, hey, it works for me.
Translation: I'm not into that "weird belief" system (Anthroposophy), but
my unscientific, UNCRITICAL belief in a similar "weird belief" system
(naturaopathy) is a good judge of what is or is not effective at healing.
)It seems to me that, if these Anthro people are breastfeeding
)their babies, [snip the other mumbo jumbo] it would make
)simple sense that their kids would be in some way healthier
)than those in the control group.
Translation: breastfeeding is know to have health benefits; some
Anthroposophists breastfeed their children; Anthroposophists also practice
a brand of naturopathy/homeopathy called Anthroposophical medicine; so, it
must also have health benefits like breastfeeding does.
)Using naturopathic medicine we have cured several sinus infections.
Translation: I believe that if I try something and simultaneously there is
a desirable event, it doesn't matter whether there is any scientific basis
or not for a causal link between the two, I am a better judge of what has
occured and why than those wussy old stuffed shirts who want to apply
science and reason.
Come on, "Pandora", you're about as critical a thinker as any other
new-age, gullible, wanna-believe, anti-rationalist, anti-scientific looney.
And you want _this_ CRITICS list to operate by YOUR rules and methods?
Bwaahahahahaha ....
"PANDORA
)but I am truly interested in the debate, thank you
)very much. You seem to think you speak for everyone who is skeptical of
)Waldorf that receives these e-mails. Well, you don't. I want to argue as
)much as the next guy, but why does it have to get so ugly? What is this
)list for? Is it truly a critics list where people can discuss the issues
)involved, or is it more of a private club, bitch-fest that would be more
)appropriately located in some chat room on Yahoo?
KOPP:
It gets ugly here because we ain't playing tiddlywinks, kiddo.
Anthroposophy, Anthroposophical "medicine", homeopathy, naturopathy, and
all the other new-age cults, are playing with the lives of more and more
people. They are also part of a popular anti-reason move back towards a
dark age of un-thought.
It gets ugly here because most of the critics' children have been
negatively affected by SWA, by the trickery and stealth of SWA schools. And
because the Defenders of the Faith of SWA are rock-hard and immovable in
their refusal to accept that this damage is inherent in the SWA pedagogy,
religion and philosophy, or believe that it can possibly be visited upon
large numbers of children in other schools.
It gets ugly here because the Defenders of the Faith are only interested in
the _appearance_ of reasoned discussion or debate. No defender has ever
publicly stated here that there is merit to the criticism of SWA's INHERENT
flaws, as opposed to the supposedly-isolated problems critics mention. It's
a one-sided argument, and never the twain shall meet.
But that was never the intention of this list. The critics are not out to
convert or convince any of the defenders. This list was started to discuss
critically, from OUTSIDE the belief system, the problems of SWA, and,
incidentally, to warn prospective customers and new buyers of SWA of what
they may expect in terms of potentially negative influences on their kids.
It's not a social club for people who want to politely disagree about the
weather, PANDORA (or whoever you are).
"PANDORA":
)Some of your posts - and I am directing this to all who post on this list,
)not just Michael Kopp - fairly drip with bitterness, not to mention plain
)ol' *meanness*.
)
)Now, I realize that you've been discussing a lawsuit, so I guess there's
)nothing new or surprising there, but is it really neccessary to behave as
)viciously as if it were your own personal divorce or something?
)
)Lighten up, and do try to be civil.
KOPP:
Just for the record, a check of the archives indicates that the first stone
is almost always cast by a Defender of the Faith. The archetype was the
fascist slime-slinger David "Lefty" Schlesinger, way back 3-1/2 years ago
in the first weeks of the list's existence.
It may be kaffee-klatsch schmoozing to you, "Pandora", but to many of us,
it IS as personal as a divorce, and as devastating to our lives.
"PANDORA":
)Remarks obviously designed to inflame, like "You're better at debating than
)you are at understanding or criticizing in rational terms" simply aren't
)helpful to anybody.
KOPP:
Calling me "paranoid", and many other ad hominem things, IS helpful? I
didn't see you jumping in the shit of any of the Defenders recently for
their ad hominems. Get real, "Pandora".
"PANDORA":
)Is not debate one way to understanding? I find this
)brand of 'criticizing' abhorrent. Please, let's stick to the debate,
)instead of descending to spiteful name-calling. If you want people to
)listen to your opinions, you need to remember they probably *won't* listen
)if you scream in their faces (literally or figuratively).
KOPP:
Tell that to the freedom riders of Selma or the anti-Vietnam-war
protesters. We calls 'em as we sees 'em, "Pandora", and nobody, including
you, is exempt. If you think I or the other critics are "screaming", then
maybe you should look over our shoulders and see the problems we're
screaming about.
"PANDORA":
)I can't find any other site or list to discuss Waldorf in a critical light,
)but I simply don't have the stomach for this personal attack crap. I've
)been back exactly one day and I've already begun to think that you folks
)are just as crazy as the Antrhopops!
KOPP:
Ummm, what, exactly, was your complaint, again, "Pandora"? What did I call
Robert Tolz that was such a personal attack? How do you generalize to the
entire group of critics from one supposed ad hominem on my part?
You're right about one thing, "Pandora": there isn't any other place in all
of the SWA realm where there is any _critical_ discussion of SWA.
May I respectfully suggest -- as I suggest with all the other newbies and
fragile flowers who come here and complain about the robustness of our
language -- that you go and read the archives before you start shotgunning
us loudmouths.
Maybe then you'll have some true understanding of the critics' criticisms.
Of course, if you'd stayed with us for the last year, you'd have that
anyway.
Welcome back, and please don't hesitate to drop in your two cents' worth
any time you want to demonstrate your brand of "criticism" again. It
certainly adds to the evidence for the view that Anthropops (and all other
new-agers) are, as you put it, "crazy".
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.8 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 21:49:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob Tolz asks"
)
) So, to sum up, you believe it's irrelevant to your lawsuit whether
)or not the pedagogy has a secular purpose, correct?
Well, it's not *my* lawsuit. The suit isn't even *aimed* at my former school
site. But, as to your question: For one thing, I don't believe that Waldorf
education has a "secular purpose." Whatever Waldorf offers that may appear,
at first glance. to have a secular purpose, is offered by institutions that
can legally deliver the same information to public schools, sans the
religious indoctrination. When I attended RSC the instructors, particularly
Betty Staley, took care to mention with tremendous frequency that Waldorf
was the only teaching method that . . . blah, blah, blah . . . fill in the
blanks. But, I had been utilizing techniques akin to those taught at RSC for
a number of years. Teaching and reteaching is not a concept held only by
Waldorf teachers, nor is the integration of art and music across the
curriculum, or utilizing movement and rhythm to reinforce mathematical
concepts. Oral language has been stressed in California for years (much to
the dismay of current phonics enthusiasts that point to low reading scores
as being the direct result of whole and oral lanaguage based education). The
difference between the pedagogical practices I was initially introduced to
at a state university and those I was introduced to at RSC are, primarily,
the Anthroposophy. In other words, why attend classes offered by a religious
sect, when similar but more suitable classes in similar techniques can be
had less than 10 miles away at an accredited university?
I believe part of RSC's financial boon re: training public school teachers,
is that there is a serious teacher shortage in the US, particularly
California. Thousands upon thousands of people are being issued emergency
credentials and have not attended teaching training programs or they have
attended ones that are very short in duration and content. They are then
cast adrift in the classroom. What RSC has to offer looks very enticing on
first glance. I was quite enticed by the lovely art and those wonderful
books. Most of these folks don't notice there is something a tad amiss at
RSC - gosh knows they aren't informed that it is a religious institution or
even that it is an Anthroposophical institution or even what Anthroposophy
is. They aren't discriminating - they haven't any basis for comparison. So,
indeed, the pedagogy *appears* to be secular in nature. It takes a while to
catch on when the necessary information is being withheld.
I think it would be wonderful if public school teacher training money was
spent on accredited programs for developing professional pedagogical
practices, sans any religious influence. Our public educational system is
not supposed to give sway to any particular religious belief system, and
this line is crossed when the pedagogy is based on a religious belief
system, such as Anthroposophy.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 06:41:32 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
) When an individual family declines to immunize its children, those
)children still get all the benefits of immunization (because all their
)comrades are immunized),
If this is so, perhaps you could explain something. Presumably the
"benefits of immunization" include immunity from the disease (in fact,
I'd be interested to know what other benefits you suggest that
immunisation confers)? If that is so, why is it that unimmunised
children (immunisation is still voluntary in this country) still get
measles, pertussis, etc.?
) with none of the risks, because the risks are
)passed on to those families who accept the immunization. From a spiritual
)standpoint refusing immunization may be desirable, but from a societal
)standpoint it is unethical.
Your argument is flawed if your premise that non-immunisers are seeking
the benefits is false. If the non-immunisers are seeking to forgo both
the risks *and* the benefits (and I suggest that it is demonstrable that
they are), your argument falls over. They are merely exercising one of
the few freedoms remaining in an increasingly regulated society.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1316.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 17:17:34 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905200302.UAA21236 lists1.best.com)
Robert TOLZ (well, maybe it was Robert Tolz, who can tell?) said:
)) -----Original Message-----
)) From: Michael Kopp [mailto:mkopp xtra.co.nz]
)
)) instinct to go for the jugular (c.f., your telling me I'm sounding
)) paranoid).
)
)[Bob Tolz]
) For the umpteenth time, I've never said you sound paranoid. When
)are you going to stop confusing me with other people?
)
) Bob Tolz (not Robert Flannery)
KOPP:
When you stop sounding like someone else? How do we know you're not Robert
Flannery ghost-writing? (Or is that "spirit-writing", in Anthropop terms?)
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp (until sundown, maybe)
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1316 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1317 --------------
001 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
007 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Summary Judgment Motion
008 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Summary Judgment Motion
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.1 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 08:33:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com) (199905200542.WAA02907 lists1.best.com)
Stephen wrote:
) They are merely exercising one of
) the few freedoms remaining in an increasingly regulated society.
Yes.
On a side note, read "The end of privacy. The surveillance society", a
three page editorial column in The Economist, May 1st 1999, p 19-23.
Big Brother, the total information control of all we do as the basis for
total behavioral control is rapidly approaching. Some happy future.
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.n1317.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 00:22:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905191428.HAA24128 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905191615.JAA14486 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo, you wrote,
)In California, summary judgment is handled a bit differently from
)federal courts. Basically, it's considerably more difficult to prevail
)on a summary judgment motion in California court. I'm not very
)familiar with federal court procedure, as I've never practiced in
)federal court, but in California courts, a defendant can only prevail
)on a summary judgment motion by showing that either (a) the
)plaintiff cannot meet an element of the cause of action, or (b) an
)affirmative defense applies under the undisputed facts.
We're not in a California court. It's a federal case.
-Dan Dugan
Dan Dugan Sound Design _/_/_/_/_/_/ Automatic Microphone Mixers
290 Napoleon St.#E USA _/ _/_/ _/ Nagra Sales and Service
San Francisco,CA 94124 _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ Custom CDs for Performance
voice (415) 821-9776 _/ _/_/ _/ E-mail dan dandugan.com
fax (415) 826-7699 _/_/_/_/_/_/ http://www.dandugan.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.3 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 06:39:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Alan S. Fine MD [mailto:asf peakpeak.com]
)
) . When an individual family declines to immunize its children, those
) children still get all the benefits of immunization (because all their
) comrades are immunized), with none of the risks, because the risks are
) passed on to those families who accept the immunization.
) From a spiritual
) standpoint refusing immunization may be desirable, but from a societal
) standpoint it is unethical.
)
Now *that's* an interesting point which I have never heard before.
Do you have any references to which you can point me?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.4 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:20:24 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905201036.DAA04332 lists1.best.com)
Alan Fine wrote:
)) From a spiritual standpoint refusing immunization may be desirable, but
))from )) a societal standpoint it is unethical.
Bob Tolz wrote:
)
) Now *that's* an interesting point which I have never heard before.
)Do you have any references to which you can point me?
It's quite simple. Refusing to get recommended shots from the doctor is
part of this "anthroposphical lifestyle," which is immoral - just like the
"long haired lifestyle." As a hairy anthropop, I know I'm in a lot of
trouble.
Cheers
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:44:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Michael Kopp [mailto:mkopp xtra.co.nz]
) )
) )[Bob Tolz]
) ) For the umpteenth time, I've never said you sound
) paranoid. When
) )are you going to stop confusing me with other people?
) )
) ) Bob Tolz (not Robert Flannery)
)
)
) KOPP:
)
) When you stop sounding like someone else? How do we know
) you're not Robert
) Flannery ghost-writing? (Or is that "spirit-writing", in
) Anthropop terms?)
Tell you what. Why don't you come over to New York in the fall when
Dan Dugan is scheduled to stop by. Flannery and I will stand side by side
so that you can see that we are not the same person (I'll be the one with
the beard). You can devise any test you like to assure yourself that each
of us is the person we hold ourselves out to be. In turn, we may wish to
devise some tests to make sure that you and Dan are not one and the same
person, since you both sound so much alike.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:44:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: ksutphen [mailto:ksutphen jps.net]
)
) Well, it's not *my* lawsuit. The suit isn't even *aimed* at
) my former school
) site. But, as to your question: For one thing, I don't
) believe that Waldorf
) education has a "secular purpose."
Offering an education is not a secular purpose?
) Whatever Waldorf offers
) that may appear,
) at first glance. to have a secular purpose, is offered by
) institutions that
) can legally deliver the same information to public schools, sans the
) religious indoctrination.
The fact that other institutions can deliver education sans
religious indoctrination does not detract from the defendants' potential
argument that they offer the same thing. I would expect them to argue (and
I know you disagree with this) that they can and do offer education without
religious indoctrination.
) When I attended RSC the
) instructors, particularly
) Betty Staley, took care to mention with tremendous frequency
) that Waldorf
) was the only teaching method that . . . blah, blah, blah . .
) . fill in the
) blanks. But, I had been utilizing techniques akin to those
) taught at RSC for
) a number of years.
Then your argument is that the Waldorf method, contrary to what its
exponents portray, does not have exclusive ownership of the techniques and
results it claims. Again, that does not detract from the defendants'
probable argument that they offer education to the children; in fact, your
comments reaffirm their argument.
) In other words, why attend classes offered
) by a religious
) sect, when similar but more suitable classes in similar
) techniques can be
) had less than 10 miles away at an accredited university?
Again, you are potentially reaffirming the argument. The training
is similar, just not "suitable" in your judgment.
)
) I think it would be wonderful if public school teacher
) training money was
) spent on accredited programs for developing professional pedagogical
) practices, sans any religious influence. Our public
) educational system is
) not supposed to give sway to any particular religious belief
) system, and
) this line is crossed when the pedagogy is based on a religious belief
) system, such as Anthroposophy.
Your comments lead me to believe that one of things you find most
objectionable is that RSC is economically benefitting, since you feel it is
a religious instituiton. Would you feel differently if there were a
state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the Waldorf pedagogy?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.7 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:27:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Scott Kendall, PLANS' attorney, was kind enough to mail me a copy of the
"Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for
Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, Summary Adjudication of Issues."
The date for hearing or submitting the motion appears to be June 4, 1999.
I haven't reviewed it yet, but I thought I'd give my listmates a heads-up.
There are five points to the legal argument:
A. Summary Judgment is Appropriate in This Case
B. Plaintiff Does Not Have Standing
C. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment Has Not Been Violated
1. School Districts have broad discretion in the operation of their
schools
2. The Lemon Test
a. The operation of Waldorf Methods schools has a secular
purpose.
b. The use of Waldorf Methods does not have the primary
effect of advancing religion.
D. Defendants have not violated Cal. Const. Art. XVI, Section 5
E. Defendants have not violated Cal. Const. Art. IX, Section 8
The headings under point C seem to be similar to the opinions I've
been expressing in discussions with Kathy S., Steve P. and others here on
the list.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.8 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 04:36:04 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905201340.GAA11297 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz says:
) Your comments lead me to believe that one of things you find most
)objectionable is that RSC is economically benefitting, since you feel it is
)a religious instituiton. Would you feel differently if there were a
)state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
)teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the Waldorf pedagogy?
Michael KOPP:
As we have seen through innumerable quotes from Steiner himself, and his
cult members all down the years since his canonization, there IS *NO*
secular aspect to Waldorf pedagogy. There is nothing at all in anything
Steiner propounded, or is followers have practiced, which is not for a
religious (spiritualistic) reason. As the Waldorf people say, if you take
out the thing that makes Waldorf Waldorf (i.e., the religion of
Anthroposophy, Steiner's remanufactured middle-ages mumbo jumbo) IT AIN'T
WALDORF ANYMORE. I do hope that the PLANS court case will settle this hash
once and for all, so disingenuous Defenders of the Faith can stop trying to
deflect attention from the clearly religious nature of their enterprise by
such dissembling as above.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1317.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:08:46 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905201624.JAA14501 lists1.best.com)
On 20 May 99, at 12:27, Tolz, Robert wrote:
) D. Defendants have not violated Cal. Const. Art. XVI, Section 5
Which reads:
Neither the Legislature, nor any county, city and county, township,
school district, or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an
appropriation, or pay from any public fund whatever, or grant
anything to or in aid of any religious sect, church, creed, or
sectarian purpose, or help to support or sustain any school,
college, university, hospital, or other institution controlled by any
religious creed, church, or sectarian denomination whatever; nor
shall any grant or donation of personal property or real estate ever
be made by the state, or any city, city and county, town, or other
municipal corporation for any religious creed, church, or sectarian
purpose whatever; provided, that nothing in this section shall
prevent the Legislature granting aid pursuant to Section 3 of Article
XVI.
) E. Defendants have not violated Cal. Const. Art. IX, Section 8
Which reads:
8. No public money shall ever be appropriated for the support of
any sectarian or denominational school, or any school not under
the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools; nor shall
any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, or instruction
thereon be permitted, directly or indirectly, in any of the common
schools of this State.
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.n1317.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:28:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199905191615.JAA14486 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905200724.AAA23966 lists1.best.com)
On 20 May 99, at 0:22, Dan Dugan wrote:
) We're not in a California court. It's a federal case.
Thanks. I didn't realize that.
That changes some things with respect to the precedential effect.
First, if the matter goes to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, any
decision will be binding on all federal courts in the Ninth Circuit,
which includes California and other states in the Western U.S. It
would not be binding on other federal courts unless it goes to the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Unless it goes to the Supreme Court, the decision is not binding in
California state courts, even as to matters of federal law. A
California trial court might find the opinion of the federal Court of
Appeal persuasive on a matter of federal law, but the state court is
not bound by the decision of any federal court except the U.S.
Supreme Court.
(Of course, if it is not appealed to the Ninth Circuit, it is not binding
on any other court.)
Now, the state constitutional claims may be stronger than the
federal claim, since Article XVI, section 5, of the California
Constitution is considerably more specific than the Establishment
Clause of the federal constitution. But a federal court decision on
the interpretation of the California Constitution is not binding on any
state court. That includes a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.
In other words, a California trial court is free to ignore a decision of
the U.S. Supreme Court to the extent that the U.S. Supreme Court
is ruling on an issue of California law.
So this case, if appealed, could result in a binding precedent
regarding the constitutionality of a public Waldorf School with
respect to the federal constitution. It cannot, though, result in
precedent regarding the constitutionality of a public Waldorf school
with respect to the California Constitution which would be binding in
California state courts.
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
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1317 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1318 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
003 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Summary Judgment Motion
006 - Daniel Sabsay (danielsabs - Benveniste to cooperate in homeopathy test
007 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
008 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
009 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Summary Judgment Motion
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:48:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Michael Kopp [mailto:mkopp xtra.co.nz]
) Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 12:36 PM
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
)
)
) Robert Tolz says:
)
) ) Your comments lead me to believe that one of things you
) find most
) )objectionable is that RSC is economically benefitting, since
) you feel it is
) )a religious instituiton. Would you feel differently if there were a
) )state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
) )teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the
) Waldorf pedagogy?
)
) Michael KOPP:
)
) As we have seen through innumerable quotes from Steiner
) himself, and his
) cult members all down the years since his canonization, there IS *NO*
) secular aspect to Waldorf pedagogy. There is nothing at all
) in anything
) Steiner propounded, or is followers have practiced, which is not for a
) religious (spiritualistic) reason. As the Waldorf people say,
) if you take
) out the thing that makes Waldorf Waldorf (i.e., the religion of
) Anthroposophy, Steiner's remanufactured middle-ages mumbo
) jumbo) IT AIN'T
) WALDORF ANYMORE. I do hope that the PLANS court case will
) settle this hash
) once and for all, so disingenuous Defenders of the Faith can
) stop trying to
) deflect attention from the clearly religious nature of their
) enterprise by
) such dissembling as above.
)
)
) Cheers from Godzone,
)
) Michael Kopp
) Wellington, New Zealand
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:00:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Sorry folks for the entire repetition of Michael's comment in the
post I just sent. The "Send" button on Outlook is in the same position as
the "Reply" button. Click on reply once to get start replying, then if the
finger slips onto the mouse button to quickly, you've got an immediate send.
Anyhow...
[Michael Kopp]
)
) As we have seen through innumerable quotes from Steiner
) himself, and his
) cult members all down the years since his canonization, there IS *NO*
) secular aspect to Waldorf pedagogy. There is nothing at all
) in anything
) Steiner propounded, or is followers have practiced, which is not for a
) religious (spiritualistic) reason. As the Waldorf people say,
) if you take
) out the thing that makes Waldorf Waldorf (i.e., the religion of
) Anthroposophy, Steiner's remanufactured middle-ages mumbo
) jumbo) IT AIN'T
) WALDORF ANYMORE.
I'm sure many Waldorf supporters would vehemently agree with you.
There are others who don't.
There are non-anthroposophical, non-spiritual folks who like the
Waldorf method for what it is on its face, regardless of or in spite of
whatever mumbo-jumbo you may find in its underpinnings. These people are
defending the wide discretion that a school ordinarily has to implement
policies which on their face serve a secular purpose. This appears to be
one of the main contentions of the defendant school districts in the summary
judgment motion.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.3 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 17:41:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In communities where immunization is practiced routinely, most of the
benefit is derived from eliminating the vector of transmission. It is
virtually impossible for an individual, anthroposophist or otherwise to
contract small pox in England. But this benefit was derived from those many
individuals willing to accept some risk and get immunized. Immunization
must be a community effort if it is to succeed. Regardless of their
intentions, those who do not participate in a community immunization are
self centered, benefitting from the sacrifice of their community, and
giving none in return. I am frankly surprised that a spiritual movement so
absorbed in the concept of love should espouse the fundamentally non loving
and selfish viewpoint that refusing to participate in a community
immunization is the proper thing to do.
Alan S. Fine MD
-
)Your argument is flawed if your premise that non-immunisers are seeking
)the benefits is false. If the non-immunisers are seeking to forgo both
)the risks *and* the benefits (and I suggest that it is demonstrable that
)they are), your argument falls over. They are merely exercising one of
)the few freedoms remaining in an increasingly regulated society.
)
)
)Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
)Stephen
)
)--
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
)+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
)+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 01:13:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905201340.GAA11297 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz, you wrote,
)Would you feel differently if there were a
)state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
)teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the Waldorf pedagogy?
What are the secular aspects of Waldorf padagogy? Real qualities, not vague
generalizations like "developmentally appropriate." I'm sure there are
some, I'd like to hear your list.
If there were such a teacher training institution, what literature would it
draw on to support its curriculum?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 01:28:23 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905201624.JAA14501 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905201710.KAA14949 lists1.best.com)
(California Constitution)
)8. No public money shall ever be appropriated for the support of
)any sectarian or denominational school, or any school not under
)the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools;
It seems to me that that last clause would rule out charter schools; how do
they get around that?
)nor shall
)any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, or instruction
)thereon be permitted, directly or indirectly, in any of the common
)schools of this State.
That's pretty damn clear. Any sectarian doctrine...directly or indirectly.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.6 ---------------
From: Daniel Sabsay (danielsabsay pacbell.net)
Subject: Benveniste to cooperate in homeopathy test
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 02:22:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is excerpted from the SI Electronic Digest (e-list)
published biweekly by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of
Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP.) Visit http://www.csicop.org/. --
Daniel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
HOMEOPATHY VIA E-MAIL?
A copper coil is wrapped around a bottle of homepathic solution.
Electromagnetic signals from the solution set up a current in the coil.
Current variations are digitized and transmitted to a second, distant
coil. Can signals from that coil turn pure water into a homeopathic
solution?
Leon Jaroff of TIME magazine covers the question in the May 17 issue.
According to the article, Physicist Robert Park of the American Physical
Society and Nobel prize winner Brian Josephson are close to agreeing on a
protocol for a double blind test of homeopathy over the Internet.
As TIME reports, Park and Josephson would test homeopathy proponent
Jacques Beneviste's latest claim "that the 'memory' of water in a
homeopathic solution has an electormagnetic 'signature.' This signature,
he says, can be captured by a copper coil, digitized and transmitted by
wire--or, for extra flourish, over the Internet--to a container of
ordinary water, converting it to a homepathic solution."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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.n1318.7 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 05:53:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
(199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905200542.WAA02907 lists1.best.com)
Dear Stephen:
I have the new book but have inadvertently deleted your mailing address.
Could you please resend?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.8 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 07:34:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905200542.WAA02907 lists1.best.com)
(199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
(199905200300.UAA20149 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905210944.CAA02078 lists1.best.com)
)Dear Stephen:
)
)I have the new book but have inadvertently deleted your mailing address.
)Could you please resend?
)
)
)
)Robert Flannery
)New York
)litvas icu.com
Apologies to the list for private correspondence misrouted. It was meant
for Stephen Tonkin.
The error may be relevant--the book I'm referring to is the new Edelglass
title, available now from Parker Courtney Press: "Sensible Physics
Teaching", a class 6, 7, and 8 physics curriculum.
"This book guides middle school teachers through sense-based science
pedagogy in step-by-step fashion with a carefully developed sequence of
experiments, described in detail and easy to follow. Apparatus kits are
available from AWSNA for each class."
152 pages, $16.75
To order, send a check to
Parker Courtney Press
307 Hungry Hollow Road
Chestnut Ridge, NY 10977
Include $3.50 for one book, and $1 for each additional book for shipping.
Orders to NY state require sales tax. Parker Courtney accepts
Mastercard/Visa.
Inquiries: Information about phenomenological science, mathematics
instruction, model-making kits, and related topics can be obtained through
the Science and Mathematics Association for Research and Teaching by
writing to Parker Courtney Press at the above address.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.9 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:23:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Dan Dugan [mailto:dan dandugan.com]
)
)
) Robert Tolz, you wrote,
)
) )Would you feel differently if there were a
) )state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
) )teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the
) Waldorf pedagogy?
)
[Dan Dugan]
) What are the secular aspects of Waldorf padagogy? Real
) qualities, not vague
) generalizations like "developmentally appropriate." I'm sure there are
) some, I'd like to hear your list.
[Bob Tolz]
C'mon, Dan. You know the list without my help: Not pushing for
reading as quickly as other methods; teacher staying with children for more
than one year; heavy emphasis on art. I'm sure there are more which could
be listed.
[Dan Dugan]
)
) If there were such a teacher training institution, what
) literature would it
) draw on to support its curriculum?
)
[Bob Tolz]
I have no idea. That's for people qualified in public education to
determine.
My questions were posed to Kathy in order to understand the heart of
her arguments and objections against Waldorf in the public schools, not to
argue about whether or not it is *possible*.
I'll pose the same question to you to refocus this discussion,
because I think this is an important legal issue, one which I'm sure will be
sharply argued in the PLANS litigation.
Suppose (1) there are specific educational methods which a school
district determines to be advisable for the teaching of its children, and
(2) those educational methods just happen to be more or less consistent
(either by accident or design) with anthroposophically-based Waldorf
methods, and (3) all teacher instruction in these methods is provided not by
RSC but by the California State University system.
Assuming all the foregoing to be true, do you have an objection?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1318.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 08:53:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905201710.KAA14949 lists1.best.com)
(199905201624.JAA14501 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905210840.BAA13492 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo:
))nor shall
))any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, or instruction
))thereon be permitted, directly or indirectly, in any of the common
))schools of this State.
Dan Dugan:
)That's pretty damn clear. Any sectarian doctrine...directly or indirectly.
I hope the judge pays particular attention to the required texts for the
Waldorf teacher training program at RSC., presented as part of PLANS
opposition. Text books such as 'Occult Science', 'The Spiritual
Hierarches', 'Christianity as Mystical Fact', 'Education of the Child in
the Light of Spiritual Science', 'Manifestation of Karma', 'Reincarnation
and Karma' (and the list goes on...) just may sound an alarm.
Debra
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1318 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1319 --------------
001 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Summarizing Summary Judgment (Long and a bit technical)
003 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Summary Judgment Motion
005 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
006 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - RE: Summary Judgment Motion
007 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Benveniste to cooperate in homeopathy test
008 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
009 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Summary Judgment Motion
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.1 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 09:22:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
On 20 May 99, at 17:41, Alan S. Fine MD wrote:
) I am frankly surprised that a spiritual movement so absorbed in the
) concept of love should espouse the fundamentally non loving and
) selfish viewpoint that refusing to participate in a community
) immunization is the proper thing to do.
"Selfish" and "unloving" are words that refer to a person's
motivation, not to their actions. If they don't agree that community
immunization is a good thing, their refusal to participate is not
unethical or selfish.
Suppose they believe (and I think this is close to the truth) that
immunization robs kids of the opportunity to get such diseases as
pertussis and measles, and that such diseases are good for the
child's development. Children who do not get such diseases are
likely to develop emotional and even physical problems later in life,
and much of the crime, depression, and dissatisfaction in our
modern society, as well as much of the heart disease, cancer, and
other "modern" diseases with which we are afflicted, are the result
of widespread immunization.
Someone with such a belief may be wrong, but that does not mean
they are selfish or unloving.
Plus, there are significant differences of opinion in the health field
as to which vaccines are worth the risks. In different countries,
different health professionals have set different standards.
I'm not up on all the issues, but if I'm not mistaken, there is some
question as to whether the chicken pox vaccine confers as good an
immunity as the disease. Since the disease is relatively benign,
and the consequences of contracting chicken pox during the early
stages of pregnancy are severe, it might make more sense to avoid
the vaccine in hopes that the girl will get the disease as a child,
rather than take the risk that the immunity will wear off in 20 or 30
years, before she gets pregnant. Someone who makes such a
choice is not unethical, selfish, or unloving in any way. It's merely
a difference of opinion.
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.n1319.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Summarizing Summary Judgment (Long and a bit technical)
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:29:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
The purpose of this post is to summarize the summary judgment
arguments made by the defendants in the PLANS case. I presume that this
subject matter is of more than passing interest to the readers of this list,
so I will take the liberty of providing a fairly lengthy and somewhat
technical description. I figure that if I can obtain enjoyment from
technical but popularized descriptions of quantum physics, others can obtain
similar enjoyment from scarfing up a somewhat technical, but I hope not
overbearingly technical, legal blow by blow in the PLANS case against public
Waldorf.
For the uninformed, PLANS has sued in Federal court to prohibit the
use of Waldorf methods in two California schools. Now, after time for
depositions and other discovery, but prior to trial, the defendant school
districts have filed a motion (a "summary judgment") motion, to have the
case kicked out of court. PLANS' attorney, Scott Kendall, was kind enough
to provide me a copy with the plaintiffs' written arguments.
I'll refrain from interjecting any editorial comments other than to
provide some assistance where a technical term might be too confusing for
non-lawyers. If and when I receive a copy of the plaintiff's responding
papers, I'll do the same. Where an argument is made in the text below, it
is not my argument -- it is the argument of the defendants' counsel; so
don't kill the messenger. I've faxed a copy of the document to Steve Premo,
so he's certainly welcome to chime in to correct anything I say.
Although the following may seem long, rest assured that it could
have been much longer.
Plaintiff does not seek damages but rather seeks only injunctive and
declaratory relief. As such, defendants claim that the court should only
consider the current program at each school for the 1998-1999 school year.
"Although Defendants vehemently deny any past violations of constitutional
law, what may or may not have happend in the past is not at issue."
Now, the facts.
In any case, the presentation of the facts is critical. There are a
number of assertions which the defendants make in their memorandum which are
labeled "Undisputed Facts." I do not know exactly how undisputed these are,
since I know that several of them might be disputed on this list. I would
not be the least surprised if PLANS' attorney's responsive papers make
different factual allegations.
In any event, here are some of the "Undisputed Facts" which I
thought were most critical to what the defendants are trying to argue in
their memorandum:
* In Waldorf education the arts are integrated into all subjects,
even math and science, as a way of creatively teaching children the
substantive concepts.
* In selecting Waldorf methods as its focus, the Oak Ridge school
(now known as John Morse) wanted to further the district's desegregation
palan, provide an innovative learning environment for its students, promote
creativity, improve reading skills, and provide a caring environment for the
students.
* When Rudolf Steiner College created the teacher training program
for the John Morse teachers in 1994, they carefully and intentionally
excluded all topics of a spiritual, religious, or Anthroposophical nature
knowing that the training had to be completely secular to be acceptable for
public school teachers. The purpose of the training program is to train
public school teachers in the use of Waldorf methods in delivering their
curriculum to public school children.
* The John Morse teachers did not receive instruction in
Anthroposophy from Rudolf Steiner College. Anthroposophy is not a part of
the curriculum at John Morse, nor is it taught to students at John Morse.
* Plaintiff is not familiar with the current curriculum at John
Morse. Plaintiff has never visited John Morse. Plaintiff has not observed
classroom instruction at John Morse. Plaintiff has not spoken with parents
of students at John Morse. Plaintiff has not spoken with the teachers at
John Morse.
* Twin Ridges (now known as Yuba River Charter School) uses Waldorf
methods because the district believed that a school using Waldorf methods
would fulfill the goals of providing area residents with an alternative form
of education which was both innovative and academically challenging.
* Anthroposophy is not a part of the curriculum at Yuba River nor
is it taught to students.
* Debra Snell, president of PLANS, had two children enrolled at
Twin Ridges (the predecessor to Yuba River). Her children left that school
in 1996. Ms. Snell has not spoken with any teachers, observed any classroom
instruction, nor seen the curriculum of the Yuba River school.
* Plaintiff is not familiar with the current curriculum at Yuba
River, has not visited the school, has not observed classroom instruction
and has not spoken with teachers at Yuba River.
A. The "standing" issue.
Defendants indicate that "[p]laintiff's only basis for standing is
the taxpayer status of its members."
The term "standing" refers to the right of a litigant to come into
court and have a grievance heard. For instance, one of the more famous
Supreme Court musings about standing came when the late Justice William
Douglas gave serious consideration to whether a tree ought to have standing
regarding issues of environmental impact.
Although a failure of a plaintiff to have standing does not reach
the merits of an issue, it is just as fatal to the plaintiff's case as a
loss on the merits, except that someone who does meet the requirements for
standing could later bring a similar case.
Defendants argue that the plaintiff has failed to allege or
demonstrate the significant requirements for standing as a state taxpayer,
notably that the complained-of behavior caused an economic harm to the
school budget and that there was economic harm to the plaintiff. Defendants
argue that "in order to have standing plaintiff must allege facts sufficient
to establish that one or more of its members has suffered, or is threatened
with, an injury other than their belief that the programs violate the
Constitution."
B. The Federal Constitutional issues.
The following will liberally quote from the defendants' memorandum
in support of the summary judgment motion. I'm not going to use quotation
marks, but understand that the entire argument (regardless of whether or not
I agree) is the defendants' argument, not mine.
Point one under this heading is that local school boards have broad
discretion in the management of schools. Judicial supervision of public
education is limited to the resolutions of conflicts that clearly involve
constitutional issues.
Both school districts made the informed decision to adopt Waldorf
methods as their curriculum based upon important secular reasons: the needs
of their students. These decisions should not be usurped by the court when
the Establishment Clause has not been violated.
In order to make out a case for a violation of the Establishment
Clause, the Supreme Court case of Lemon v. Kurtzman holds that plaintiff
must allege facts showing that the use of Waldorf methods (1) has no secular
purpose, (2) that its primary effect advances religion and (3) that the
activity fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion.
As to part (1) of the test, the operation of a Waldorf methods
school has a secular purpose. Though plaintiff's complaint alleges that the
primary purpose of said operation is to advance religion, it pleads no facts
supporting this allegation. The Supreme Court has invalidated governmental
action on the ground that a secular purpose was lacking *only* when it has
concluded that there was no question that the statute or activity was
*motivated wholly* by religious considerations. The legal test is whether
the government's actual purpose is to endorse or disapprove of religion.
Here, no such religious purpose exists. There is no question that each
district adopted the Waldorf methods program as their curriculum for the
entirely non-religious (i.e. secular) purpose of educating the children in a
creative and alternative manner. The purpose of the Waldorf methods in
these schools is not to endorse a religion, but simply to educate the
children. Any religious references are trivial.
As to part (2) of the test.... Assuming for purposes of this
argument only, that Anthroposophy is a religion, plaintiff must prove that
the districts' use of Waldorf methods has the "primary" effect of advancing
the religion of Anthroposophy. The relevant inquiry is whether the
government's action actually conveys a message of endorsement of religion in
general or of a particular religion. The proper analysis is whether an
objective observer in the position of an elementary school student would
perceive a message of endorsement of Anthroposophy in the use of Waldorf
methods. This analysis permits, for example, the study of the Protestant
Reformation and Greek mythology, because their study does not promote or
advance them.
Here, the children are not taught Anthroposophy nor is it even
mentioned in any part of the curriculum. Plaintiff has not offered any
evidence to the contrary. Plaintiff has no evidence at all about what is
being taught at the schools at issue. As such, its case rests solely on
speculation and conjecture.
Thus it would be illogical that an objective observer in the
position of an elementary student would perceive a message of endorsement of
Anthroposophy in the use of Waldorf methods.
Plaintiff cannot prove either of the first two prongs of the Lemon
test and plaintiff has made no allegations regarding the third prong.
Therefore, it cannot prove a violation of the Establishment Clause.
C. California Constitutional Issues
The defendants memo on these points is very brief, no pun intended.
With Steve Premo being a California lawyer, I'll leave it to him to make
comments here if he so desires.
That's it for me. My fingers need a rest.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.3 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 09:29:04 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905211622.JAA22828 mail.cruzio.com)
On 21 May 99, at 9:22, I wrote:
) Suppose they believe (and I think this is close to the truth) that
) immunization robs kids of the opportunity to get such diseases as
) pertussis and measles . . .
Just to clarify, I mean that I think that many Anthroposophists
actually do believe something like that about immunization. I don't
mean that I agree with that belief!
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.n1319.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:36:16 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Dan Dugan [mailto:dan dandugan.com]
) (California Constitution)
) )8. No public money shall ever be appropriated for the support of
) )any sectarian or denominational school, or any school not under
) )the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools;
)
) It seems to me that that last clause would rule out charter
) schools; how do
) they get around that?
)
) )nor shall
) )any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, or instruction
) )thereon be permitted, directly or indirectly, in any of the common
) )schools of this State.
)
) That's pretty damn clear. Any sectarian doctrine...directly
) or indirectly.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
As I've mentioned in another post, Steve Premo is much more
qualified than I to speak to the California issues. But:
) That's pretty damn clear. Any sectarian doctrine...directly
) or indirectly.
Things are never as clear as they sometimes seem, particularly in
legal issues. In fact, whenever I read or hear an attorney arguing to a
judge that something is perfectly clear, my antennae perk up (and I betcha
Steve Premo's antennae act in exactly the same way), because those words are
an indication that the attorney is not so sure that the logic and facts are
sufficient to carry the arguments and that an additional amount of
bull-****-dozing is required. There is absolutely no additional weight
which can be given to an argument simply because some lawyer expresses the
opinion that what he believes is perfectly clear. Heck, it *couldn't* be
perfectly clear, or otherwise there wouldn't be an argument being made on
the other side.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.5 ---------------
From: "Duane Koons" (dkoons gundluth.org)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:16:09 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Steve I believe you are correct in describing a commonly held
anthroposophical rational opposing immunization. Many parents drawn to WE
already have fears about immunizations and the anthroposophical view is
therefore deemed tolerable. Yet I don't see them actively seeking out
disease experiences for their children's benefit (other than perhaps
chicken pox). I do agree with Dr. Fine's general premise that
anti-immunization adherents are taking a free ride and benefiting from herd
immunity. These same parents would likely have been first in line when the
vaccines for polio came out as they would perceive the risk benefit ratio
differently when living in an era where parents lived in fear that a
seemingly innocuous fever in there child could develop weeks later into a
life threatening and permanently altering disease.
As a physician I find it peculiar the need to romanticize illness related
suffering. I'm sure the parent and child are permanently and profoundly
altered by the experience of a life-threatening infectious illness such as
Haemophillus influenza meningitis. I held several of these children in my
arms as a resident in the mid 1980s. Those parents would surely say they
would rather have avoided the experience altogether. Fortunately the rate
of invasive H. Flu infections has dropped more than 95% since the
widespread use of the vaccine in the late 1980s. I seriously question the
wisdom of parents who have some romantic notion that these types of illness
are good for the child. It goes to show haw easy life has become.
Speaking of misinterpretations of statistical reality, most parents who
oppose immunizations do not have children in waldorf schools and may not
have even heard of them. I know the critics like to hold waldorf schools
accountable for much of the nonsense in the world today but I think in this
situation its a larger problem
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.6 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: RE: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:10:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905211633.JAA02019 lists1.best.com)
On 21 May 99, at 12:36, Tolz, Robert wrote:
) ) From: Dan Dugan [mailto:dan dandugan.com]
)
) ) That's pretty damn clear. Any sectarian doctrine...directly
) ) or indirectly.
)
) Things are never as clear as they sometimes seem, particularly in
) legal issues. In fact, whenever I read or hear an attorney arguing to a
) judge that something is perfectly clear, my antennae perk up (and I betcha
) Steve Premo's antennae act in exactly the same way) . . .
Heck, not only do my antennae perk up, but sometimes I laugh out
loud!
Just the other day I was reviewing a motion on a matter of first
impression, i.e., an issue for which there is no legal precedent.
One of the attorneys was accusing the other of boldly asking the
court to make new law. He neglected to mention, though, that the
court would be making new law either way, since it's a matter of
first impression! It was funny to me, not only because of the
silliness of his argument, but also because of the vehemence with
which it was presented.
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.n1319.7 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Benveniste to cooperate in homeopathy test
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 18:25:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905210920.CAA25493 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905210920.CAA25493 lists1.best.com)
Daniel Sabsay (danielsabsay pacbell.net) wrote:
)As TIME reports, Park and Josephson would test homeopathy proponent
)Jacques Beneviste's latest claim "that the 'memory' of water in a
)homeopathic solution has an electormagnetic 'signature.' This signature,
)he says, can be captured by a copper coil, digitized and transmitted by
)wire--or, for extra flourish, over the Internet--to a container of
)ordinary water, converting it to a homepathic solution."
One question, Daniel: How will they test the solutions to determine
whether or not they are homoeopathic solutions?
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.8 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 18:33:24 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
)In communities where immunization is practiced routinely, most of the
)benefit is derived from eliminating the vector of transmission. It is
)virtually impossible for an individual, anthroposophist or otherwise to
)contract small pox in England.
Smallpox vaccination has been unusual in its efficacy. Measles
vaccination, for example, is much less effective, failing to confer
immunity to somewhere between 5% and 15% (depending on who you read) of
recipients. Even taking the lower figure, it is not clear that
vaccination of 100% of the population would confer herd immunity or that
the disease would be eradicated.
I also find it interesting that you, as a doctor, have fallen for the
government newspeak by using "immunization" when you mean "vaccination"
-- what a patient receives is not immunisation but vaccination; it is
not a given that immunisation results from vaccination. As I am sure you
know, the first measles vaccines conferred no immunity at all, although
their use did correlate with a decline in incidence of the disease.
Note that I am not stating that vaccination does not confer benefits to
many people, but I suggest that the case is overstated.
) But this benefit was derived from those many
)individuals willing to accept some risk and get immunized. Immunization
)must be a community effort if it is to succeed.
See above.
) Regardless of their
)intentions, those who do not participate in a community immunization are
)self centered, benefitting from the sacrifice of their community, and
)giving none in return.
I don't know about US statistics, but I understand that those in for
this country suggest that the incidence of many diseases was already on
the decline *before* mass vaccination programmes for those diseases
began.
In the light of the Lancet report, if one takes another perspective on
the effect of having a large-ish sample of people who have not been
vaccinated (and a majority of these are *not* anthropops), one could
consider that they offer a benefit to the rest of society in that they
could be used to test the hypothesis that vaccination has some
responsibility for the rise in incidence of atopy which correlates with
the incidence of vaccination programmes. (Yes, I know correlation does
not imply causation).
Those with a stake in the pharmaceutical industry are rather reluctant
(and understandably so) to have the effects of their money-spinners
questioned, but I suggest that it is bad science to ignore a growing
body of evidence. If the evidence is deemed by the pharmaceutical
industry to be inadequate, it's interesting, is it not, that the
pharmaceutical industry is so reluctant to have it properly evaluated so
that this inadequacy can be demonstrated? However, all one gets is
denial and what is (to me) indistinguishable from soundbite propaganda.
It is interesting to note the parallels with the way GM (genetically
modified) foods have been "snuck" into the human food chain and how
agribusiness and governments are doing their damnedest to suppress the
growing body of evidence that some GM organisms are not as benign as
they would have us believe. Only today the UK government "report" states
that GM foods have no harmful effects on human health, although they can
be harmful to wildlife. The majority of harm noted in wildlife is not in
the first generation of GM consumers (although there is some first
generation damage, e.g. Monarch butterfly larvae) -- see for example,
the work of Putsai at the Rowett Institute and Birch at the Scottish
Crops Research Institute. They haven't tested for effects in human
second generations, but fall back on the "there is no evidence of harm"
-- not exactly revealing not to have evidence that has not been sought,
is it? It's also interesting that Dan Glickman, Secretary of the US
Department of Agriculture and who promotes GMOs, is on record as saying
that he prefers to eat only organic food.
There is also the hotting-up trade dispute between the EC and the US
with regards to products of BST (a GM hormone, manufactured by Monsanto)
treated cattle. (But you guys are OK with Ben & Jerry's -- they use only
BST-free milk, although they had to go to court to establish the right
to say so!).
Of course, demonstrable harm from GM stuff is absolutely no evidence of
any kind with respect to vaccination. However, they are both examples of
where anyone who wishes to have the "inconvenient" evidence considered
or who is unwilling to uncritically swallow the government/commercial
line is subject to institutionalised disapprobation.
Michael Kopp -- this GM stuff is possibly a fruitful use of your
journalistic skills if, as it seems, you don't swallow commercial/establ
ishment/government newpropagandababblespeak.
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.9 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 15:38:45 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905210840.BAA13492 lists1.best.com)
(199905201710.KAA14949 lists1.best.com)
(199905201624.JAA14501 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905211552.IAA08319 lists1.best.com)
)I hope the judge pays particular attention to the required texts for the
)Waldorf teacher training program at RSC., presented as part of PLANS
)opposition. Text books such as 'Occult Science', 'The Spiritual
)Hierarches', 'Christianity as Mystical Fact', 'Education of the Child in
)the Light of Spiritual Science', 'Manifestation of Karma', 'Reincarnation
)and Karma' (and the list goes on...) just may sound an alarm.
)
)Debra
Hopefully the court will pay attention to more than just the titles. . . .
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1319.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:32:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905211839.LAA03604 lists1.best.com)
On 21 May 99, at 18:33, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)The majority of harm noted in wildlife is not in the
) first generation of GM consumers
Is this hypothesized to mean that consumption of genetically
modified foods causes genetic mutations in the second generation
of consumers? Or that the consumption of genetically modified
foods by a pregnant animal it affects the developing embryo? Or is
there some other proposed explanation?
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
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1319 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1320 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Summary Judgment Motion
002 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
003 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Parents certifiying teachers?
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
010 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 13:04:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905211552.IAA08319 lists1.best.com)
(199905210840.BAA13492 lists1.best.com)
(199905201710.KAA14949 lists1.best.com)
(199905201624.JAA14501 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905211930.MAA09159 lists1.best.com)
)
)
)Hopefully the court will pay attention to more than just the titles. . . .
)
Amen.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.2 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Vaccination and GM foods (was: Anthroposophical Medicine )
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 22:01:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905202349.QAA18233 lists1.best.com)
(199905211839.LAA03604 lists1.best.com)
(199905211935.MAA12099 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905211935.MAA12099 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)On 21 May 99, at 18:33, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)
))The majority of harm noted in wildlife is not in the
)) first generation of GM consumers
)
)Is this hypothesized to mean that consumption of genetically
)modified foods causes genetic mutations in the second generation
)of consumers? Or that the consumption of genetically modified
)foods by a pregnant animal it affects the developing embryo? Or is
)there some other proposed explanation?
I don't know, Steve. If the research has been done, the results aren't
(to my knowledge) published. However, I think this is symptomatic of the
problems. My take on it is that there is a great rush to get GMOs
established *before* they are properly tested for purely commercial
reasons.
The unseemly rush to get this stuff out and into the food chain. In this
country it has been done by stealth: notifications being put in local
newspapers for a region different to that where the GM trial crops are
grown, government ministers insisting (until today when they were
rumbled) that no licenses for commercial growing had been given (now
it's "we are not permitting unlicensed commercial growing", and even
that turns out to be an unenforceable voluntary "code of practice" to
which some GMO firms have agreed).
I'd be interested to know about what has happened your side of the pond.
The US folk to whom I have mentioned GMOs don't appear to know a lot
about them, even though they are already well established in your maize
(corn) and soya crops.
I recognise that this is a tad OT in this list (sorry, Dan) -- anyone
know of anywhere on the 'net where these things are being discussed?
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.3 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 17:17:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob Tolz asks:
)
) Your comments lead me to believe that one of things you find most
)objectionable is that RSC is economically benefitting, since you feel it is
)a religious instituiton.
Sorry if my comments misled you. I believe I find it *equally* objectionable
that RSC is defrauding public school districts of hundreds of thousands of
dollars as they sell their training program through a carefully planned
campaign of false advertising.
Would you feel differently if there were a
)state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
)teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the Waldorf pedagogy?
Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the *most secular
aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy and there's
nothing left.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 22:36:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
What appears below does so notwithstanding that I seem to be the Invisible Man here, by which I mean that since I joined this list I've marveled at the following:
*Someone asserts that dogmatism is universal to Anthroposophy and challenges any anthroposophist (I'm one) to express any doubts about any of the contents of Anthroposophy; I elaborate on such doubts of my own concerning two cardinal principles of Anthroposophy, and there follows no response whatsoever, except that the charge soon is repeated twice again by another list-member (whom all know to be a very scrupulous post-reader). I recall that person to my disproof, reprinting the relevant sections, and my contribution is again ignored. In the ensuing weeks the assertion is repeated twice again by the same source.
*In response to someone else on the list issuing a warning about Waldorf teachers' practice of meditating about their pupils, a list-member requests information about the topic. I compose a medium-length description of teachers' meditations -- content, method and purpose -- and... it's exactly as if I hadn't: The warning is sounded again from the same source, this time including a general request for such a characterization as I had just supplied (and which in the meantime I passed to a few teachers for review of accuracy, which they certified); again I point out that I have just addressed the query, and a lone acknowledgment comes from another party on the list; the topic evaporates.
*I ask four times for an explication of one contributor's term of art used in dismissing others' beliefs (it contains a range of meaning), hoping to nourish an exploration concerning methodology of criticism, and four times am consistently ignored. He continues to use the term.
**One or two other gauntlets flung into this (for me) echoless chasm.
Oh, well.
Even slow (an appellation conferred on me, I suppose intuitively, by one of the authors cited above in his very short-lived acknowledgement of my keyboard -- which acknowledgement issued, perhaps not accidentally, from my sole descent on this list into toilet humor) learners eventually do learn. So, I've learned not to expect, well, anything, here. I composed the following post for the "SJU" Waldorf information list instead. I reprint it, slightly modified, here for.. well, for whatever you want. Oh, and [sniff] please don't say anything. I want to remember you just the way you are. Wistfully, /MRx
**********
Here and there I've read indignant posts, maybe not all on this list, expressing astonishment -- that is, general astonishment, not merely concerning a specific instance -- at the audacity displayed by certain teachers by professing to know better what their pupils need than do the pupils' parents.
I ask because I cannot think of a comparable situation in which I would not hold the very opposite opinion to the above, namely that the very justification for ANY teacher's (or doctor's, minister's, nutritionist's, etc.'s) office is precisely that s/he know more about the needs of the one(s) being served than a nonspecialist. The moment I begin to suspect that I know better is the moment I begin to question the point of retaining the services of the (relative-to-at-least-me-in-that-arena) incompetent. And, since we're talking about being precise, by "know" in this context I include knowing how to implement that knowledge.
For example, I can do arithmetic. But I wouldn't know how best to teach it, say, to peers. If I did, I'd expect that others (including others' parents) would expect me to know how to teach it better than they themselves do, unless they too happened to be ready and able to teach arithmetic; that is, unless they knew the best way TO teach it, which would make them ...arithmetic teachers.
I know even less the best way to teach arithmetic to children; less still to handicapped children, still less to foreign-born handicapped children, etc., etc.; my ignorance increasing in direct proportion to the remoteness of the pupil's organic and acculturated learning-conditions from my own. Same with writing. Same with editing. Same with baking. (I bake a mean loaf of bread, and so did the children I briefly trained (not taught) to do so at a summer camp, but I am CERTAIN that a good baking teacher would have done it better -- or not be a good baking teacher.)
Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to see how parenthood places one a better position to know what one's offspring need ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's teachers? Or did I misunderstand the objection?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:02:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905220019.RAA05711 lists1.best.com)
Kathy wrote:
)Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the *most secular
)aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy and there's
)nothing left.
According to the faculty at my neighborhood *public* Waldorf school, Kathy
is correct. Here is part of a parent hand out they presented on January 13,
1996:
"The Waldorf curriculum and methodology can be viewed as the child of
Anthroposophy. Insights leading to the formulation of Waldorf Education
came to Rudolf Steiner as a result of his own inner work. Without
Anthroposophy, we would not have Waldorf Education. The education remains
alive through the inner work of the teacher."
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:05:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905220239.TAA23199 lists1.best.com)
Hey Michael,
Smoke any good pot lately? :+)
Deby
)What appears below does so notwithstanding that I seem to be the Invisible
)Man here, by which I mean that since I joined this list I've marveled at
)the following:
)
)*Someone asserts that dogmatism is universal to Anthroposophy and
)challenges any anthroposophist (I'm one) to express any doubts about any
)of the contents of Anthroposophy; I elaborate on such doubts of my own
)concerning two cardinal principles of Anthroposophy, and there follows no
)response whatsoever, except that the charge soon is repeated twice again
)by another list-member (whom all know to be a very scrupulous
)post-reader). I recall that person to my disproof, reprinting the relevant
)sections, and my contribution is again ignored. In the ensuing weeks the
)assertion is repeated twice again by the same source.
)
)*In response to someone else on the list issuing a warning about Waldorf
)teachers' practice of meditating about their pupils, a list-member
)requests information about the topic. I compose a medium-length
)description of teachers' meditations -- content, method and purpose --
)and... it's exactly as if I hadn't: The warning is sounded again from the
)same source, this time including a general request for such a
)characterization as I had just supplied (and which in the meantime I
)passed to a few teachers for review of accuracy, which they certified);
)again I point out that I have just addressed the query, and a lone
)acknowledgment comes from another party on the list; the topic evaporates.
)
)*I ask four times for an explication of one contributor's term of art used
)in dismissing others' beliefs (it contains a range of meaning), hoping to
)nourish an exploration concerning methodology of criticism, and four times
)am consistently ignored. He continues to use the term.
)
)**One or two other gauntlets flung into this (for me) echoless chasm.
)
)Oh, well.
)
)Even slow (an appellation conferred on me, I suppose intuitively, by one
)of the authors cited above in his very short-lived acknowledgement of my
)keyboard -- which acknowledgement issued, perhaps not accidentally, from
)my sole descent on this list into toilet humor) learners eventually do
)learn. So, I've learned not to expect, well, anything, here. I composed
)the following post for the "SJU" Waldorf information list instead. I
)reprint it, slightly modified, here for.. well, for whatever you want. Oh,
)and [sniff] please don't say anything. I want to remember you just the way
)you are. Wistfully, /MRx
)
)**********
)Here and there I've read indignant posts, maybe not all on this list,
)expressing astonishment -- that is, general astonishment, not merely
)concerning a specific instance -- at the audacity displayed by certain
)teachers by professing to know better what their pupils need than do the
)pupils' parents.
)
)I ask because I cannot think of a comparable situation in which I would
)not hold the very opposite opinion to the above, namely that the very
)justification for ANY teacher's (or doctor's, minister's, nutritionist's,
)etc.'s) office is precisely that s/he know more about the needs of the
)one(s) being served than a nonspecialist. The moment I begin to suspect
)that I know better is the moment I begin to question the point of
)retaining the services of the (relative-to-at-least-me-in-that-arena)
)incompetent. And, since we're talking about being precise, by "know" in
)this context I include knowing how to implement that knowledge.
)
)For example, I can do arithmetic. But I wouldn't know how best to teach
)it, say, to peers. If I did, I'd expect that others (including others'
)parents) would expect me to know how to teach it better than they
)themselves do, unless they too happened to be ready and able to teach
)arithmetic; that is, unless they knew the best way TO teach it, which
)would make them ...arithmetic teachers.
)
)I know even less the best way to teach arithmetic to children; less still
)to handicapped children, still less to foreign-born handicapped children,
)etc., etc.; my ignorance increasing in direct proportion to the remoteness
)of the pupil's organic and acculturated learning-conditions from my own.
)Same with writing. Same with editing. Same with baking. (I bake a mean
)loaf of bread, and so did the children I briefly trained (not taught) to
)do so at a summer camp, but I am CERTAIN that a good baking teacher would
)have done it better -- or not be a good baking teacher.)
)
)Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to see how
)parenthood places one a better position to know what one's offspring need
)ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's teachers? Or did I misunderstand the
)objection?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:29:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
"good pot" is a contradiction in terms /MRx
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 5/21/99 3:05 PM )))
Hey Michael,
Smoke any good pot lately? :+)
Deby
)What appears below does so notwithstanding that I seem to be the Invisible
)Man here, by which I mean that since I joined this list I've marveled at
)the following:
)
)*Someone asserts that dogmatism is universal to Anthroposophy and
)challenges any anthroposophist (I'm one) to express any doubts about any
)of the contents of Anthroposophy; I elaborate on such doubts of my own
)concerning two cardinal principles of Anthroposophy, and there follows no
)response whatsoever, except that the charge soon is repeated twice again
)by another list-member (whom all know to be a very scrupulous
)post-reader). I recall that person to my disproof, reprinting the relevant
)sections, and my contribution is again ignored. In the ensuing weeks the
)assertion is repeated twice again by the same source.
)
)*In response to someone else on the list issuing a warning about Waldorf
)teachers' practice of meditating about their pupils, a list-member
)requests information about the topic. I compose a medium-length
)description of teachers' meditations -- content, method and purpose --
)and... it's exactly as if I hadn't: The warning is sounded again from the
)same source, this time including a general request for such a
)characterization as I had just supplied (and which in the meantime I
)passed to a few teachers for review of accuracy, which they certified);
)again I point out that I have just addressed the query, and a lone
)acknowledgment comes from another party on the list; the topic evaporates.
)
)*I ask four times for an explication of one contributor's term of art used
)in dismissing others' beliefs (it contains a range of meaning), hoping to
)nourish an exploration concerning methodology of criticism, and four times
)am consistently ignored. He continues to use the term.
)
)**One or two other gauntlets flung into this (for me) echoless chasm.
)
)Oh, well.
)
)Even slow (an appellation conferred on me, I suppose intuitively, by one
)of the authors cited above in his very short-lived acknowledgement of my
)keyboard -- which acknowledgement issued, perhaps not accidentally, from
)my sole descent on this list into toilet humor) learners eventually do
)learn. So, I've learned not to expect, well, anything, here. I composed
)the following post for the "SJU" Waldorf information list instead. I
)reprint it, slightly modified, here for.. well, for whatever you want. Oh,
)and [sniff] please don't say anything. I want to remember you just the way
)you are. Wistfully, /MRx
)
)**********
)Here and there I've read indignant posts, maybe not all on this list,
)expressing astonishment -- that is, general astonishment, not merely
)concerning a specific instance -- at the audacity displayed by certain
)teachers by professing to know better what their pupils need than do the
)pupils' parents.
)
)I ask because I cannot think of a comparable situation in which I would
)not hold the very opposite opinion to the above, namely that the very
)justification for ANY teacher's (or doctor's, minister's, nutritionist's,
)etc.'s) office is precisely that s/he know more about the needs of the
)one(s) being served than a nonspecialist. The moment I begin to suspect
)that I know better is the moment I begin to question the point of
)retaining the services of the (relative-to-at-least-me-in-that-arena)
)incompetent. And, since we're talking about being precise, by "know" in
)this context I include knowing how to implement that knowledge.
)
)For example, I can do arithmetic. But I wouldn't know how best to teach
)it, say, to peers. If I did, I'd expect that others (including others'
)parents) would expect me to know how to teach it better than they
)themselves do, unless they too happened to be ready and able to teach
)arithmetic; that is, unless they knew the best way TO teach it, which
)would make them ...arithmetic teachers.
)
)I know even less the best way to teach arithmetic to children; less still
)to handicapped children, still less to foreign-born handicapped children,
)etc., etc.; my ignorance increasing in direct proportion to the remoteness
)of the pupil's organic and acculturated learning-conditions from my own.
)Same with writing. Same with editing. Same with baking. (I bake a mean
)loaf of bread, and so did the children I briefly trained (not taught) to
)do so at a summer camp, but I am CERTAIN that a good baking teacher would
)have done it better -- or not be a good baking teacher.)
)
)Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to see how
)parenthood places one a better position to know what one's offspring need
)ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's teachers? Or did I misunderstand the
)objection?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 05:42:03 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905220331.UAA23363 lists1.best.com)
Deby wrote:
)Hey Michael,
)Smoke any good pot lately? :+)
Michael Ronall responded:
)"good pot" is a contradiction in terms /MRx
Perhaps she was referring to the biodynamic homegrown variety. I hear
people's balconies are full of them in Hamburg, where policy is pretty
liberal. The worst thing about "orthodox" pot is not pesticides, but
herbicides. That is why pot smoking Waldorf students are so much healthier
than pot smoking public school students in America.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 00:02:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
I'm so glad my concerns have been taken up. Say, Tarjei, did you get my letter? /MRx
))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 5/21/99 11:42 PM )))
Deby wrote:
)Hey Michael,
)Smoke any good pot lately? :+)
Michael Ronall responded:
)"good pot" is a contradiction in terms /MRx
Perhaps she was referring to the biodynamic homegrown variety. I hear
people's balconies are full of them in Hamburg, where policy is pretty
liberal. The worst thing about "orthodox" pot is not pesticides, but
herbicides. That is why pot smoking Waldorf students are so much healthier
than pot smoking public school students in America.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1320.10 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 22:21:59 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
There certainly are cases of grey where the desease being immunized is of a
mild or nonthreatening nature, and I am certainly open debate about whether
immunization is necessary for any particular illness. What I am saying is
that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize must
be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You may not
believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that pollution
control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may point out that
the air is clean in your community. You may see no reason to have pollution
control on your vehicle. But if you are one of the few choosing not to
exercize pollution control on your vehicle, you are deriving the health
benefits of your neighbor's compliance, with no sacrifice of your own. I
see that as selfish. I view many immunization programs in the same way.
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
On 20 May 99, at 17:41, Alan S. Fine MD wrote:
) I am frankly surprised that a spiritual movement so absorbed in the
) concept of love should espouse the fundamentally non loving and
) selfish viewpoint that refusing to participate in a community
) immunization is the proper thing to do.
"Selfish" and "unloving" are words that refer to a person's
motivation, not to their actions. If they don't agree that community
immunization is a good thing, their refusal to participate is not
unethical or selfish.
Suppose they believe (and I think this is close to the truth) that
immunization robs kids of the opportunity to get such diseases as
pertussis and measles, and that such diseases are good for the
child's development. Children who do not get such diseases are
likely to develop emotional and even physical problems later in life,
and much of the crime, depression, and dissatisfaction in our
modern society, as well as much of the heart disease, cancer, and
other "modern" diseases with which we are afflicted, are the result
of widespread immunization.
Someone with such a belief may be wrong, but that does not mean
they are selfish or unloving.
Plus, there are significant differences of opinion in the health field
as to which vaccines are worth the risks. In different countries,
different health professionals have set different standards.
I'm not up on all the issues, but if I'm not mistaken, there is some
question as to whether the chicken pox vaccine confers as good an
immunity as the disease. Since the disease is relatively benign,
and the consequences of contracting chicken pox during the early
stages of pregnancy are severe, it might make more sense to avoid
the vaccine in hopes that the girl will get the disease as a child,
rather than take the risk that the immunity will wear off in 20 or 30
years, before she gets pregnant. Someone who makes such a
choice is not unethical, selfish, or unloving in any way. It's merely
a difference of opinion.
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
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1320 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1321 --------------
001 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - eurythmy, not psychologist
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
007 - Bob Williams (danabob she - Inherent flaws
008 - Bob Williams (danabob she - Who is Michel Ronfield?
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
010 - redon (redon geocities.co - School Prayer
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.1 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:11:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905220429.VAA24174 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905220429.VAA24174 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
) What I am saying is
)that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize must
)be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
)control. Many communities have laws about car emissions.
I beg to differ -- the analogy is false. Pollution control aims to
prevent people adding something to the environment which was not already
there. Vaccination aims to remove from the environment something which
is already there. Pollution control and vaccination say absolutely
nothing about each other.
)You may feel that pollution
)control devises on your car do more harm than good.
Now you mention it ... (g). This is often indeed the case with catalytic
converters in this country. Over 80% of car journeys are shorter than is
required for the converters to warm up to efficient working. They also
increase fuel consumption. Hence, on these journeys, pollution is
actually increased. They also increase the output of carbon dioxide, a
"greenhouse" gas, on *all* journeys. (Yes, the "acid rain" gases, such
as oxides of sulphur and nitrogen, are reduced).
As with vaccination, I contend that the case for catalytic converters is
overstated. The only sure-fire way to reduce pollution from private
vehicles is to reduce their use.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: eurythmy, not psychologist
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 00:42:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In a discussion on the SJU Waldorf list, Dawn McConnell wrote:
)In issues dealing with problem children who have parents who do not
)recognize that there are issues with their children that need to be
)addressed, I'm just wondering if there are counselors at any of the schools.
)Are child psychologists ever recommended to parents of Waldorf students?
)From what I have read on child development, child psychologists are often in
)agreement with almost everything in Waldorf education. I was thinking that
)parents may be more receptive to a "doctor's" input rather than another
)parent or teacher.
Mad Ross filled Dawn in on how things are done in the insulated world of
Waldorf:
)In a Waldorf environment "Corrective Eurythmy", Anthrosopical Medicine, or
)Homeopathy is often used to help the "difficult" child and their family cope.
)Many schools have a child care group composed of mentor teachers,
)eurthymist, Anthrosopical OD's.
That ended the discussion.
You see, Dawn, since Anthroposophists have access to special knowledge of
the Nature of Man, through the "indications" of Rudolf Steiner, a child
psychologist couldn't possibly be of help. If you wonder whether, just
possibly, anything might have been learned about psychology since Steiner
died in 1925, you're on the right track.
Excuse my sarcasm. You asked a good question. You got an honest answer, but
one that reveals how strange and isolated a system based on revealed
knowledge can be. The "healing" of eurythmy, Anthroposophical medicine, and
Homeopathy is based on -magic-, not any knowledge that could withstand peer
review in psychology or medicine. Those "alternative" practices are, to put
it plainly, quackery.
-Dan Dugan
copy: Dawn McConnell, Mad Ross
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.3 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:17:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: MICHAEL RONALL [mailto:mronall rabecker.com]
) Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to
) see how parenthood places one a better position to know what
) one's offspring need ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's
) teachers? Or did I misunderstand the objection?
Hope you don't mind if I break the silence.
Many parents do believe that they know better than their teachers
what their children need ACADEMICALLY. That's why they shop around for
different schools, why someone might choose Waldorf over a "regular"
education, and why someone else might look at Waldorf and run very fast in
the other direction. Since there are many options, in every case the parent
is required to use his or her discernment to determine what is best for the
child academically, notwithstanding that the teachers in the "rejected"
venue might disagree.
You may or may not have followed the thread on external absolute
moral authority. I had promised once to tie some of the ideas there more
closely into the educational discussions on this list. Now is the time.
In that thread, one of my main objections to claims by those who
felt that relying on an external absolute moral authority was the
*fallibility* of human beings. To accept without question and with utmost
faith what someone says is true is to abdicate one's own personal
responsibility.
Ministers and priests who tell us what morality ought to be are
human and fallible. That's why I refuse to accept blindly what anybody
tells me what life is all about.
Doctors are human and fallible. That's why I learn everything I can
about any condition I or a loved one has. I'm finding more and more that
the doctors I deal with are quite open to learning from me whatever I might
have found on the internet. They don't have *time* to know everything.
Lawyers are human and fallible. That's why I demand that my clients
read every word of a contract I've written on their behalf. I can't know
every fact surrounding a circumstance, nor can I know every concern that the
client may have, unless the client takes some active responsibility.
Teachers are also human and fallible. The parent who blindly leaves
a child in the care of the teachers without understanding what's going on is
abdicating responsibility.
In all of these cases, the person whose knowledge in an area is
greater than one's own is owed deference and respect for that knowledge, but
a degree, diploma, license or certificate is not proof of competency. Proof
is in the pudding.
In the context of this list, we know that there are significant
differences of opinion among educators about what's appropriate academically
for our children. Where such differences exist, it is the parents'
responsibility to discern those differences and make decisions for the
children, and any educator who claims knowledge as to what is best must face
questioning.
If a parent determines that a teacher's approach is not appropriate,
then there are a number of different possible responses for communication:
(1) talk with the teacher and find out why it *is* appropriate, or (2) talk
with the teacher to enlighten the teacher about what the teacher might be
missing in the situation. In either of those cases where there's fruitful
communication, there may be resolution of the differences between parent and
teacher. In other cases, where the communication is not so fruitful, then
either the teacher goes, the parent and child leave, or you just wind up in
a continuing battle of friction.
I've said all of the above to try to explain *why* it sometimes
seems that parents feel they know better than the teachers what's needed for
their kids academically. There have been occasions when I've seen parents
feel as if they are prepared to substitute their judgment on many things I
would defer completely to the teachers. For instance, I remember one
meeting I had with a group of parents -- independently of any teachers --
about a troublesome dynamic in the class. One parent insisted that we as a
group demand that class size be reduced because he saw that as the cause of
the situation. I didn't believe the connection of class size to the problem
was quite so obvious that it required the judgment of the teachers to be
replaced by the judgment of the parents.
In the thread on moral authority, one of the things which I
indicated is associated with the issue of fallibility is rigidity. I find
that the best teachers are the ones who acknowledge their fallibility and
are flexible. The worst are the ones who refuse to acknowledge their
fallibility, and cover it up with rigidity, and that leads to the third
deadly sin of arrogance.
To me, these issues of fallibility, rigidity and arrogance extend
way beyond the discussion on external moral authority. They apply to
virtually every corner of our existence, including all discussions on this
list, including the opinions held by people on this list, including the
biases and prejudices. It helps explain why you've observed that some
people refuse to acknowledge your contibutions if those contributions appear
to be inconsistent with their opinions and views. Obviously, if their
opinions are infallibly correct, they must be sufficiently rigid to maintain
the opinion. I assume you get the point, and I'll hold my tongue there lest
I be accused of ad hominems.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:18:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
)
) According to the faculty at my neighborhood *public* Waldorf
) school, Kathy
) is correct. Here is part of a parent hand out they presented
) on January 13,
) 1996:
)
) "The Waldorf curriculum and methodology can be viewed as the child of
) Anthroposophy. Insights leading to the formulation of Waldorf
) Education
) came to Rudolf Steiner as a result of his own inner work. Without
) Anthroposophy, we would not have Waldorf Education. The
) education remains
) alive through the inner work of the teacher."
)
) Deby
But what happens in the inner work of the teacher is not what's
taught academically.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:20:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) [Bob Tolz]
) Would you feel differently if there were a
) )state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
) )teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the
) Waldorf pedagogy?
)
[Kathy Sutphen]
) Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the
) *most secular
) aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy and there's
) nothing left.
That's absolutely not true, Kathy, and you know it. Now you and Dan
are sounding exactly alike, and we may have to have you and he stand next to
each other so we can prove you're not one and the same person. I know, I
know. Dan's the one with the beard, right? :-)
You're avoiding the question, which is central in the summary
judgment motion. I'd really love to hear your answer.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.6 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 08:08:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MRx posts:
)*In response to someone else on the list issuing a warning about Waldorf
teachers' practice of meditating about their pupils, a list-member requests
information about the topic. I compose a medium-length description of
teachers' meditations -- content, method and purpose -- and... it's exactly
as if I hadn't:
I believe I was the one that did not respond to your description of
teacher's meditations. I apologize for my oversight and/or the fact that
your post was ignored. I didn't, to my knowledge, receive the list in which
your description was posted. I don't know if this was an error on my ISP's
part (there have been other days in which I received *no* email from this
list and other sources), or if I was simply so busy that I didn't read the
list and subsequently deleted it in error. It wasn't my intent to ignore
your post.
What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you posted an enraged
insult regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
meditating on students. The flavor of this reply and another that you
posted toward me has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
with you.
)Oh, and [sniff] please don't say anything. I want to remember you just the
way you are. Wistfully, /MRx
And how shall we remember you MRx? I would like to feel as if I could
dialogue intelligibly with you, but I admit that when I see your name on a
post I have an expectation of anger and indignation.
)Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to see how
parenthood places one a better position to know what one's offspring need
ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's teachers? Or did I misunderstand the
objection?
This is an interesting question. Are you a parent? I am a parent and a
teacher. Certainly I believe that I have more education and practice at
teaching than an individual that is not a teacher by profession. So, I do
believe that it's likely, in most situations, I would know more about the
practice of teaching, say math, than a parent that doesn't have this sort of
training. However, this doesn't negate the parents' knowledge about their
child. More often than not information from parents adds more to what I know
about a particular student. This goes without saying. An informed,
interested parent, very likely is in a better position to know what their
child needs academically. I believe the best educational team for any child
consists of a collaborative group of that child's teachers *and* parents.
It's not an either/or situation. And sometimes the parent simply has a
hunch/belief that something else would be better or that something isn't
working *and* this hunch/belief is likely correct.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.7 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: Inherent flaws
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 08:41:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Michael Kopp writes:
)It gets ugly here because the Defenders of the Faith are only interested in
)the _appearance_ of reasoned discussion or debate. No defender has ever
)publicly stated here that there is merit to the criticism of SWA's INHERENT
)flaws, as opposed to the supposedly-isolated problems critics mention. It's
)a one-sided argument, and never the twain shall meet.
Bob Williams asks and then requests:
First, I believe Steve Premo was recently lauded for his objective
discussions of list matters. Do you consider him a DoF or critic? Is it
possible that the participants in the list are more diverse than your
"unreasonable DoF" and "fair minded critics" distinction would suggest?
Second, if you have time, I'd be interested in *your* succinct list of the
INHERENT flaws that have been brought up over the years on the list. I
sense that you are very bothered by the perception that certain folks won't
listen to "the critics" basic arguments, so I make the above request in an
attempt to see if the "twain"-- if not able to meet-- might at least
"publicly" wave to each other across the flood. I would guess that we might
have more agreement than you suggest in your posting. (OT and irrelevant,
I'm sure, but...Two listmates are standing on opposite sides of a river.
One yells across, "How do I get to the other side?" The other pauses for a
moment, with a perplexed expression, and finally yells back, "You are on
the other side.")
Respectfully,
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.8 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 12:46:18 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I've enjoyed reading your posts, Michael. I appreciate your
participation...especially when I imagine you writing late at night with
your archtypical fedora pushed back on your head.
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:22:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905221937.MAA08950 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905221937.MAA08950 lists1.best.com)
Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) wrote:
)Subject: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Michael Ronall, you are doomed (as am I) to the inability of the populus
at large to accept that you know how to spell your own name
Stephen/Steven Tonkin/Tomkins/Thompkinson/Tonka/Tonks/Honkin/Tinkan/Runkin/...
(to cite but a few of the corruptions that have occurred over the last decde or
so)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1321.10 ---------------
From: redon (redon geocities.com)
Subject: School Prayer
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 19:58:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905220429.VAA24175 lists1.best.com)
School Prayer
May 1995: Judge Kenning ordered the cessation of prayers at all graduation ceremonies, ruling that neither students nor school officials "could invoke the names of any deities"
Judge Kenning informed school officials that if they believed he was not serious about his order, if they violated it "they would be facing six months in jail, further he would assign U.S. Marshals to listen to graduation exercises, and if any teenager went against his order they "will wish they had died at birth."
For some reason one week later Kenning had a change of heart.
Kenning altered his ruling and proclaimed there was room for spirituality in schools and that he would let them pray after all -- even at football games, which was previously in question.
Kenning added that students could also invoke the name or names of any deity they wished" while praying.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1321 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1322 --------------
001 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: School Prayer
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
003 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - ksutphen jps.net - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
007 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
008 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.1 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: School Prayer
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 03:34:44 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905220429.VAA24175 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905230111.SAA28977 lists1.best.com)
Please tell me this is a joke.
)School Prayer
)May 1995: Judge Kenning ordered the cessation of prayers at all graduation
)ceremonies, ruling that neither students nor school officials "could
)invoke the names of any deities"
)
)Judge Kenning informed school officials that if they believed he was not
)serious about his order, if they violated it "they would be facing six
)months in jail, further he would assign U.S. Marshals to listen to
)graduation exercises, and if any teenager went against his order they
)"will wish they had died at birth."
)
)For some reason one week later Kenning had a change of heart.
)Kenning altered his ruling and proclaimed there was room for spirituality
)in schools and that he would let them pray after all -- even at football
)games, which was previously in question.
)Kenning added that students could also invoke the name or names of any
)deity they wished" while praying.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 23:03:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
The decision has been rendered in the "Satanism" trial which I brought to
the attention to the group a few months ago. Both sides have claimed
victory, and it seems that both sides also expect to appeal. I attach both
the NY Times and the Associated Press stories below.
---------------------------------------
From the NY Times, May 22, 1999:
---------------------------------------
Judge Rules That School Curriculum Crossed Church-State Line
By PAUL ZIELBAUER
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- A Westchester County school district violated its
students' First Amendment right to religious freedom by allowing schools to
engage in religious-oriented activities, including the construction of a
Hindu god's likeness by third-graders and New Age prayer recitals at a
high-school Earth Day celebration, a Federal District Court ruled Friday.
The ruling upheld 3 of 15 claims brought by a group of Roman Catholic
parents who said the Bedford Central School District promoted Satanic
rituals and cult worship and impermissibly mixed religion into the school
curriculum.
The judge did not rule against all the activities protested in the suit,
allowing the district to continue certain card games and yoga lessons, for
example.
In his ruling, which chided both sides for their inability to accommodate
each other's views, Judge Charles L. Brieant III ordered school district
officials to stop teachers from creating lessons that incorporate religious
symbols or routines, holding that those lessons violated the constitutional
doctrine of church-state separation.
Specifically, the judge scolded the school district for allowing students to
make "worry dolls," brightly painted miniature dolls constructed of wire,
thread and toothpicks, which are supposed to dispel everyday anxieties when
left under a child's pillow.
"The business with the worry dolls is a rank example of teaching
superstition to children of a young and impressionable age," Brieant wrote
in his ruling. "It assumes that an inanimate object has some occult power to
relieve us from worry and assure a good night's sleep."
He also criticized a segment of one third-grade teacher's week-long lesson
on the culture of India, in which the teacher read her class stories of an
elephant-headed Hindu god, Ganesha, and then planned to have pupils make
their own Ganeshas from paper.
"While reading the Ganesha story can be part of a neutral secular
curriculum, this court fails to find any educational justification for
telling young impressionable students to construct images of a known
religious god," the judge wrote in response to the plaintiffs' complaint
that the school was forcing them to make graven images, in violation of
their religious beliefs.
He also ordered the school district to end religious exercises and
paraphernalia at Fox Lane High School's "truly bizarre" Earth Day
celebrations. He said a creed students listened to -- "This is what we
believe. The Mother of us all is Earth. The Father is the Sun," constituted
religious worship of the Earth.
To prevent recurring lawsuits on similar grounds, Brieant also ordered
schools officials to publish a clear policy demanding that teachers and
guest lecturers in the future remain neutral toward all religions, although
he was clear that religion is not a forbidden topic, if it is presented
without advocacy. "To describe the religious beliefs of some persons without
endorsing those beliefs does not violate the First Amendment," Brieant
explained.
While he touched on an array of other activities in the Bedford district
that the Catholic parents had challenged -- including classroom readings on
the life of Buddha, lectures on crystals by a retired engineer and a field
trip to a cemetery that he labeled "terminally dumb" -- Brieant steadfastly
adhered to judicial protocol by staying away from advocating wholesale
change to the district's curriculum.
Both the school district and the parents groups who brought the suit claimed
the verdict gave them a victory.
"We were delighted and elated and thankful to God for the judge's decision
that our rights were violated," said Mary Ann Dibari, 60, a plaintiff whose
two granddaughters attended middle school in the district. "It's a real
vindication. Here's a federal judge deciding that an area of the
Constitution was violated."
School district officials Friday admitted they were surprised to have lost
any portion of the suit, even though 12 of the 15 practices the plaintiffs
cited were not found to pose First Amendment problems, and they took pains
to put the judge's ruling in the best possible light.
"We're certainly pleased that the judge found on behalf of the district for
the vast preponderance of matters that the plaintiffs alleged," said Dr.
Bruce L. Dennis, the superintendent of Schools.
While the case has received wide attention, legal experts said that the
activities struck down by Friday's ruling were too esoteric for the ruling
to have far-reaching implications.
"It doesn't sound like something that's going to have a wide impact on
schools nationwide," Edwin Darden, a lawyer for the National School Boards
Association in Washington, said after reading a portion of Judge Brieant's
decision. "It's very specific facts here that the judge ruled on."
The parents were represented by the American Catholic Lawyers Association.
The Bedford school system was supported by People for the American Way, a
civil liberties group. Both sides are planning to appeal.
------------------------------------------
From the Associated Press:
------------------------------------------
Judge: School District Violated Religious Rights
Associated Press
Saturday, May 22, 1999; Page A12
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y., May 21-A federal judge ruled today that a school
district violated the religious rights of Roman Catholic families by having
youngsters cut out elephant-head images of a Hindu god, make toothpick
"worry dolls" and build an altar for an Earth Day liturgy.
U.S. District Judge Charles Brieant ordered the Bedford Central school
district to stop the activities and give clear instructions to teachers
about the Supreme Court standards for the separation of church and state.
Bedford Central attorney Warren Richmond said the ruling will have a
chilling effect. He said the judge went further than any court in the
country in directing the behavior of an individual school district.
The case began in 1995, when students in the well-to-do Westchester County
district began playing the strategy card game Magic: The Gathering. Some
parents complained that the cards, bearing images ranging from fairies to a
woman about to be sacrificed, were satanic.
The two-week trial, which wrapped up in March, brought a parade of
witnesses, including a yogi-numerologist, a psychic-telepath and a
mineralogist who denied that crystals have special powers.
Brieant rejected the families' complaints about yoga lessons, cemetery
visits and the use of the card game.
But he said he found "subtle coercive pressure to engage in the Hindu
religion" when a third-grade teacher, during a lesson about India, had her
pupils make construction-paper cutouts of elephant heads after reading a
story about Ganesha, an elephant-headed Hindu god.
"While reading the Ganesha story can be part of a neutral secular
curriculum, this court fails to find any educational justification for
telling young, impressionable students to construct images of a known
religious god," Brieant said.
He found that the district had allowed "worry dolls" -- tiny
yarn-and-toothpick figures -- to be made in class and sold at school as a
way for students to keep bad dreams away.
"The business with the worry dolls is a rank example of teaching
superstition to children of a young and impressionable age," Brieant said.
Some rituals in the school district's Earth Day celebration were "truly
bizarre" and crossed over into religious teaching, he said.
One of the parents who sued, Mary Ann DiBari, said she was delighted with
the ruling but had hoped the use of the card game would be found to be a
constitutional violation.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.3 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 00:58:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Alan Fine posted:
)There certainly are cases of grey where the desease being immunized is of a
)mild or nonthreatening nature, and I am certainly open debate about whether
)immunization is necessary for any particular illness.
In my understanding, this is exactly the point. Intelligent people who
question routine vaccination of all children seek unbiased information on
the benefits and risks of *each* vaccine, on an individual basis. Unbiased
information, however, is extremely hard to come by. Caring parents who seek
reliable data on which to base their decisions are thus left in a real
dilemma; they must make the best decisions they can with the limited
information they have.
While there are certainly some parents who choose not to vaccinate at all,
there are also many (more?) who pick and choose in order to maximize the
chances that their children will stay healthy, both in the short term and
in the long term. (From what I understand, one theory is that eradicating
acute illness -- and/or bombarding a small child's body with many vaccines
in a short span of time -- may tax the immune system and affect the child's
natural disease-fighting ability, leading to a decrease in overall health
and an increase in the incidence of chronic illness later on.)
It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
ones? And even the newest vaccines carry risks (that may well be worth
taking in many cases), and contain potentially toxic ingredients such as
formaldehyde and genetically engineered components. And, of course, even
newer vaccines will continue to come along as the risks of the current ones
become evident. (Only recently, the recommended schedule for polio
vaccination was revised to include several doses of killed polio in place
of the live oral vaccine -- in order to decrease the risk of the vaccine
causing... polio. That said, when I was a student for a year in Israel a
decade ago, there was an outbreak of polio and I certainly wasn't picketing
outside the health centers for my right to remain unvaccinated. I do think
it's a different story when there is a clear and present danger.)
People like to point to the smallpox vaccine as a model, but it's not
really valid as an example for today's situation. When the smallpox vaccine
program was implemented, there were few (if any?) other vaccines routinely
given to children. It's a different story today, when two-month-old infants
are subjected to multiple vaccinations in a jam-packed schedule that
continues through the early childhood years. Also, the smallpox vaccine was
phased out (I think somewhere around 1970?) when there was no longer a
clear and present danger.
Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
) What I am saying is
)that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize must
)be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
)control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You may not
)believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that pollution
)control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may point out that
)the air is clean in your community. You may see no reason to have pollution
)control on your vehicle. But if you are one of the few choosing not to
)exercize pollution control on your vehicle, you are deriving the health
)benefits of your neighbor's compliance, with no sacrifice of your own. I
)see that as selfish. I view many immunization programs in the same way.
This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's dilemma
concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it comes to the
health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that there is a connection
here between the issue of mandatory routine vaccination and the
introduction of genetic engineering, irradiation, etc. into our food
supply... Maybe the connection has to do with the "powers that be" (and I
don't mean God) determining that for our own good and for the good of Big
Business (like Monsanto, maker of Roundup Ready soybeans, bovine growth
hormone, and much, much more), certain things will be done that will affect
our families, whether we like it or not.
Scientists can make a great case for the benefits of genetically modifying
crops, and for irradiating our food to eliminate pathogenic bacteria... and
it certainly can start to sound like all this technological interference is
in everyone's best interest...
I'm not sure what the direct connection is between all this and
Anthroposophy/Waldorf, except that my grappling with these issues is
evidence that it's not only Anthroposophists who deviate from the "norm"
here. If you surveyed a random sample of Anthroposophists on these issues
and a random sample of Californians, for example (and I'm neither of
these), you'd probably find similar responses.
Lots of people who read Natural Jewish Parenting are trying to be informed
about these issues as well...
Feedback is welcome; I'm thinking as I type (a risky proposition on this
list...).
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective on
childraising and health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.4 ---------------
From: ksutphen jps.net
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:38:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The discussion continues:
)
)) [Bob Tolz]
)) Would you feel differently if there were a
)) )state-funded, state-run program (i.e., no money to RSC) which offered
)) )teacher instruction in the most secular aspects of the
)) Waldorf pedagogy?
))
)
)[Kathy Sutphen]
)) Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the
)) *most secular
)) aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy and there's
)) nothing left.
)
) That's absolutely not true, Kathy, and you know it.
Well Bob, I don't think I do *know* this. Why don't you tell what the
secular aspects are, in your opinion, and I'll respond to that. When I
attended the public school teacher's training it was Anthroposophy, the
endless fairy tales, the rhythmic movements, the wet-on-wet, the
pseudoscience, the strange lectures on child development ala Steiner, the
temperaments, the *elements*, the form drawing, the pretty books . . . need
I go on?
Now you and Dan
)are sounding exactly alike, and we may have to have you and he stand next to
)each other so we can prove you're not one and the same person. I know, I
)know. Dan's the one with the beard, right? :-)
Well, yeh. Hirsutism isn't one of my physical pecularities . . . thank gawd
for small favors.
) You're avoiding the question, which is central in the summary
)judgment motion. I'd really love to hear your answer.
Well, I thought I gave it. Enlighten me dahling!
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 23:23:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
But when it comes to the
)health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
Well said, Yael.
)Scientists can make a great case for the benefits of genetically modifying
)crops, and for irradiating our food to eliminate pathogenic bacteria... and
)it certainly can start to sound like all this technological interference is
)in everyone's best interest...
)
)I'm not sure what the direct connection is between all this and
)Anthroposophy/Waldorf, except that my grappling with these issues is
)evidence that it's not only Anthroposophists who deviate from the "norm"
)here. If you surveyed a random sample of Anthroposophists on these issues
)and a random sample of Californians, for example (and I'm neither of
)these), you'd probably find similar responses.
True.
)
)Lots of people who read Natural Jewish Parenting are trying to be informed
)about these issues as well...
I think most parents consider these issues, regardless.
)
)Feedback is welcome; I'm thinking as I type (a risky proposition on this
)list...).
Thinking people are always appreciated, Yael. I consider myself a true
friend of many people on this list, whether they agree with me on Waldorf
issues or not. Stephen Tonkin, a Waldorf teacher, is my friend. He cares
about my kids. He cares about me. I care about his family. My husband and I
have many differences, yet maintain a solid and happy marriage... Of
course, if we were limited to discussing _only_ our differences, marriage
would likely become a challenge. Personally, I enjoy the conversations that
are often considered 'off topic' by the majority. It bonds us as a people.
I always try to keep in mind that most of us have more commonalities than
differences, and keep a sense of humor when reading those posts that attack
my thoughts. I feel like I know some of my list mates better than some of
my friends. I value that depth. Your post reminds me of this.
Does anyone like to canoe or kayak? Cook for lots of company? Clean out
linen cupboards? Read bestsellers? Can peaches with their Mother? (Oops,
off topic...)
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:12:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[The following post was received from a person wishing to remain anonymous.
-dD-]
Bob Tolz wrote:
"in every case the parent
is required to use his or her discernment to determine what is best for the
child academically, notwithstanding that the teachers in the "rejected"
venue might disagree."
What about the opinions of the teacher in the *chosen* venue? If the
teachers one has trusted with the education of one's child don't consider
what the parent *knows* the child's needs, academically, what are the
parent's acceptable options?
Tolz:
"To accept without question and with utmost
faith what someone says is true is to abdicate one's own personal
responsibility."
Like accepting without real question and on ultimate faith Steiner's claim
to clairvoyance, astral travel, and the truth of his assertions on life,
the universe & everything.
Tolz:
"Ministers and priests who tell us what morality ought to be are
human and fallible. That's why I refuse to accept blindly what anybody
tells me what life is all about."
Any minister, priest, or rabbi who lacks the humility and discernment to
acknowledge their own human fallibility is outside their competence as
counselors and guides. The absolute moral authority comes from a higher
source. The relationship is between each individual and God. Pastors
minister to earthly needs and offer professional help in interpretations
that are ultimately matters of discernment and conscience. The leaders of
congregations are also answerable ultimately to God.
Tolz:
"Doctors are human and fallible. That's why I learn everything I can
about any condition I or a loved one has. I'm finding more and more that
the doctors I deal with are quite open to learning from me whatever I might
have found on the internet. They don't have *time* to know everything."
Maybe they don't have *time* to know *everything*, but I have never met a
competent physician who was not up to speed on at least their own area of
practice. Similarly, competent physicians often admit where their knowledge
is lacking, but then go back to sources that can be trusted &
scientifically verified to find out. Discernment is very important on the
Internet. There is a lot of information quite cleverly contrived to look
authoritative that is wrong. Much statistical manipulation can be found on
the Internet. How does someone judge a study without knowing the
reliability of sources? There are specialists in medicine who do nothing
but meta-study analysis, statistical analysis and who know where to search
for other specialists who can review the science being used as a basis for
assertions. These individuals are also competent to judge the form of a
study. Peer review is used to assess competency in research & clinical
medicine.
Tolz:
"Lawyers are human and fallible. That's why I demand that my clients
read every word of a contract I've written on their behalf. I can't know
every fact surrounding a circumstance, nor can I know every concern that the
client may have, unless the client takes some active responsibility."
Doctors can't know everything about objective science, and lawyers can't
know everything about the client's subjective circumstances? This linkage
seems slanted in favor of the attorneys. Would you accept a physician's
interpretation or knowledge of the law? You are qualified to go on the
Internet & search out medical information for a physician that you are
confident is reliable. Can a physician spend time they don't have to keep
up in their own field to search out all the precedents and opinions in
their own legal cases?
Tolz:
"Teachers are also human and fallible. The parent who blindly leaves
a child in the care of the teachers without understanding what's going on is
abdicating responsibility."
The question is not: 'understanding what's going on'. It is that the parent
is not considered competent to question or change aspects of the curriculum
relative to their own child's needs. In Waldorf, there are perceived
*needs* of the student that only the teacher can competently address, in
light of the teacher's knowledge of Steiner's writings and the teacher's
*inner work* and meditations on the child.
Parents are only gradually brought to the knowledge of "what's going on"
through study groups. Often, by then, the child is so entrenched in the
class & school, that the parent must choose between options of leaving or
staying that both have detrimental outcomes for the child.
Tolz:
"In all of these cases, the person whose knowledge in an area is
greater than one's own is owed deference and respect for that knowledge, but
a degree, diploma, license or certificate is not proof of competency. Proof
is in the pudding."
A physician has an objective education that lasts roughly twice as long as
that of any other profession in a technically demanding field that changes
rapidly and builds on the knowledge gained by all the other clinical &
research workers in medical science. Yet, an attorney can earn their
gratitude by researching medical information on the Internet when that
information does not include a history, a physical exam, or an ability to
make a differential diagnoses.
However, when the profession under question is law, the final
responsibility rests on the client, because an attorney, who has to know
the statutes and the permutations of circumstance and past decisions that
only rarely are changing as the contract is being written, can pass the
responsibility on to the client.
It is a common joke in medicine that an accurate medical history is only
obtained by the attending (supervising) physician, by the second or third
consulting specialist, or at around the third visit. Is that history not
more important to bring to a physician's attention than a gloss of a paper
found on the Internet?
A common joke about lawyers is that "only a fool acts as their own
attorney". Is it at all possible that only a fool acts as his own physician?
Tolz:
"There have been occasions when I've seen parents
feel as if they are prepared to substitute their judgment on many things I
would defer completely to the teachers."
How does one discern *feelings* by *seeing*? You can add to a technical
professional's knowledge through use of a public information source and
your clients bear final responsibility for any contract you draw. But, *on
many things I would defer completely to the teacher's [expertise]*? When,
in the case of Waldorf, the teacher may have two years of sectarian
training? When, as has been said before by educators on the list, the
public university training of 4-6 years duration, may or may not be
addressing the situation the parent is concerned with and where the
differing opinions are just that: opinions? How are differences in
pedagogical approach at all analogous to technical scientific and clinical
medical judgement? If your civil client cannot rely completely on your
interpretation of the law because you cannot be expected to know all the
personal aspects of the situation, isn't it the same in education? Doesn't
the parent *know* aspects of their child's needs, academically, as well as
emotionally ,that the teacher has no way of knowing?
"The proof is in the pudding". The quote is:"The proof of the pudding is in
the tasting". Indeed. The physician is peer reviewed and there are
data-bases that contain every mistake a physician has ever made, including
the ratio of patients treated to patients who have died. Physicians
licenses can be proportionally suspended for whatever reasons the Medical
Examining Board may have. Attorneys are held to a code of professional
behavior by the Bar and can have their ability to practice questioned or
changed by that professional body. Ministers may be fired by congregations
or priests may be removed by the diocesan authorities. Where is the proof
in Waldorf? Where are the standardized test results of Waldorf teachers &
students? Why is teacher competency only the purview of the College of
Teachers? Public school teachers have administrators above them, a school
board and parent organizations, as well as individual parents to contend
with. In many states teachers must pass regular competency exams. Who
oversees Waldorf teachers? What methods of oversight are guaranteed to the
parents and students?
Tolz:
"I didn't believe the connection of class size to the problem
was quite so obvious that it required the judgment of the teachers to be
replaced by the judgment of the parents."
Is everything in Waldorf done collectively and is consensus applied in
cases of parent's meetings to discuss problems of class *dynamic*? Why did
the opinion of even one other parent, who happens to be an attorney whose
clients cannot expect him to know *everything* about their situation, even
come into consideration? In public school and in other private schools,
teachers & parents meet privately to discuss the child. Parents are allowed
to sit in on classes and observe whenever they wish. Parents observing a
problem dynamic that may have been influenced by class size, would first
discuss it with the teacher, then the teacher and the parent might meet
with administration. If no solution was found, perhaps the PTO would get
involved, and there, the discussion would be specific, perhaps heated and
no one would be able to tell the dissenting parent that they could not
replace the teacher's judgement with their own, because class size is not
an area under the teacher's judgement.
(snip long discussion on flexibility, fallibility, rigidity & arrogance)
Where is the flexibility in Waldorf education? Can you cite specific
examples where a parent was able to convince a teacher to make a change in
content or presentation to accomodate a student? The content is prescribed
by Steiner; the order of presentation is determined occultly:
"One of the secrets of the curriculum is that it
does not move in accordance with earthly, linear time, which moves in one
direction only, but rather pulses and breathes in a time-form that is
inspired by the Akashic Record. For the children, this progression touches
those organs-both physical and psychological-that are developing at each
grade. For the teacher, this progression can be tantamount to the passage
through the chambers of a Mystery Center. What we teach the children will
help them incarnate firmly upon the earth; what we glean from the
curriculum will help us cross the threshold into the spiritual world."
Schwartz, Eugene. The Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide. Fair Oaks,
CA: Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1992. p16
If parents are unaware of the agenda within all the pedagogy, not the least
of which is also the balancing of a class by temperament, of which there are
only four, meaning every child has a rather narrow niche to which they are
assigned, how on earth can anyone determine that the teacher is any sort of
authority on any given child?
It appears that the arrogance so decried in other professions is alive and
well in Waldorf education and its supporters.
*************************************************************************
)From a different post [RSC Public School Teacher's Training}
"But what happens in the inner work of the teacher is not what's
taught academically."
*Academically* in a Waldorf School everything is imbued with Anthroposophy.
The goal is a child who has incarnated *correctly* and is certain of the
existence of the spirit world as written of by Steiner. In every subject,
the Anthroposophical content is a prime concern. Below an example of method
in which Anthroposophy is to be intertwined with history & geography and a
with a blatant religious message at the end that contradicts the view of
Christians, Jews and Muslims with, I submit, arrogant disregard for the
individual child's heritage.
"After having introduced the children to the concept
of destiny, slowly and with the aid of suitable stories, and also to the
concept of heredity, and that of repeated earth lives, you lead over to the
three spheres of the heavenly worlds: (1) The first sphere leads to the
realm of the angel beings. Every individual human being has a guardian
Angel. Here you speak about how each single person is guided from one
incarnation to the next by his personal genius. You first deal with man's
personal link to the divine worlds through the angel who is his guide. (2)
You now try to explain that there are higher divine powers, the archangels,
and that it is their task to direct groups of people, such as nations, etc.
Here you enter by degrees into the realm of history and geography. You have
to approach it in such a way that the child learns to distinguish clearly
between the God of whom for instance Protestantism speaks, who in reality
is only an Angel, and between the Archangel who is more sublime than the
divinity which is spoken of by evangelical religious teaching."
Stockmeyer, E.A. Karl. Rudolf Steiner's Curriculum for Waldorf
Schools: An attempt to summarise his indications: A collection of
quotations for the benefit of different Waldorf Schools. Trans. Roland
Everett-Zade. Forest Row, East Sussex, England: 1969 p164
)From a second post on the same topic:
[Kathy Sutphen]
) Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the
) *most secular
) aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy and there's
) nothing left.
Tolz:
"That's absolutely not true, Kathy, and you know it."
(snip joke)
"You're avoiding the question, which is central in the summary
judgment motion. I'd really love to hear your answer."
If Kathy makes a positive statement to the effect that Anthroposophy is the
only content in Waldorf pedagogy, why can't the answer contain concrete
evidence of academic content devoid of Anthroposophy? Critics go to the
trouble & spend the time reading Steiner and his commentators who write
specifically for Waldorf teachers and whose texts are published by
Anthroposophical publishers. Critics are told to "do the work" before
daring to have an opinion. A flat denial, an accusation that Kathy
knowingly is not telling the truth and a further accusation that Kathy is
avoiding the question you deem central to the summary judgement motion,
followed by your personal preference in answers from Kathy is not even
close as a refutation.
Please quote, with citations, the academic content, the methods dealing
only with presentation of academic content and the form of the curriculum
that does not consider Anthroposophical concerns. Certainly, if this is
central to the summary judgement motion, the defendants will easily be able
to present this evidence.
We'd all really love to hear your answer.
[while my personal & professional situation prevents me from identifying
myself or my affiliation, I hope I have shown citations to the fact that
Anthroposophy is inextricably entwined with academic content and that
academic content is Anthroposphically determined]
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.7 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 14:07:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905230831.BAA07913 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905230831.BAA07913 lists1.best.com)
(Can anyone suggest a succinct way of citing an anonymous poster which
does not sound pejorative?)
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) posted on behalf of another:
)
) "After having introduced the children to the concept
[...]
)divinity which is spoken of by evangelical religious teaching."
)
) Stockmeyer, E.A. Karl. Rudolf Steiner's Curriculum for Waldorf
)Schools: An attempt to summarise his indications: A collection of
)quotations for the benefit of different Waldorf Schools. Trans. Roland
)Everett-Zade. Forest Row, East Sussex, England: 1969 p164
I have that edition (reprinted 1982) and find that, in mine, the quote
is not on p164 as cited above, but on pp. 225/226, in the section
dealing with Religion lessons. These were the lessons which were to be
offered, at the request of anthroposophist parents, to those of their
children who did not attend the denominational religion lessons given by
pastors/priests/etc. (Note that this was at a place and time where
religious instruction was compulsory in schools.) They (the anthropops)
requested a "religious instruction for their children which was based on
anthroposophy." (p220). These lessons were to happen alongside the
denominational religious instruction given by visiting priests, etc.
I would be interested if our correspondent, now having been made aware
of this context, still believes the statement with which he prefaced the
quote from Stockmeyer to be valid:
)Below an example of method
)in which Anthroposophy is to be intertwined with history & geography and a
)with a blatant religious message at the end that contradicts the view of
)Christians, Jews and Muslims with, I submit, arrogant disregard for the
)individual child's heritage.
Whether or not Steiner's indication of the content of these "Free
Religion Lessons" is valid in different times and places is a separate
question. I am probably not the best person to address that, since it is
one of the things which I (to use the common phrase) "find difficult"
about Steiner.
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1322.8 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:33:10 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
PART ONE OF TWO PARTS DIVIDED FOR BENEFIT OF E-MAIL CLIENT RESTRICTIONS
Yael Resnick posted on the subject of supposed danger or lack of benefit of
vaccination, and parental authority over medical care of their children:
)Alan Fine posted:
)
))There certainly are cases of grey where the desease being immunized is of
))a
))mild or nonthreatening nature, and I am certainly open debate about
))whether
))immunization is necessary for any particular illness.
)
)In my understanding, this is exactly the point. Intelligent people who
)question routine vaccination of all children seek unbiased information on
)the benefits and risks of *each* vaccine, on an individual basis. Unbiased
)information, however, is extremely hard to come by. Caring parents who seek
)reliable data on which to base their decisions are thus left in a real
)dilemma; they must make the best decisions they can with the limited
)information they have.
Michael KOPP:
Questions for Yael:
How many "intelligent people" question routine vaccination of children? Can
you give us some statistical evidence regarding what percentage of the
population "questions" routine vaccination?
What is your definition of "intelligent people"?
You seem to be saying that the definition of intelligence is to question
routine vaccination. But routine vaccination has been accepted by the large
majority for at least 50 years now, and the health benefits to the
community at large are statistically unchallenged. So it would seem that a
case could be made that "intelligent people" would be those who accept the
evidence of the medical efficacy of mass general vaccination, not those who
"question the benefits and risks".
How many "intelligent people" know how to analyze information -- biased or
unbiased -- about such scientific matters?
The only reason for believing that there is no "unbiased" information on
vaccination is either a belief in a conspiracy theory or a complete lack of
faith in scientific medicine (as opposed to normal consumer caution about
anything).
Most people who reject vaccination, either by individual vaccines or in
toto, are predisposed to one or the other of these anti-rational, ususally
anti-science, viewpoints. Alternatively, they are of the new-age persuasion
which sees benefit in rejecting all that has been accomplished by 300 years
of human progress in favour of some ill-defined, nebulous, spiritualistic
good vibes and clean living, often accompanied by occult practices of
shamanistic witch-doctoring and herbalist pharmacology.
Caring parents of a rational nature who seek reliable data on which to base
their decisions are not seduced by any of the above irrationalities, and
they can easily find reasonable information on which to base their
judgements about vaccinations. Take for instance the (U.S.) statistics on
morbidity (illness, as opposed to mortality, death) in regard to the
various diseases of the last hundred years which have posed public health
risks to the community at large.
Unless one believes there is a 1984-like propaganda machine which produces
such statistics, or one believes someone is making these statistics lie, or
one chooses not to believe anything at all that comes from any authority,
then the following are true:
Polio - a major epidemic occurred at the turn of the century and further
epidemics increased in magnitude. In 1952 (my generation) 57,000 cases were
reported. It's true that no cases of virus related polio have been reported
in the US since 1979, only vaccine-associated paralytic polio. However,
this occurs only with oral polio vaccine (Sabin) which contains
live-attenuated poliovirus strains; the risk is highest after the 1st dose
and in immunocompromised people; the American Academy of Pediatrics updated
their recommended immunization schedule on December 8 to prevent any risk
of VAPP; VAPP is very rare (one case for every 2.5 million doses).
Diphtheria - was one of the most common causes of death among children in
the early part of this centry prior to introduction of the vaccine.
Pertussis - from the early to mid 1900s was one of the most common
childhood diseases and a major cause of childhood death. Since the
introduction of the vaccine in the 1940's, cases decreased from 150 per
100,000 to 1.2 per 100,000 by 1991. However, cases have been on the rise
since then and Pertussis is now the most frequently reported
vaccine-preventable disease in children ( 5 years of age. This is
concurrent with a reduction in the percentage of the young population
receiving vaccinations.
Measles - prior to vaccine in 1963, more than a half million cases were
reported each year. By 1995, only 301 cases were reported. Outbreaks mainly
involve unvaccinated/inadequtely vaccinated pre-schoolage children as well
as high school and college students.
Mumps - reported cases have decreased over 99% in the US since the 1967
vaccine.
Haemophilus Influenzae type b (Hib) - prior to vaccine, about 20,000
invasive Hib infections/year occured in the US with up to 1000 deaths. It
was the most common cause of bacterial meningits among children ( 5 years
of age. Prevaccine, 90% of cases occurred in children ( 5 years with a peak
age of 6-7 months.
The declining U.S. "vaccinated base" not only reduces the "herd immunity"
among the "indigenous" population, it makes it subject to reintroduction of
the viruses from foreign immigrants who have not been vaccinated and may
carry the diseases.
What's most unfortunate is that many of these diseases take their heaviest
toll in the ( 5 year age group before they are required to be vaccinated.
Vaccination isn't just a matter of informed consent and choice for one - it
affects all children, making it a serious and ongoing public health concern.
RESNICK:
)While there are certainly some parents who choose not to vaccinate at all,
)there are also many (more?) who pick and choose in order to maximize the
)chances that their children will stay healthy, both in the short term and
)in the long term.
KOPP:
Please cite statistics showing the number of people who use this strategy
by informed, educated, knowing choice, rather than the hit-or-miss laissez
faire attitude which is becoming more prevalent among a population which
does not remember the epidemics of childhood diseases of 50-and-more years
ago.
Among the most educated people, it is indeed the most rational choice for
optimizing both the benefit of herd immunity and avoidance of chance side
effects from some vaccines. However, it completely avoids the issue of the
increasing possibility that un-vaccinated children will be exposed to the
disease in the general population. In other words, it is playing Russian
roulette with a child's health and perhaps its life, as well as decreasing
the herd immunity and abdicating any social responsibility the parents may
have. And the odds in this Russian roulette are decreasing.
Here is an [abridged] argument regarding this issue, from a medical doctor
in another discussion forum.
begin quote ----------------
)From a self-interest standpoint, parental refusal makes perfect rational
sense, while advocating parental refusal or elimation of immunizations is
absolutely stupid from all rational standpoints. Here's the argument:
Why should a parent avoid immunizing his/her child? Because the lowest risk
is probably to be unimmunized but in the middle of a population which has
been immunized. That avoids even a 1 in 10,000 risk of immunization
reaction, but herd immunity provides excellent protection against the
infections themselves.
For this strategy to be most effective though, [the person who rejects
immunization for their child or self] should be a strong advocate of
immunization for everyone else's children.
What's wrong with this approach? One intuitively recognizes its
"unfairness" and selfishness. More formally, it fails Kant's categorical
moral imperative, which is roughly that we should act the way that would be
best if everyone acted that way.
The breakdown in community welfare that occurs when an increasing number
recognize that it is to their advantage to act selfishly as long as most
don't is analogous to the "tragedy of the commons," a major problem in
social ethics which you can find explained in most handbooks of philosophy
or ethics.
The community may need to act as a group (i.e., by government coercion) to
prevent acts of individual selfishness which would endanger the community
if practiced by a large proportion.
This is the real justification for coercive immunization laws, which I
support. It also seems just to me to attempt to compensate the very small
percentage who are injured by a coerced action which benefits the large
majority.
While we may cringe at the selfishness of parents who want their children
to enjoy herd immunity protection without the tiny immunization risk, it is
at least a rational decision.
David Langdon, M.D., Danville PA mailto://dlangdon psghs.edu
"test everything; hold fast what is good" (1Thess5:21)
end quote-------------------------
RESNICK:
)(From what I understand, one theory is that eradicating
)acute illness -- and/or bombarding a small child's body with many vaccines
)in a short span of time -- may tax the immune system and affect the child's
)natural disease-fighting ability, leading to a decrease in overall health
)and an increase in the incidence of chronic illness later on.)
KOPP:
With all due respect to your obvious intelligence, I suspect that the "one
theory" to which you refer is the standard anti-vaccination line of what
might be called the "vax-quax", or pseudo-scientific,
anti-scientific-medicine loonies. To dispel this suspicion on my part,
could you please cite the origin or proponents of this "one theory", and
some evidence of replicated science which confirms or tends to confirm it.
)From a scientific source "Quackwatch", at
http://www.familyinternet.com/quackwatch/03HealthPromotion/immu/immu00.html
is the following, one of a number of refutations of `misconceptions' about
vaccination (immunization):
begin quote-----------------------
Misconceptions about Immunization
Misconception #7 Giving a child more than one vaccine at a time increases
the risk of harmful side effects and can overload the immune system.
Children are exposed to many foreign antigens every day. (An antigen is a
substance that stimulates an immune response.) Eating food introduces new
bacteria into the body, and numerous bacteria live in the mouth and nose,
exposing the immune system to still more antigens. An upper respiratory
viral infection exposes a child to 4-10 antigens, and a case of "strep
throat" to 25-50. According to Adverse Events Associated with Childhood
Vaccines, a 1994 report from the Institute of Medicine, "In the face of
these normal events, it seems unlikely that the number of separate antigens
contained in childhood vaccines . . . would represent an appreciable added
burden on the immune system that would be immunosuppressive." And, indeed,
available scientific data show that simultaneous vaccination with multiple
vaccines has no adverse effect on the normal childhood immune system.
end quote------------------------
END OF PART ONE OF TWO PARTS DIVIDED FOR BENEFIT OF E-MAIL CLIENT
RESTRICTIONS
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1322 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1323 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 2 of 2)
002 - redon (redon geocities.co - School Prayer
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
004 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
005 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 2 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:33:42 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
PART TWO OF TWO PARTS DIVIDED FOR BENEFIT OF E-MAIL CLIENT RESTRICTIONS
Yael Resnick posted on the subject of supposed danger or lack of benefit of
vaccination, and parental authority over medical care of their children:
RESNICK:
)It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
)acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
)introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
)ones?
KOPP:
What does it say to you, Yael? Could you tell us, please, or are we left to
try to infer something from what looks like innuendo. The way I read it,
you're saying anyone who doesn't see something sinister here is under the
thumb of scientific medicine.
*I* think it is a confirmation of the scientific method, a self-correcting,
evidence-based, skeptical, method of _progress_ (not _regress_, as in
pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo arising out of a return to pre-scientific
nostrums) which is always questing for a better way to do things.
Good science done honestly and interpreted and used wisely and openly by
authorities is far more reasonable as a way of life than relying on old
wives' tales and medieval superstition, or new-age beliefs in either the
lack of need for prevention and cure, or the quackery that abounds to
supply the credulous with useless, often even harmful, remedies.
RESNICK:
)Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
)the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
)the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
KOPP:
Really? Is that how you characterize universal vaccination? An "extreme
viewpoint"? What would you propose as the "middle" ground? Fifty percent of
the population gets vaccinated, and 50 percent doesn't? Who chooses? How?
Why? And what happens if 100 percent of the population acts on their
eminent rationality, and elects to forego any personal risk?
Assuming that this is unlikely (there will always be altruistic, socially
responsible people) what do you think is the likely percentage of people
who choose what they believe is the most reational course? And at what
percentage of non-immunization does the herd immunity upon which those
eminently rational refuseniks rely disappear, producing new-age epidemics,
if not pandemics, of childhood diseases to kill millions?
FINE:
)) What I am saying is
))that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize
))must
))be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
))control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You may not
))believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that pollution
))control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may point out that
))the air is clean in your community. You may see no reason to have
))pollution
))control on your vehicle. But if you are one of the few choosing not to
))exercize pollution control on your vehicle, you are deriving the health
))benefits of your neighbor's compliance, with no sacrifice of your own. I
))see that as selfish. I view many immunization programs in the same way.
RESNICK:
)This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's dilemma
)concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it comes to the
)health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
KOPP:
Are you sure you understand these ethical principles? It seems to me that
you are advocating the exact selfishness of the eminently rational person
who refuses the social compact and yields to the temptation to put yet
another strain on the commons, despite the knowledge that this is
detrimental to the entire commons in the long run. What you say you
understand, and what you say you would do, are antithetical.
You are, in effect, saying there is a higher ethics and morality and right
of ownership to the parental relationship than to the commons. And on what
do you base this right to "stand alone"? Does God give this right? Does the
State give this right? Does the Commons give this right? Or is it some
elemental, irrational, emotional (usually mothers'), almost
animal-instinct, "right" to make life-and-death choices for another human
being?
Where this kind of thinking logically leads, of course, is to the religious
refusal of any medical treatment (placing the ill in "God's" care). Or to
the new-age belief that all authoritarian systems of social control,
including medical intervention in socially-harmful diseases, is state
fascism, to be fought against by any means, including taking a child
forcibly into hiding, away from the potential control of the state. Or,
just refusing vaccinations.
We have seen two results of this philsophy of rational self-interest in
Godzone, which has declining childhood immunization and increasing
childhood pertussis, particularly, along with many other childhood problems
that place New Zealand -- formerly at the top of Westernized countries in
all aspects of health, education and welfare, near the middle of the list
of OECD countries in all these areas.
And we have seen a mother and father -- unable to bear watching the
side-effects of chemotherapy on their child with an almost-intractable
cancer -- refuse the chemotherapy in favour of what looks very much like
quackery, and when ordered by a court to reinstitute the chemotherapy,
steal their child away from the State and hide. The State (court)
recognizing it was beaten, simply rescinded the order and allowed the
parents to come out of hiding with no recriminations, and no obligation to
use scientific medicine. This after a large media campaign on the side of
the parents and "alternative medicine". (The full details of the
alternative cancer therapy were not revealed, but it appears the
practitioner was not a medical doctor, and the "therapy" consisted of some
form or manual manipulation of the tumour site and diet and herb
treatments.) This kind of quackery (as opposed to medical science
investigating, by the standard scientific method, say, indigenous herbal
"cures" for cancer which have some possiblity of having something
scientifically provable and useful inherent in them).
RESNICK:
)I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that there is a connection
)here between the issue of mandatory routine vaccination and the
)introduction of genetic engineering, irradiation, etc. into our food
)supply... Maybe the connection has to do with the "powers that be" (and I
)don't mean God) determining that for our own good and for the good of Big
)Business (like Monsanto, maker of Roundup Ready soybeans, bovine growth
)hormone, and much, much more), certain things will be done that will affect
)our families, whether we like it or not.
KOPP:
Robert Flannery, where are you when you are needed? (G) (Got the right
Robert this time, eh, Tolz?) Methinks Yael is sounding a tad bit paranoid
...
I am no fan of Monsanto, having been in Vietnam during the era of spraying
of Agent Orange.
And I do believe that government regulatory processes can be tilted, if not
corrupted, in favour of big-business science.
But I think that the scientific establishment, and the watchdog consumer
and science criticism mechanisms, are robust enough to keep such abuses in
check. Certainly this is several orders of magnitude better today than it
was 50 years ago when the U.S. Government simply decided to withhold the
possible side effects of live polio vaccine contaminated with a simian
virus that is now, apparently, causing cancers.
One such control on vaccination policy is the following *independent* body
which has studied and deliberated the childhood immunization problems and
policies, and made recommendations for changes to the vaccinatin regimes.
This is hardly a Monsanto-controlled rubber-stamper.
The report is too long to quote in its entirety here. It deals mainly with
side effects of vaccines on people with pre-existing abnormalities of the
immune system, neurologic system, and fetal or childhood disorders which
raise contraindications for immunization of one type or another. There were
no iatrogenic pathologies attributed to side-effects of the vaccines
themselves. I will quote selectively.
begin quote---------------------
Update: Vaccine Side Effects, Adverse Reactions,
Contraindications, and Precautions
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
(* An independent research organization chartered by the National Academy of
Sciences.)
Authors: Jessica Tuttle, M.D., Robert T. Chen, M.D., M.A., Stephen C.
Hadler, M.D., John C. Watson, M.D., M.P.H., Gina J. Terracciano, D.O.,
M.P.H., Epidemiology and Surveillance Division, National Immunization
Program, in collaboration with the Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices (ACIP).
Summary: This report provides updated information concerning the potential
adverse events associated with vaccination for hepatitis B, poliomyelitis,
measles, mumps, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. This information
incorporates findings from a series of recent literature reviews, conducted
by an expert committee at the Institute of Medicine (IOM), of all evidence
regarding the possible adverse consequences of vaccines administered to
children. Specific information concerning the following vaccines and the
possible adverse events associated with their administration are included:
hepatitis B vaccine and anaphylaxis; measles vaccine and a)
thrombocytopenia and b) possible risk for death resulting from anaphylaxis
or disseminated disease in immunocompromised persons; diphtheria and
tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine (DTP) and chronic encephalopathy; and
tetanus-toxoid-containing vaccines and a)
Guillain-BarrÈ syndrome, b) brachial neuritis, and c) possible risk for
death resulting from anaphylaxis.
Introduction
Immunization has enabled the global eradication of smallpox [1], the
elimination of poliomyelitis from the Western hemisphere [2], and major
reductions in the incidence of other vaccine-preventable diseases in the
United States (Table 1). However, although immunization has successfully
reduced the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases, vaccination can
cause both minor and, rarely, serious side effects. Public awareness of and
controversy about vaccine safety has increased, primarily because increases
in vaccine coverage resulted in an increased number of adverse events that
occurred after vaccination. Such adverse events include both true reactions
to vaccine and events coincidental to, but not caused by, vaccination.
Despite concerns about vaccine safety, vaccination is safer than accepting
the risks for the diseases these vaccines prevent. Unless a disease has
been eradicated (e.g., smallpox), failure to vaccinate increases the risks
to both the individual and society.
In response to concerns about vaccine safety, the National Childhood
Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 established a no-fault compensation process for
persons possibly injured by selected vaccines [3]. The Act also mandated
that the Institute of Medicine* (IOM) review scientific and other evidence
regarding the possible adverse consequences of vaccines administered to
children.
IOM constituted an expert committee to review all available information on
these vaccine adverse events; such information included epidemiologic
studies, case series, individual case reports, and testimonials. To derive
their conclusions, the IOM committee members created five categories of
causality to describe the relationships between the vaccines and specific
adverse events.
Simultaneous Administration of Vaccines
In general, simultaneous administration of the most widely used live and
inactivated vaccines does not impair antibody responses or increase rates
of adverse reactions [53]. The administration of MMR vaccine yields results
similar to the administration of individual measles, mumps, and rubella
vaccines at different sites or at different times.
Vaccines recommended for administration at 12-15 months of age can be
administered at either one or two visits. There are equivalent antibody
responses and no clinically significant increases in the frequency of
adverse events when DTP, MMR, and OPV (or IPV) vaccines and H. influenzae
type b conjugate vaccine (HbCV) are ad-ministered either simultaneously at
different sites or at separate times. If a child might not be brought back
for future vaccinations, all vaccines (including DTP [or DTaP], OPV[or
IPV], MMR, varicella, HbCV, and hepatitis B vaccines) may be administered
simultaneously, as appropriate to the child's age and previous vaccination
status.
To throw out the baby (scientific medicine, and particularly the value of
universal vaccination) with the bathwater (the mendacity inherent in all
people, which flourishes in some unethical concerns) is to not only return
to the dark ages, but to invite the likely backlash of government
compulsion by force against any serious revolt in the population against
public health measures. Where is your "halfway" in this, Yael? The good of
the Commonweal demands that there be some yielding to the interest of the
majority.
RESNICK:
)I'm not sure what the direct connection is between all this and
)Anthroposophy/Waldorf, except that my grappling with these issues is
)evidence that it's not only Anthroposophists who deviate from the "norm"
)here. If you surveyed a random sample of Anthroposophists on these issues
)and a random sample of Californians, for example (and I'm neither of
)these), you'd probably find similar responses.
KOPP:
The connection is real, and vital, and dangerous.
**The bottom line in regard to this list's main concerns -- the practices
of Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools, public or private -- is that
SWA is an active opponent of herd immunity, universal immunization, and
particularly state compulsion; and it advocates a system of medicine which
is, if at all, only one slight step removed from outright quackery. The
fact that SWA people are well-meaning, if deluded, credulous, new-age
twits, does not negate the harm they can cause by promoting such health
frauds.**
I think that the California example is invalid, as everyone knows that
Californians are all wacko new-agers who rub crystals with Shirley Maclaine
and believe they also are gods. (G)
Seriously, I think if you did such a survey nationwide you might find that
a significantly higher percentage of SWA people (whatever they are) agree
with the anti-scientific-medicine line you have effectively proselytized
above (despite your self-prided skepticism) than the rest of the population.
One would hope so, or we are *definitely* headed for Carl Sagan's "new dark
age".
END OF PART TWO OF TWO PARTS DIVIDED FOR BENEFIT OF E-MAIL CLIENT
RESTRICTIONS
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.2 ---------------
From: redon (redon geocities.com)
Subject: School Prayer
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 08:42:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905231335.GAA18013 lists1.best.com)
) From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
) Subject: Re: School Prayer
) Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 03:34:44 +02
) Please tell me this is a joke.
This is very real.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.3 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:17:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Kathy Suthphen]
) Well Bob, I don't think I do *know* this. Why don't you tell what the
) secular aspects are, in your opinion, and I'll respond to that. When I
) attended the public school teacher's training it was
) Anthroposophy, the
) endless fairy tales, the rhythmic movements, the wet-on-wet, the
) pseudoscience, the strange lectures on child development ala
) Steiner, the
) temperaments, the *elements*, the form drawing, the pretty
) books . . . need
) I go on?
OK. Let's keep it really simple. Assume the following:
A school district chooses to practice the following methods: keep
the teacher with the children for 8 ears; use art in most if not all
lessons; start with a multi-hour main lesson block each morning with a
concentration on some subject which lasts 3-4 weeks; use a slower "schedule"
for getting children to read than is commonly used in most other programs.
Teachers attend training sessions at the University of California
and are taught by professors from the University. No monies go directly or
indirectly to RSC. The teachers are not taught anything about anthroposophy
or Rudolf Steiner. They have been brought into this program because some
educators and parents like the methods that they are being taught and want
various school districts to offer the alternative.
Now the question: Do you have objections to this from a point of
view of separation of church and state?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.4 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 17:09:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)Measles - prior to vaccine in 1963, more than a half million cases were
)reported each year. By 1995, only 301 cases were reported. Outbreaks mainly
)involve unvaccinated/inadequtely vaccinated pre-schoolage children as well
)as high school and college students.
Do you happen to have, or know where I can get, year-by-year values for
measles incidence from 1963 for the next decade or so? (You can probably
tell where this is leading)
Stephen
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.5 ---------------
From: "Duane Koons" (dkoons gundluth.org)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:56:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Michael Kopp. I appreciate your enthusiastic comments when they are imbued
with solid facts and well formulated rational. I had to check my e-mail
files to make sure it was the same writer. Thank you for going to the
trouble to post the data. Duane
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:25:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905230259.TAA14808 lists1.best.com)
Thanks for the news from Bedford, Robert Tolz.
)He also criticized a segment of one third-grade teacher's week-long lesson
)on the culture of India, in which the teacher read her class stories of an
)elephant-headed Hindu god, Ganesha, and then planned to have pupils make
)their own Ganeshas from paper.
)
)"While reading the Ganesha story can be part of a neutral secular
)curriculum, this court fails to find any educational justification for
)telling young impressionable students to construct images of a known
)religious god," the judge wrote in response to the plaintiffs' complaint
)that the school was forcing them to make graven images, in violation of
)their religious beliefs.
I don't think this judge would tolerate Waldorf history lessons.
)He also ordered the school district to end religious exercises and
)paraphernalia at Fox Lane High School's "truly bizarre" Earth Day
)celebrations. He said a creed students listened to -- "This is what we
)believe. The Mother of us all is Earth. The Father is the Sun," constituted
)religious worship of the Earth.
That was indeed bizarre, more explicit than Waldorf's verses. The grace
before meals, for example,
Earth who gives to us this food
Sun who makes it ripe and good
Dear Earth dear Sun
By you we live
Our loving thanks to you we give
is acceptable to most parents as 'generic spirituality', but equally
violates the constitution as a nature-worship prayer.
)To prevent recurring lawsuits on similar grounds, Brieant also ordered
)schools officials to publish a clear policy demanding that teachers and
)guest lecturers in the future remain neutral toward all religions, although
)he was clear that religion is not a forbidden topic, if it is presented
)without advocacy. "To describe the religious beliefs of some persons without
)endorsing those beliefs does not violate the First Amendment," Brieant
)explained.
I think this was all the judge could do, though in practice I don't think
it will have any effect after a few years when the current staff have
retired. Those rules were what they were supposed to be doing in the first
place.
The situation in publicly funded Waldorf schools is significantly
different. In Waldorf there is a 75-year tradition of denying the religious
content of an essentially religious curriculum, the Anthroposophical
content of Waldorf teacher training, and the whole body of Waldorf
literature "informed" by Anthroposophy.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:26:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
ALAN FINE
))There certainly are cases of grey where the desease being immunized is of a
))mild or nonthreatening nature, and I am certainly open debate about whether
))immunization is necessary for any particular illness.
I don't think we do mass immunization for any "mild or nonthreatening"
disease, do we? Measles, for example, produces significant fatalities.
YAEL RESNICK
)In my understanding, this is exactly the point. Intelligent people who
)question routine vaccination of all children seek unbiased information on
)the benefits and risks of *each* vaccine, on an individual basis. Unbiased
)information, however, is extremely hard to come by.
I don't understand this attitude. To say that information based on
scientific knowledge and population statistics is "biased" is to buy into
the relativism that says all opinions are equal, or to believe in a
paranoid fantasy of government and medicine conspiring against the people.
But some opinions are wrong, and can kill you, and though government may
often be stupid, it isn't malicious.
)Caring parents who seek
)reliable data on which to base their decisions are thus left in a real
)dilemma; they must make the best decisions they can with the limited
)information they have.
Information isn't limited. You can read thorough explanations of
immunization policy at http://www.who.int/gpv-safety/prof/misconcept.htm#1,
for example.
)While there are certainly some parents who choose not to vaccinate at all,
)there are also many (more?) who pick and choose in order to maximize the
)chances that their children will stay healthy, both in the short term and
)in the long term. (From what I understand, one theory is that eradicating
)acute illness -- and/or bombarding a small child's body with many vaccines
)in a short span of time -- may tax the immune system and affect the child's
)natural disease-fighting ability, leading to a decrease in overall health
)and an increase in the incidence of chronic illness later on.)
This "bombard" hypothesis is Misconception No. 6 in the above web site.
)It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
)acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
)introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
)ones?
That the newer ones are safer, thank science. The facts for the disease
(same web page) are:
Pneumonia: 1 in 8
Encephalitis: 1 in 20
Death: 1 in 200
And for the vaccine:
Acute encephalopathy: 0-10.5 in 1,000,000
Death: None proven
)And even the newest vaccines carry risks (that may well be worth
)taking in many cases), and contain potentially toxic ingredients such as
)formaldehyde and genetically engineered components.
This is sowing fear based on ignorance.
)And, of course, even
)newer vaccines will continue to come along as the risks of the current ones
)become evident. (Only recently, the recommended schedule for polio
)vaccination was revised to include several doses of killed polio in place
)of the live oral vaccine -- in order to decrease the risk of the vaccine
)causing... polio. That said, when I was a student for a year in Israel a
)decade ago, there was an outbreak of polio and I certainly wasn't picketing
)outside the health centers for my right to remain unvaccinated. I do think
)it's a different story when there is a clear and present danger.)
)
)People like to point to the smallpox vaccine as a model, but it's not
)really valid as an example for today's situation. When the smallpox vaccine
)program was implemented, there were few (if any?) other vaccines routinely
)given to children. It's a different story today, when two-month-old infants
)are subjected to multiple vaccinations in a jam-packed schedule that
)continues through the early childhood years. Also, the smallpox vaccine was
)phased out (I think somewhere around 1970?) when there was no longer a
)clear and present danger.
Because smallpox was -eradicated- from the whole world. It may mutate again
from cowpox or something, but for the time being we're safe from -that- one.
)Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
)the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
)the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
The viewpoint based on science and ethics isn't extreme. Again, Yael, take
care to avoid the trap of relativism.
ALAN FINE
)) What I am saying is
))that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize must
))be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
))control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You may not
))believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that pollution
))control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may point out that
))the air is clean in your community. You may see no reason to have pollution
))control on your vehicle. But if you are one of the few choosing not to
))exercize pollution control on your vehicle, you are deriving the health
))benefits of your neighbor's compliance, with no sacrifice of your own. I
))see that as selfish. I view many immunization programs in the same way.
YAEL RESNICK
)This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's dilemma
)concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it comes to the
)health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
It's an excellent analogy, only you don't like it, because it points out
the immorality of your position.
)I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that there is a connection
)here between the issue of mandatory routine vaccination and the
)introduction of genetic engineering, irradiation, etc. into our food
)supply... Maybe the connection has to do with the "powers that be" (and I
)don't mean God) determining that for our own good and for the good of Big
)Business (like Monsanto, maker of Roundup Ready soybeans, bovine growth
)hormone, and much, much more), certain things will be done that will affect
)our families, whether we like it or not.
)
)Scientists can make a great case for the benefits of genetically modifying
)crops, and for irradiating our food to eliminate pathogenic bacteria... and
)it certainly can start to sound like all this technological interference is
)in everyone's best interest...
All these subjects are worthy of debate, and they are debated, hopefully,
based on evidence, not fear.
)I'm not sure what the direct connection is between all this and
)Anthroposophy/Waldorf, except that my grappling with these issues is
)evidence that it's not only Anthroposophists who deviate from the "norm"
)here. If you surveyed a random sample of Anthroposophists on these issues
)and a random sample of Californians, for example (and I'm neither of
)these), you'd probably find similar responses.
)
)Lots of people who read Natural Jewish Parenting are trying to be informed
)about these issues as well...
The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against immunization,
harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
suffering and death.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:38:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905231831.LAA01415 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
)The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against immunization,
)harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
)suffering and death.
Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
the results of "Waldorf preaching".
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 14:17:46 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
On 23 May 99,, Yael Resnick wrote:
) Alan Fine posted:
)
) ) What I am saying is
) )that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize
) )must be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like
) )pollution control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You
) )may not believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that
) )pollution control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may
) )point out that the air is clean in your community. You may see no
) )reason to have pollution control on your vehicle. But if you are one
) )of the few choosing not to exercize pollution control on your vehicle,
) )you are deriving the health benefits of your neighbor's compliance,
) )with no sacrifice of your own. I see that as selfish. I view many
) )immunization programs in the same way.
)
) This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's
) dilemma concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it
) comes to the health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
Also, the analogy fails because vaccination is not mandatory, while
pollution control is. If the analogy is made to support mandatory
vaccination, then I *really* disagree with it.
One's privacy interest in one's body is greater than that in one's
car. Forcing people to have pollution control devices on their cars, for
the greater good, is acceptable because it does not infringe on one's
fundamental rights (although strict libertarians would disagree). But to
force people to take vaccines against their will would never be acceptable
to me, any more than it would be acceptable to force people to undergo any
other medical procedure. The government has no business in my body.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1323.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:25:54 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905231659.JAA23851 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Kopp. I appreciate your enthusiastic comments when they are imbued
)with solid facts and well formulated rational. I had to check my e-mail
)files to make sure it was the same writer. Thank you for going to the
)trouble to post the data. Duane
Thanks for what appears to be a kack-handed compliment, Duane, but I happen
to think that *all* my comments are "imbued with solid facts and well
formulated rational [sic]". Perhaps you could let me know which of my
previous posts you consider not factual or rational?
Case in point: the Duesberg "HIV doesn't cause AIDS" issue, brought up by
an intemperant, ignorant, puerile, illiterate, ranting Waldorf school
graduate who got an honours degree in philosophy and computer science, but
whose prejudices are thoroughly new-age and Waldorfian. I spent hours
categorically refuting that rubbish which can kill, and asked Ezra Beeman
if he would take the moral responsibility of telling someone who was
diagnosed with HIV that they didn't need to worry about AIDS, and could go
on with a normal sex life. No answer. No rebuttal from anyone; at least
Ezra's betters among the Defenders of the Faith are not THAT crazy.
Only the Robert Twins think Kopp is really someone else in disguise.
Only people who want to believe in fairies believe nonsense like
Anthroposophical Medicine.
But again, sincere thanks for your remarks; you'll understand that
compliments for Kopp are so few and far between from Defenders and
fellow-travellers, and the occasional nice word gets me all choked up.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1323 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1324 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
002 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - review of German book criticizing Anthroposophical medicine
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: eurythmy, not psychologist
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Bedford Satanism Decision: Journal News
006 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
007 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
008 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
009 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Non-Waldorf but derived from.....
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:23:21 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905231613.JAA07825 lists1.best.com)
)From Stephen Tonkin:
)Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
))Measles - prior to vaccine in 1963, more than a half million cases were
))reported each year. By 1995, only 301 cases were reported. Outbreaks
))mainly
))involve unvaccinated/inadequtely vaccinated pre-schoolage children as well
))as high school and college students.
)
)Do you happen to have, or know where I can get, year-by-year values for
)measles incidence from 1963 for the next decade or so? (You can probably
)tell where this is leading)
)
)Stephen
Stephen,
Yes, I think I can tell where you're trying to go, but I think you'll find
(if you don't already know) that there is a simple and undeniable negation
of what you are likely to say.
I won't steal your act by revealing where I know you're going.
But I must express my surprise that you, a scientist who has alluded to
difficulties with Anthroposophy's mumbo jumbo alternatives to that human
achievement and glory, would want to rehash the new-age, Anthroposophical,
health fraud line of crap about immunization that seems to be imminent.
Here are some resources for statistics. Go for it, mate -- but you're
wasting your time with such an argument: it doesn't hold water.
http://www.cdc.gov
(http://search.cdc.gov/search97cgi/s97_cgi.exe?Action=Search&Colle
ction=nchswww&ResultTemplate=nchswww.hts&queryText=measles&SortField=Score)
The above are CDC databases for 'measles'. All are huge .pdf files which
will require Adobe Acrobat Reader to read after downloading, which will
take some time and require some disk space. Enjoy the reading.
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publicat/ccdr/95vol21/index.html
Canadian pdf files
http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/anti-immune.htm
Measles statistics from Sweden, 1981-1987, plus other vax quax information.
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/pict001.htm
If you have time, Stephen -- and I recommend this for all Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical and new-age people on this list as well, especially those
considering partial or total civil resistance to immunization of their
children, the above site contains some pictures of people with
vaccine-preventable diseases.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.2 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 19:51:25 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231831.LAA01415 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (23765561 toto.iv)
Tarjei Straume writes:
) Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) )The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against immunization,
) )harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
) )suffering and death.
)
) Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
) the results of "Waldorf preaching".
Before a child can enroll in the local Waldorf (private) school in
Atlanta, you must demonstrate that she is up to date in vaccinations.
I think there is some way to opt out, but it is not recommended in any
way that I have seen.
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: review of German book criticizing Anthroposophical medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:37:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
http://www.indian-skeptic.de/html/esove.htm
This review of "The Esoteric Seduction" doesn't touch on the
Anthroposophical medicine content of the book at all; but there's an
interesting critique of the "academic left" position of many of the
articles in it.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: eurythmy, not psychologist
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 12:32:23 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)At 12:42 AM 5/22/99 -0700, Dan Dugan wrote:
))In a discussion on the SJU Waldorf list, Dawn McConnell wrote:
))
))Mad Ross filled Dawn in on how things are done in the insulated world of
))Waldorf:
MAD ROSS
)Gee Dan I guess you do not beleive in the United States Copyright Laws.
DAN DUGAN
I do and I acknowledge your copyright on your posting whether you give
notice or not.
)And you did not have my reproduction permission.
Your permission is not required for discussion of your posting. The
quotation was within the fair use guidelines of the waldorf-critics list.
)Those final lines in my signature are there for a reason.
It's simple: if you don't want to be quoted, don't publish your opinions.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Bedford Satanism Decision: Journal News
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:55:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Judge: 3 Bedford teachers illegally promote Satanism
By BRUCE GOLDING and LANNING TALIAFERRO
COPYRIGHT 1999 The Journal News. All rights reserved. Publication date:
5/23/1999
WHITE PLAINS -- Three teachers in the Bedford school district illegally
promoted pagan religious beliefs and practices in violation of the First
Amendment, a federal judge ruled yesterday.
In a split decision, U.S. District Judge Charles L. Brieant rejected most
of the claims by three Roman Catholic families who argued that the
district's educational policies offended their religious beliefs.
But the judge -- who branded some school activities "terminally dumb" and
"truly bizarre" -- agreed that individual Bedford educators went over the
line in three instances, including a lesson on India in which
fourth-graders made construction-paper cutouts of Ganesha, an
elephant-headed Hindu god.
"While reading the Ganesha story can be part of a neutral secular
curriculum, this court fails to find any educational justification for
telling young impressionable students to construct images of a known
religious god," Brieant wrote in his 61-page decision.
The school district's lawyer, Warren Richmond, said he would recommend an
appeal because Brieant's ruling could force educators to censor their
lesson plans to avoid litigation.
"It's going to have a chilling effect on teachers," Richmond said. "It's
going to go far beyond these three activities and the Bedford school
district."
A staff attorney with the conservative Rutherford Institute, Kim Gilmer,
called Brieant's decision unique because "for the most part, courts don't
like to micromanage curriculum."
But Elliot Mincberg, legal director of the liberal People for the American
Way, which filed legal papers in support of the school district, said
judges in Florida and Mississippi had earlier ordered school districts to
alter courses in biblical history that were found to promote religion.
Brieant's ruling came more than two months after a nonjury trial that grew
out of a 1995 dispute over school clubs in which Bedford students played a
card game called Magic: The Gathering.
DEVIL WORSHIP
Critics, including the plaintiffs, contend that the game is an introduction
to devil worship because its cards feature lurid images of demons and other
supernatural beings.
District officials refused to ban the game, saying it taught players math
and other skills.
In addition to the ruling on the Ganesha cutouts, the judge directed that
the district banish "worry dolls" -- small stick figures of Central
American origin that purportedly prevent bad dreams -- and eliminate Earth
Day ceremonies and other classroom activities that resemble religious
rituals or prayers.
Brieant also ordered that the district adopt written standards directing
that all instruction about religion be presented neutrally and without
forcing students to participate in any religious exercise.
None of the teachers faulted in yesterday's ruling -- Jackie Reizes, Dale
Saltzman and Ruth Ann Funari -- could be reached for comment, but Schools
Superintendent Bruce Dennis said he was disappointed because he thought the
district should have prevailed on every issue.
"I'm deeply disturbed that the judge chose to seize upon three very
innocent activities," Dennis said. "The notion of that paper-bag elephant
head cutout being a violation, I assumed to be ludicrous."
But Dennis also claimed a key victory because Brieant refused to allow the
plaintiffs to "opt out" of any school programs to which they objected on
religious grounds.
School officials will comply with Brieant's ruling unless and until it is
overturned on appeal, Dennis said.
School board President Paul Alcorn said he would seriously consider an
appeal but wouldn't make up his mind until after reading Brieant's decision
and discussing it with other trustees and the district's lawyers.
Outgoing board member James Markowski questioned the value of an appeal.
"I think we have better things to focus our time, money and resources on
than defending the right to have our children make paper-bag Ganeshas,
worry dolls and prayers as part of Earth Day," Markowski said.
The school board will meet June 2.
One of the plaintiffs, Mary Ann DiBari of Pound Ridge, said she was
delighted by the ruling, even though Brieant ruled against her side on 12
of 15 points.
"We only needed to win on one issue to show that the school district
violated our rights and violated the First Amendment," DiBari said.
But DiBari said she planned to appeal Brieant's ruling regarding the Magic
game, which the judge said no reasonable person could regard as a form of
religious instruction.
"Our case was meritorious on its face," DiBari said. "Magic: The Gathering
is an introduction to Satanism."
ASSERTION DENIED
A spokesman for the game's manufacturer, Wizards of the Coast in Renton,
Wash., denied DiBari's assertion and hailed yesterday's ruling regarding
the game.
"Our games promote positive social interaction, critical thinking and
creativity," said Brian Lewis, the company's associate general counsel.
"Our games do not have anything to do with religion."
DiBari and the other plaintiffs were represented at no cost by attorneys
from the American Catholic Lawyers Association.
The plaintiffs' trial lawyer, James Bendell of Port Townsend, Wash., said
the question of an appeal was premature because both sides still had to
agree on a final judgment enforcing Brieant's orders.
Both sides also have until next month to submit arguments regarding the
legal fees and court costs that can be awarded to the plaintiffs for the
portion of the case they won.
Bendell could not provide an estimate of the plaintiffs' costs, but said it
was less than the $330,000 that Dennis said the school district had spent
on its side of the case to date.
None of the district's legal expenses were covered by insurance because the
plaintiffs did not seek money damages, Dennis said.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.6 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 20:25:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905231659.JAA23851 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905232327.QAA11369 lists1.best.com)
)Only the Robert Twins think Kopp is really someone else in disguise.
I've never said or implied that.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.7 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 17:33:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"There are non-anthroposophical, non-spiritual folks who like the
Waldorf method for what it is on its face, regardless of or in spite of
whatever mumbo-jumbo you may find in its underpinnings. These people are
defending the wide discretion that a school ordinarily has to implement
policies which on their face serve a secular purpose. This appears to be
one of the main contentions of the defendant school districts in the
summary
judgment motion.
Bob Tolz"
I don't know anything about the legal issues, but I agree with you. I
positively loathe Steiner the more of his nonsense I read, but I still
intend to send my kid to the local Waldorf Kinderhaus.
Why? Well, I am extremely interested in the work of brain development
researchers such as Jane Healy, PhD. (author of "Endangered Minds - Why
Kids Can't Think," "Your Child's Growing Mind" and "Failure to Connect").
The consensus that is currently coming out of the scientific community -
and Mister Kopp, please feel free to look me up on this, there are many
researchers besides Healy working with PET scans, etc. to determine how the
brain develops - is that the kind of real world work, such as singing,
bread-baking, sewing, etc., that is done in the Waldorf Kindergarten
actually helps the brain develop more connections. I live on an island and
I can tell you that there are no other options for this type of preschool
experience here, except in the preschool that I own (not a Waldorf school).
But my son is 4 and a half and needs to go to his own school now instead of
always being with Mom, so there you have it...
I am on this list to try to stay abreast of what the critics are saying,
because I am critical of the "underpinnings," myself. But the stuff "on the
face", I agree with. My dilemma is, if the Waldorf school is all based on a
wacky cult, is it still okay to me to send my kid to the school? For him it
would only be one or two years of preschool, not non-stop BS all the way
through eight grade, and "the heart is not a pump" !
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.8 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Summary Judgment Motion [anon.]
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 22:35:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
I take it from Anon's posting that he/she is a physician. Welcome
to the list.
)
) Bob Tolz wrote:
) "in every case the parent
) is required to use his or her discernment to determine what
) is best for the
) child academically, notwithstanding that the teachers in the
) "rejected"
) venue might disagree."
)
[To which Anon. replied]
) What about the opinions of the teacher in the *chosen* venue? If the
) teachers one has trusted with the education of one's child
) don't consider
) what the parent *knows* the child's needs, academically, what are the
) parent's acceptable options?
[Bob Tolz]
Even within the *chosen* venue, there may be disagreements. I think
I highlighted in my prior posts what I would think some of those options
might be, most of which involve communication.
)
) Tolz:
) "To accept without question and with utmost
) faith what someone says is true is to abdicate one's own personal
) responsibility."
)
[Anon]
) Like accepting without real question and on ultimate faith
) Steiner's claim
) to clairvoyance, astral travel, and the truth of his
) assertions on life,
) the universe & everything.
We are in agreement.
)
) Tolz:
) "Ministers and priests who tell us what morality ought to be are
) human and fallible. That's why I refuse to accept blindly
) what anybody
) tells me what life is all about."
)
) Any minister, priest, or rabbi who lacks the humility and
) discernment to
) acknowledge their own human fallibility is outside their competence as
) counselors and guides. The absolute moral authority comes
) from a higher
) source. The relationship is between each individual and God. Pastors
) minister to earthly needs and offer professional help in
) interpretations
) that are ultimately matters of discernment and conscience.
) The leaders of
) congregations are also answerable ultimately to God.
[Bob Tolz]
We are in agreement, with the following caveat regarding "the
absolute moral authority comes from a higher source." As I've stated
before, determining exactly what that absolute moral authority *is*,
assuming that there is one, is often something that people relegate to their
religious leaders to determine. I think religious leaders (and religions
per se) can offer some guidance, but because of their fallibility
individuals should not abdicate their responsibility.
)
) Tolz:
) "Doctors are human and fallible. That's why I learn everything I can
) about any condition I or a loved one has. I'm finding more
) and more that
) the doctors I deal with are quite open to learning from me
) whatever I might
) have found on the internet. They don't have *time* to know
) everything."
) [Anon]
) Maybe they don't have *time* to know *everything*, but I have
) never met a
) competent physician who was not up to speed on at least their
) own area of
) practice.
[Bob Tolz]
Indeed, you have given us a definition of what a *competent*
physician is.
)
) Tolz:
) "Lawyers are human and fallible. That's why I demand that my clients
) read every word of a contract I've written on their behalf.
) I can't know
) every fact surrounding a circumstance, nor can I know every
) concern that the
) client may have, unless the client takes some active responsibility."
)
[Anon]
) Doctors can't know everything about objective science, and
) lawyers can't
) know everything about the client's subjective circumstances?
) This linkage
) seems slanted in favor of the attorneys.
It is important for the client to become involved, rather than
assume that the lawyer will *protect* him without input from the client.
Contracts work best for a client when the client *reads* a draft of a
contract, asks questions, thinks about it, makes comments and so forth.
Without that active participation and input, there's a lot missing.
) Would you accept a
) physician's
) interpretation or knowledge of the law? You are qualified to go on the
) Internet & search out medical information for a physician that you are
) confident is reliable. Can a physician spend time they don't
) have to keep
) up in their own field to search out all the precedents and opinions in
) their own legal cases?
[Bob Tolz]
I'm not sure I follow your point. I certainly would not accept a
physician's interpretation or knowledge of the law, but neither do I expect
my physician to accept my interpretation or knowledge of medicine.
Nevertheless, I have had doctors thank me for the information that I have
produced for them which they did not otherwise possess.
)
) Tolz:
) "Teachers are also human and fallible. The parent who blindly leaves
) a child in the care of the teachers without understanding
) what's going on is
) abdicating responsibility."
)
[Anon]
) The question is not: 'understanding what's going on'. It is
) that the parent
) is not considered competent to question or change aspects of
) the curriculum
) relative to their own child's needs. In Waldorf, there are perceived
) *needs* of the student that only the teacher can competently
) address, in
) light of the teacher's knowledge of Steiner's writings and
) the teacher's
) *inner work* and meditations on the child.
[Bob Tolz]
You are giving your impression of Waldorf or Steiner theory. In
practice, I have found the teachers quite open to input from the parents.
)
) Tolz:
) "In all of these cases, the person whose knowledge in an area is
) greater than one's own is owed deference and respect for that
) knowledge, but
) a degree, diploma, license or certificate is not proof of
) competency. Proof
) is in the pudding."
[Anon]
) A physician has an objective education that lasts roughly
) twice as long as
) that of any other profession in a technically demanding field
) that changes
) rapidly and builds on the knowledge gained by all the other clinical &
) research workers in medical science. Yet, an attorney can earn their
) gratitude by researching medical information on the Internet when that
) information does not include a history, a physical exam, or
) an ability to
) make a differential diagnoses.
[Bob Tolz]
True. Your point being? What's wrong with an open-minded physician
being happy to learn anything from any of his patients?
) [Anon]
) However, when the profession under question is law, the final
) responsibility rests on the client, because an attorney, who
) has to know
) the statutes and the permutations of circumstance and past
) decisions that
) only rarely are changing as the contract is being written,
) can pass the
) responsibility on to the client.
[Bob Tolz]
No, the basic responsibility in *each* profession rests with the
professional, but the patient/client should not assume that the professional
in either case is a god.
) [Anon]
) It is a common joke in medicine that an accurate medical
) history is only
) obtained by the attending (supervising) physician, by the
) second or third
) consulting specialist, or at around the third visit. Is that
) history not
) more important to bring to a physician's attention than a
) gloss of a paper
) found on the Internet?
[Bob Tolz]
That history most certainly *is* more important than a paper found
on the internet.
[Anon]
) A common joke about lawyers is that "only a fool acts as their own
) attorney". Is it at all possible that only a fool acts as his
) own physician?
[Bob Tolz]
It's not a joke. It's an adage: A lawyer who represents himself
has a fool for a client. I would also agree that a doctor who acts as his
own physician has a fool for a patient. By extrapolation, any person who
acts as his own lawyer or physician has a fool for a patient/client.
)
) Tolz:
) "There have been occasions when I've seen parents
) feel as if they are prepared to substitute their judgment on
) many things I
) would defer completely to the teachers."
) [Anon]
) How does one discern *feelings* by *seeing*?
[Bob Tolz]
I'm don't understand the question.
[Anon]
You can add to a
) technical
) professional's knowledge through use of a public information
) source and
) your clients bear final responsibility for any contract you
) draw.
[Bob Tolz]
I don't believe I ever said that my clients bear all responsibility
for any contract I draw. That would be silly.
[Anon]
) But, *on
) many things I would defer completely to the teacher's
) [expertise]*?
[Bob Tolz]
Yes. Just as I would defer in many cases completely to the
expertise of my physician, and would expect my clients to defer completely
to my expertise in many cases.
[Anon]
) When,
) in the case of Waldorf, the teacher may have two years of sectarian
) training? When, as has been said before by educators on the list, the
) public university training of 4-6 years duration, may or may not be
) addressing the situation the parent is concerned with and where the
) differing opinions are just that: opinions?
[Bob Tolz]
It depends on the individual teacher, doesn't it?
[Anon]
) How are differences in
) pedagogical approach at all analogous to technical scientific
) and clinical
) medical judgement?
[Bob Tolz]
I was drawing analogies in different arenas to the individual
responsibility that any person must exercise. If you don't see it, that's
fine with me.
[Anon]
) If your civil client cannot rely completely on your
) interpretation of the law because you cannot be expected to
) know all the
) personal aspects of the situation, isn't it the same in
) education?
[Bob Tolz]
You are assuming too much from my brief description of the
interaction between attorney and client. I do expect my client to rely
completely on my interpretation of the law. However, in drafting a contract
or settling a lawsuit, I need to know very clearly what it is that the
client *wants*. That is something that I cannot find in the books. I
*depend* on the client for that information. I client who *assumes* I know
what he wants and is not forthcoming or participatory is a client who may
wind up disappointed.
[Anon]
) Doesn't
) the parent *know* aspects of their child's needs,
) academically, as well as
) emotionally ,that the teacher has no way of knowing?
[Bob Tolz]
I'm sure that's correct.
[Anon]
) Where
) is the proof
) in Waldorf? Where are the standardized test results of
) Waldorf teachers &
) students? Why is teacher competency only the purview of the College of
) Teachers? Public school teachers have administrators above
) them, a school
) board and parent organizations, as well as individual parents
) to contend
) with. In many states teachers must pass regular competency exams. Who
) oversees Waldorf teachers? What methods of oversight are
) guaranteed to the
) parents and students?
[Bob Tolz]
I am aware of more than one instance where a Waldorf teacher has not
cut the mustard and has not remained in a position.
)
) Tolz:
) "I didn't believe the connection of class size to the problem
) was quite so obvious that it required the judgment of the
) teachers to be
) replaced by the judgment of the parents."
)
[Anon]
) Is everything in Waldorf done collectively and is consensus applied in
) cases of parent's meetings to discuss problems of class
) *dynamic*? Why did
) the opinion of even one other parent, who happens to be an
) attorney whose
) clients cannot expect him to know *everything* about their
) situation, even
) come into consideration?
[Bob Tolz]
This was not a meeting of all parents. It was a private meeting of
parents of about half a dozen kids in the class, called to discuss
independently what was happening in the class. Every person's opinion comes
into consideration in such a circumstance, which is as it should be.
[Anon]
) Where is the flexibility in Waldorf education? Can you cite specific
) examples where a parent was able to convince a teacher to
) make a change in
) content or presentation to accomodate a student?
[Bob Tolz]
Absolutely.
You must not have been lurking on this list very long. Recently
there was a description given on the list which would fit your request, and
maybe somebody can dig it up out of their own archives for you.
I have seen more than one of such changes in my own experience. Do
you want chapter and verse?
[Anon]
The content
) is prescribed
) by Steiner; the order of presentation is determined occultly:
)
[snip quotation from Survival Guide]
[Bob Tolz]
There is nothing within the cited quotation which suggests to me
that a teacher is forever forbidden from being flexible.
)
) [Kathy Sutphen]
) ) Well, Bob, I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the
) ) *most secular
) ) aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy
) and there's
) ) nothing left.
)
) Tolz:
) "That's absolutely not true, Kathy, and you know it."
) (snip joke)
)
) "You're avoiding the question, which is central in the summary
) judgment motion. I'd really love to hear your answer."
)
[Anon]
) If Kathy makes a positive statement to the effect that
) Anthroposophy is the
) only content in Waldorf pedagogy, why can't the answer
) contain concrete
) evidence of academic content devoid of Anthroposophy?
[Bob Tolz]
I provided such a "really simple" restatement of the question in a
subsequent post in that thread, setting forth a number of pedagogical
methods which could be used by a school without even calling it Waldorf but
which could have been derived from Waldorf.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.9 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Non-Waldorf but derived from.....
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 19:58:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Default
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I provided a .... restatement of the question in a subsequent post in that
thread, setting forth a number of pedagogical methods which could be used
by a school without even calling it Waldorf but
which could have been derived from Waldorf.
Bob Tolz
Oh, how I wish I could find one! Wouldn't it be nice to find a school
which placed emphasis on the arts, nature, real work, natural materials,
etc., without Steiner and his loony ideas being the root of it? I have
come to the conclusion that I can agree with the kindergarten - and Steiner
- on aspects of the curriculum, but still think Steiner himself was a nut.
{I just don't say it too loud when I'm around the other parents! ;-) }
Pandora
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1324.10 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 04:03:35 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905231613.JAA07825 lists1.best.com)
(199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)Yes, I think I can tell where you're trying to go, but I think you'll find
)(if you don't already know) that there is a simple and undeniable negation
)of what you are likely to say.
)
)I won't steal your act by revealing where I know you're going.
Go ahead, I don't mind. Thanks for the URLs -- I've saved them straight
to disk and will read them later.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1324 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1325 --------------
001 - Bob Williams (danabob she - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
002 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
003 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (part 2 of 2)
004 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (part 1 of 2)
005 - Bob Williams (danabob she - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: review of German book criticizing Anthroposophical medicin
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: Archives uploaded
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
009 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
010 - Lisa DeNike (Ldenike patu - RE: anthro. medicine and cancer
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.1 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 22:17:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Michael KOPP:
)As the Waldorf people say, if you take
)out the thing that makes Waldorf Waldorf (i.e., the religion of
)Anthroposophy, Steiner's remanufactured middle-ages mumbo jumbo) IT AIN'T
)WALDORF ANYMORE.
Bob Williams replies:
My understanding is that public schools that use Waldorf methods are not to
identify themselves as Waldorf schools but rather as Waldorf *inspired.* (I
can hear the snickering already.) My sense is that if it ain't got that
Steiner swing, then... "it ain't Waldorf anymore" but obviously has some
relationship that needs to be described-- if not by "inspired"-- by some
other term.
Dan Dugan:
)What are the secular aspects of Waldorf padagogy? Real qualities, not vague
)generalizations like "developmentally appropriate." I'm sure there are
)some, I'd like to hear your list.
Kathy Sutphen:
) Well, Bob (Tolz), I cannot imagine what that would be. What are the
) *most secular aspects* of the Waldorf pedagogy? Remove the Anthroposophy
)and )there's nothing left.
Bob Williams replies:
I assume that Dan, Mr. Kopp, Deby, and others all had secular aspects in
mind when they enrolled their children in Walorf schools. Despite their
subsequent experiences, the initial qualities that attracted them to WE
(assuming they had all looked deeper than art on the walls and school
assemblies) might form the basis for a secular Waldorf-derived
approach/fishing lure.
Respectfully,
Bob Williams
P.S. Another thought (or analogy that the list must have considered in the
past) Mindfulness meditation is often used in stress reduction programs and
clinics. Now, if the technique derives from Buddhism or other
contemplative/religious paths, can it be said to have a secular purpose, or
is the use of meditation as taught in a stress reduction program a
religious act by virtue of its genesis in a religious belief system?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.2 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:09:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I had posted, in response to Alan Fine:
))In my understanding, this is exactly the point. Intelligent people who
))question routine vaccination of all children seek unbiased information on
))the benefits and risks of *each* vaccine, on an individual basis. Unbiased
))information, however, is extremely hard to come by.
Dan responded:
)I don't understand this attitude. To say that information based on
)scientific knowledge and population statistics is "biased" is to buy into
)the relativism that says all opinions are equal, or to believe in a
)paranoid fantasy of government and medicine conspiring against the people.
As I explained in my response to Michael Kopp, I meant that the proponents
of *both* sides of the issue are biased. It is indeed very difficult to
obtain unbiased information from either side.
))It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
))acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
))introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
))ones?
)
)That the newer ones are safer, thank science. The facts for the disease
)(same web page) are:
)
) Pneumonia: 1 in 8
) Encephalitis: 1 in 20
) Death: 1 in 200
)
)And for the vaccine:
) Acute encephalopathy: 0-10.5 in 1,000,000
) Death: None proven
These statistics are extremely misleading, since they do not take into
account the probability of a particular child contracting one of these
diseases. These numbers can only mean something if one assumes that a child
who is not vaccinated *will* contract the disease.
Promoters of the new varicella vaccine use statistics like these to scare
parents into adding yet one more vaccine to their children's crowded
schedules. Have you seen the heartstring-tugging ad campaign for Varivax in
the glossy national parenting magazines? A lot of money is being spent to
make parents fear what has always been considered a rite of passage of
childhood. (If a vaccine against the common cold could be developed, would
you give it to your children? What if you learned that some percentage of
children who catch the common cold progress to complications including
infections, pneumonia, and asthma attacks that can lead to death?)
))And even the newest vaccines carry risks (that may well be worth
))taking in many cases), and contain potentially toxic ingredients such as
))formaldehyde and genetically engineered components.
)
)This is sowing fear based on ignorance.
The only ignorance is in *not* investigating these issues. I don't know the
answers, but I certainly won't stifle my questions.
))Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
))the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
))the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
)
)The viewpoint based on science and ethics isn't extreme. Again, Yael, take
)care to avoid the trap of relativism.
In my response to Michael, I think I made it clear that I was not implying
that a scientific viewpoint is extreme. However, there is, on the continuum
of viewpoints on this issue, an extreme on both ends. This has nothing at
all to do with relativism.
Last of all (you'll all be glad to know that I am thoroughly exhausted and
I must, at last, shut up): I have not mentioned whether or not my own
children are vaccinated. I have said that the issue is complex, and I don't
see it as black-and-white. I do *not* take an anti-science view here. But I
don't take a close-your-eyes-and-do-what-the-scientists-say approach
either.
Thanks to Steve Premo and Deby Snell for backing me up a little... When I
get into these discussions, I do start to feel a little as though I'm on
trial...
Well, I'm here of my own volition, so go ahead and cross-examine.
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective on
childraising and health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.3 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (part 2 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:09:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Here's part two:
I had posted:
))It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
))acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
))introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
))ones?
Michael Kopp asked:
)What does it say to you, Yael? Could you tell us, please, or are we left to
)try to infer something from what looks like innuendo. The way I read it,
)you're saying anyone who doesn't see something sinister here is under the
)thumb of scientific medicine.
No, you have misunderstood. It simply means that it is naive to put one's
complete faith in any current scientific recommendation (that's not to say
that one should rather *reject* current science either!!), for what is
considered safe and good according to science is constantly changing. Yes,
the new vaccines are safer. Future vaccines will be yet safer, one can
assume. But at any given point, it is irrational and unfair to criticize
those who choose to investigate the failings and omissions of the current
scientific consensus. I am certainly *not* anti-science; I am simply
skeptical.
)*I* think it is a confirmation of the scientific method, a self-correcting,
)evidence-based, skeptical, method of _progress_ (not _regress_, as in
)pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo arising out of a return to pre-scientific
)nostrums) which is always questing for a better way to do things.
How is it skeptical to categorically follow the mainstream medical view?
How is that better than categorically rejecting the mainstream medical
view? This is what I mean when I said that the answers are somewhere in the
middle. More on this in response to your comment below.
)Good science done honestly and interpreted and used wisely and openly by
)authorities
Who decides who the authories are? The ones who pay for the research?
)is far more reasonable as a way of life than relying on old
)wives' tales and medieval superstition,
Please, we're hardly talking about blood-letting here... Since when is a
controversial theory necessarily about old wives' tales and superstition?
)or new-age beliefs in either the
)lack of need for prevention and cure,
I assume you are describing Anthroposophical medicine here, and not my
personal views. I certainly believe in the need for prevention and cure of
disease! (According to Jewish law, in general one *must* seek medical care
and do anything possible -- even use heroic measures -- in order to prolong
a life for even one *second*.)
))Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
))the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
))the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
)
)Really? Is that how you characterize universal vaccination? An "extreme
)viewpoint"?
No. Mandatory, multiple vaccinations on a routine schedule that is not
adapted to a particular child's geographical location, hygiene, social
environment, etc., is one extreme.
)What would you propose as the "middle" ground? (snip)
Some suggestions, off the top of my head: Fewer required vaccinations,
flexible schedule based on an individual child's health and family
situation, phasing out of vaccinations for diseases that are no longer
immediate dangers. Concurrent programs to educate parents on how to
strengthen their children's immune systems in general (through proper diet,
etc.).
(snip Alan Fine's car pollution analogy)
))This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's dilemma
))concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it comes to the
))health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
)
)Are you sure you understand these ethical principles?
Yes.
)It seems to me that
)you are advocating the exact selfishness of the eminently rational person
)who refuses the social compact and yields to the temptation to put yet
)another strain on the commons, despite the knowledge that this is
)detrimental to the entire commons in the long run. What you say you
)understand, and what you say you would do, are antithetical.
Not true. Here's one more point: *If* there does prove to be validity to
the theory that universal, multiple, early-childhood vaccination leads to a
greater incidence of chronic disease later on, then there is also a
financial and public health cost to continuing this practice. Can you
provide any statistics to show that vaccination does *not* lead to more
asthma, allergies, etc., and, based on the possibility that this *may*
prove to be the case, can you please compare the financial and health
consequences of vaccination vs. non-vaccination over, say, a 50-year
period? (rhetorical)
)You are, in effect, saying there is a higher ethics and morality and right
)of ownership to the parental relationship than to the commons.
Well, sure. Am I missing something? Isn't this something like democracy vs.
fascism? I know you're not from the U.S., but around here this kind of
statement (an implication that parents do *not* have the right to make
choices for their own children) tends to ring the little bells in people's
heads.
Hm... remind me where you stand on the question of teachers knowing better
than a child's parents what is best for the child?
)And on what
)do you base this right to "stand alone"? Does God give this right?
Well, in matters of health, sure. It is a commandment in the Torah to
"guard one's health exceedingly" and this is certainly a responsibility
that parents must carry out for their own children.
By the way, to relate this to another thread: The Torah also states that it
is the parents' responsibility to educate their children. They may hire
others (teachers) to do this for them (usually after the age of three), but
they are the ones who are ultimately responsible for their children's
education. The parents are considered their children's true teachers.
)Does the
)State give this right?
Sure. One is allowed to opt out of vaccination because of religious
objections or, in some states, philosophical objections. And, of course,
children who are at high risk for adverse vaccine reactions are not
required to be vaccinated.
)Or is it some
)elemental, irrational, emotional (usually mothers'), almost
)animal-instinct, "right" to make life-and-death choices for another human
)being?
This needs no comment. Your bias speaks for itself!
But here's one comment anyway: Parents make life-and-death choices for
their children every day. From what they feed their children to whether or
not they buckle the kids into car seats or put bicycle helmets on their
heads when they go riding... etc... This is a parent's job. It is not
always as black-and-white as seatbelts and bicycle helmets. But making
these decisions for their children is most certainly a parent's
responsibility. Don't you make choices for your children? Is it always
easy? Is it always rational and unemotional?
)Where this kind of thinking logically leads, of course, is to the religious
)refusal of any medical treatment (placing the ill in "God's" care).
It most certainly does *not* lead logically to this conclusion. I have
already explained above that, at least in the Jewish religion, it is
forbidden to refuse medical treatment that would save a life.
) Or to
)the new-age belief that all authoritarian systems of social control,
)including medical intervention in socially-harmful diseases, is state
)fascism, to be fought against by any means, including taking a child
)forcibly into hiding, away from the potential control of the state. Or,
)just refusing vaccinations.
I have no personal knowledge of anything like this. Since you do, it seems
to be coloring your reaction to my comments.
))I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that there is a connection
))here between the issue of mandatory routine vaccination and the
))introduction of genetic engineering, irradiation, etc. into our food
))supply... Maybe the connection has to do with the "powers that be" (and I
))don't mean God) determining that for our own good and for the good of Big
))Business (like Monsanto, maker of Roundup Ready soybeans, bovine growth
))hormone, and much, much more), certain things will be done that will affect
))our families, whether we like it or not.
)
)I am no fan of Monsanto, having been in Vietnam during the era of spraying
)of Agent Orange.
)
)And I do believe that government regulatory processes can be tilted, if not
)corrupted, in favour of big-business science.
Then you do agree that government regulations can be skewed ("corrupted"
was your word) by the interests of big business. Does that make you
paranoid? No, it makes you informed.
)But I think that the scientific establishment, and the watchdog consumer
)and science criticism mechanisms, are robust enough to keep such abuses in
)check.
Based on what I have learned about how genetically engineered crops, for
example, have been introduced in huge proportions into our food supply, I
disagree 100 percent.
)Certainly this is several orders of magnitude better today than it
)was 50 years ago when the U.S. Government simply decided to withhold the
)possible side effects of live polio vaccine contaminated with a simian
)virus that is now, apparently, causing cancers.
You are a bit behind in your investigative research. If I'm not mistaken,
the link between cancer to the contaminated polio vaccine was discredited,
last I read.
)To throw out the baby (scientific medicine, and particularly the value of
)universal vaccination) with the bathwater (snip)
I haven't said anything about throwing out scientific medicine, have I?
Respectfully,
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective on
childraising and health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.4 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (part 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:09:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I will try to briefly respond to the questions Michael Kopp has addressed to me:
This first of two parts will respond to the first of Michael's two-part message.
Michael KOPP asks:
)How many "intelligent people" question routine vaccination of children? Can
)you give us some statistical evidence regarding what percentage of the
)population "questions" routine vaccination?
Most people do not even seek information; they simply follow their doctors'
recommendations/instructions. I do not have stastistical evidence regarding
what percentage of the population does bother to ask questions.
)What is your definition of "intelligent people"?
People who ask questions and try to use the information they obtain in a
rational manner. People who have a healthy skepticism of *all* viewpoints
until they satisfy -- as well as they can -- their own need to understand
so that they can act in an informed manner.
)You seem to be saying that the definition of intelligence is to question
)routine vaccination.
No, you misunderstood. I was talking about a subset of the population --
picture the old Venn diagrams we drew (at least I did) in elementary school
-- that is the intersection of intelligent people and people who question
vaccination. Of course there are also intelligent people who do not
question vaccination, and people who question vaccination (or simply do not
vaccinate) who are not necessarily intelligent!
)But routine vaccination has been accepted by the large
)majority for at least 50 years now, and the health benefits to the
)community at large are statistically unchallenged. So it would seem that a
)case could be made that "intelligent people" would be those who accept the
)evidence of the medical efficacy of mass general vaccination, not those who
)"question the benefits and risks".
There is enough controversial statistical evidence to justify questioning.
)How many "intelligent people" know how to analyze information -- biased or
)unbiased -- about such scientific matters?
I don't know. Many intelligent people do know how to analyze information;
why assume that you have abilities others do not? I will point out below a
few places where your own analysis falls short. But what I'm writing here
is, needless to say, far from the last word as I'm certainly not an expert
on the subject, although I do consider myself fairly well-informed (because
of my university degree in engineering science and experimental psychology,
and my current work in publishing a magazine that must confront complex
issues including vaccination).
)The only reason for believing that there is no "unbiased" information on
)vaccination is either a belief in a conspiracy theory or a complete lack of
)faith in scientific medicine (as opposed to normal consumer caution about
)anything).
I didn't say that there is no unbiased information out there. I said it is
extremely hard to come by. By this I meant that information on *both* sides
of the issue tends to be biased. I am not paranoid, nor do I hold by a
conspiracy theory. You yourself said that government policy can be swayed
by big-business interests, and that this *does* happen in the U.S.
vis-a-vis the pharmaceutical industry (and other powerful interests,
including the food industry, e.g., the Dairy Council) is clear.
)Most people who reject vaccination, either by individual vaccines or in
)toto, are predisposed to one or the other of these anti-rational, ususally
)anti-science, viewpoints.
I think it's a bit funny that people who claim to be unfailingly rational,
skeptical people are willing to throw all their eggs, chips, whatever mixed
metaphor you like, in with the current (and constantly changing) party line
of the "scientific community" (as if they were a homogeneous group). Does
that mean that each time the "scientific" news breaks (thanks to a study
funded by the Dairy Council or the Avocado Growers' Association or
whatever) that some previously under-appreciated superfood (yesterday it
was broccoli sprouts or psyllium or soybeans or red wine; today it's flax
seed or blueberries or...) can ward off disease, one should stock one's
pantry with it, and next month stock up on the next new thing?
A generation ago, the scientific recommendations for a healthy diet
consisted of four food groups, two of which were comprised of animal
products. Today we have the food pyramid, which emphasizes whole grains and
vegetables. If a scientific, rational person recognized that whole grains
were superior to beef when the four food groups were in vogue, should one
still have followed the government's official dietary recommendations?
Sorry to belabor this point, but I really don't understand your viewpoint.
Are you saying that the most rational, health-promoting thing to do is to
unquestioningly follow the government's (or the scientific community's)
recommendations? But if no one questions (aren't scientists supposed to
question?) then progress does not happen. Someone has to be on the cutting
edge. And I understand that you will likely respond that the scientific
process works fine -- research is conducted, results are analyzed, theories
are tested, conclusions are drawn -- but this process can take years (in
the case of long-term studies, decades). Must one put blind faith in
scientists while the research process is going on?
)Alternatively, they are of the new-age persuasion
)which sees benefit in rejecting all that has been accomplished by 300 years
)of human progress in favour of some ill-defined, nebulous, spiritualistic
)good vibes and clean living, often accompanied by occult practices of
)shamanistic witch-doctoring and herbalist pharmacology.
Engaging in "occult practices of shamanistic witch-doctoring" would be
explicitly prohibited for a Jewish person!
)Unless one believes there is a 1984-like propaganda machine which produces
)such statistics, or one believes someone is making these statistics lie, or
)one chooses not to believe anything at all that comes from any authority,
)then the following are true:
)
)Polio - a major epidemic occurred at the turn of the century and further
)epidemics increased in magnitude. In 1952 (my generation) 57,000 cases were
)reported. It's true that no cases of virus related polio have been reported
)in the US since 1979, only vaccine-associated paralytic polio. However,
)this occurs only with oral polio vaccine (Sabin) which contains
)live-attenuated poliovirus strains; the risk is highest after the 1st dose
)and in immunocompromised people; the American Academy of Pediatrics updated
)their recommended immunization schedule on December 8 to prevent any risk
)of VAPP; VAPP is very rare (one case for every 2.5 million doses).
Someone please explain to me why the polio vaccine wasn't simply phased out
after the immediate polio threat disappeared. Why are we now still seeking
the "least risky" way to vaccinate against polio? (Sincere questions;
answers respectfully requested please!)
)Diphtheria - was one of the most common causes of death among children in
)the early part of this centry prior to introduction of the vaccine.
Someone please cite statistics indicating whether or not the disease was
already on the decline when the vaccine was introduced.
)Pertussis - from the early to mid 1900s was one of the most common
)childhood diseases and a major cause of childhood death. Since the
)introduction of the vaccine in the 1940's, cases decreased from 150 per
)100,000 to 1.2 per 100,000 by 1991. However, cases have been on the rise
)since then and Pertussis is now the most frequently reported
)vaccine-preventable disease in children ( 5 years of age. This is
)concurrent with a reduction in the percentage of the young population
)receiving vaccinations.
A tricky one. The previous form of the vaccine had a relatively high
incidence of side effects and complications. The new, acellular form is
better.
)Measles (snip)
)Mumps (snip)
)Haemophilus Influenzae type b (Hib) (snip)
I am not expert enough on these to respond to your points off the top of my
head. I'll try to respond in a later post if I have time.
)The declining U.S. "vaccinated base" not only reduces the "herd immunity"
)among the "indigenous" population, it makes it subject to reintroduction of
)the viruses from foreign immigrants who have not been vaccinated and may
)carry the diseases.
Why not require immigrants to be screened for infectious diseases? I
haven't thought this out, but the question occurred to me as I read your
comment.
)What's most unfortunate is that many of these diseases take their heaviest
)toll in the ( 5 year age group before they are required to be vaccinated.
Then why hasn't the "scientific community" lobbied for legislation that
would mandate vaccination for children under 5? Aren't the current
recommendations out of sync with the most up-to-date scientific knowledge?
)Vaccination isn't just a matter of informed consent and choice for one - it
)affects all children, making it a serious and ongoing public health concern.
True, which is why no parent takes the decision lightly.
))While there are certainly some parents who choose not to vaccinate at all,
))there are also many (more?) who pick and choose in order to maximize the
))chances that their children will stay healthy, both in the short term and
))in the long term.
)
)Please cite statistics showing the number of people who use this strategy
)by informed, educated, knowing choice, rather than the hit-or-miss laissez
)faire attitude which is becoming more prevalent among a population which
)does not remember the epidemics of childhood diseases of 50-and-more years
)ago.
I can't cite statistics, and I doubt that they exist. However, based on the
growing number of books and articles devoted to debates of the subject of
vaccination, and based on my own experience with readers of my magazine,
parents *are* seeking information, they are seeking to be informed, and
they are trying to make the right decision. And they most certainly *are*
asking questions.
(snip my quote about the theorized risks of vaccination)
)With all due respect to your obvious intelligence, I suspect that the "one
)theory" to which you refer is the standard anti-vaccination line of what
)might be called the "vax-quax", or pseudo-scientific,
)anti-scientific-medicine loonies. To dispel this suspicion on my part,
)could you please cite the origin or proponents of this "one theory", and
)some evidence of replicated science which confirms or tends to confirm it.
I can obtain sources for my statements, but if someone else can do it
sooner, please do. I have little energy at this hour, and little time at
any hour! But I'll try. But one small tidbit that makes perfectly rational
sense to me is that an infant's immune system is not fully developed, at
least for the first six months (if the baby is nursing, though, he will
benefit to a large extent from the mother's immunity, since her antibodies
are passed on through her milk). Infants are not able to fight off disease
very well in the early months; therefore, it makes sense that they are also
likely to be more susceptible to negative effects from vaccine-introduced
stresses in the early months. Some people who do choose to vaccinate do so
on a delayed schedule, to avoid taxing a very young infant's immature
immune system.
)From a scientific source "Quackwatch", at
)http://www.familyinternet.com/quackwatch/03HealthPromotion/immu/immu00.html
)is the following, one of a number of refutations of `misconceptions' about
)vaccination (immunization):
)
)begin quote-----------------------
)
)Misconceptions about Immunization
)
)Misconception #7 Giving a child more than one vaccine at a time increases
)the risk of harmful side effects and can overload the immune system.
)
)Children are exposed to many foreign antigens every day. (An antigen is a
)substance that stimulates an immune response.) Eating food introduces new
)bacteria into the body, and numerous bacteria live in the mouth and nose,
)exposing the immune system to still more antigens. An upper respiratory
)viral infection exposes a child to 4-10 antigens, and a case of "strep
)throat" to 25-50. According to Adverse Events Associated with Childhood
)Vaccines, a 1994 report from the Institute of Medicine, "In the face of
)these normal events, it seems unlikely that the number of separate antigens
)contained in childhood vaccines . . . would represent an appreciable added
)burden on the immune system that would be immunosuppressive." And, indeed,
)available scientific data show that simultaneous vaccination with multiple
)vaccines has no adverse effect on the normal childhood immune system.
Two questions: (1) Isn't there a difference in degree between, say, a cold
virus and polio, in terms of how well a child's body might be able to fight
it off? After all, the body is designed to ward off minor illness, thus
strengthening the immune system. But warding off several major illnesses at
one time does seem a more taxing proposition. (2) How much "available
scientific data" (I love that expression; you can use it even if there have
been *no studies done*. For decades there was no "data" to show anything
about any women's health condition, or any general health condition as it
applied to women... because no one ever did any research on women) is
actually available on the subject? How have they tested whether multiple
vaccinations have had an adverse effect on the normal childhood immune
system? Has anyone done long-term studies? Can anyone *disprove* the theory
that multiple vaccinations may cause adverse effects? (Isn't that all one
can do using the scientific method: disprove -- never prove -- theories?)
More in Part 2...
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective on
childraising and health!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.5 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 23:52:07 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Kathy, sorry for not responding sooner.
KATHY:
)Who made the comparison between the Waldorf pedagogy and Lindamood-Bell
)ask this because I found that my instructors made a point of telling us
)that Waldorf dovetailed with Piaget, Gesell, current brain research, current
)research on oral language, etc., etc. When I conducted my own research on
)these alleged linkages, I found that only a slight comparison could be
)made and )that )there were areas that were vastly different from the
)Waldorf pedagogy as )compared to )the school of thought to which the
)comparison was made. I felt as if these )comparisons were made in order to
)give Waldorf more credence.
BOB W.:
The instructors did not make the comparison. I had pursued Lindamood-Bell
for the same reasons I had pursued Waldorf-- to try to understand the
system and looking for pieces in that "world view" that might resonate with
me.
I see the overzealous use of "research" continually in education, Waldorf
and mainstream. Especially prevalent in the mainstream is the use of
"current brain research." My Ohio State trained literacy coordinator also
loves to bash Piaget and heaps praise on Vygotsky without more than a
cursory knowledge of either.
In all aspects of my life I tend to take research/expert/surveys
say...(especially in teacher trainings) with a grain of salt. (I'd much
rather see the research, read the book, etc. myself.) Kathy, I would agree
with you that the educational establishment, including Waldorf, should be
more critical in its use of research and theory in supporting educational
practices.
KATHY:
)In fact, I suspect that very little or no mention was made of
)Anthroposophy during )your training. Were you at least informed of its
)influence?
BOB W.:
I don't remember any such discussions. I was aware that Steiner had an
esoteric philosophy/cosmic view on which WE was based. Knowing more now
about WE's deeper purposes for practices doesn't change whether or not they
seemed useful to me back in '97. I took an evening eurythmy class during my
stay that was *not* a part of the Public School Training. I found it
relaxing, the music beautiful, the movement patterns challenging, and it
brought to mind lots of ideas for use of beautiful music and movement back
in my classroom. I now know that the star element of one of the pieces has
hidden (occult) meaning. That knowledge doesn't diminish the relaxation and
inspiration I received in the class.
KATHY:
)I also suspect that the majority of the public school teachers that
)attended, at )least during the time I was there, simply listen, take it
)in, and use it or don't. In )other words, I don't think that most
)participants question what is being taught to )them, either in the sense
)of a "doubting Thomas" or simply for a deeper explanation. )I operated in
)this mode for several years.
BOB W.:
Did you accept practices that in hindsight were not sound? From the
thoughtfulness of your participation on this list, I find that hard to
believe. You seem to be suggesting that naive, uncritical, poorly trained
teachers are sitting in the Public School Teachers Training being seduced
by RSC.()Thousands upon thousands of people are being issued emergency
credentials and have not attended teaching training programs or they have
attended ones that are very short in duration and content. They are then
cast adrift in the classroom.(snip) They aren't discriminating - they
haven't any basis for comparison.) Do you have any proof to support this
belief?
KATHY:
)Sure I liked the singing and I enjoyed playing the recorder since I had
)learned this )at CSUS and had been playing with my students prior to
)Waldorf, but there wasn't much )there other than the same painting
)techniques, the singing, the story telling, the )stepping in rhythm, over
)and over and over again. It was repetitious and dull.
BOB W.:
I recently asked a public school teacher in Davis why she had been to the
training for five years. She said that althought she wasn't interested in
"teaching Waldorf," she found that the folks at the training looked at
elements like room beauty, relationships with children, choice of materials
and presentation, etc. in a different way than most mainstream teachers. At
the training, she could have discussions and idea-wrestle with a group of
people that thought differently than the pack. Perhaps the Davis teacher is
an anomoly in that she is an active learner who thinks for herself. I hope
for the sake of our children that there are more teachers like her than
like the untrained, naive joiners who you suggest are creating a financial
boon for RSC.
KATHY:
)Whatever Waldorf offers that may appear, at first glance. to have a
)secular purpose, )is offered by institutions that can legally deliver the
)same information to public )schools, sans the religious indoctrination.
BOB W.:
I've never come across a class, course, or individual who has articulated
an educational program that integrates the same or similar practices with
the same or similar focus on the child. If you know of some group who is
pursuing such a program and offers training or fellowship, I would love to
learn from them, too!
KATHY:
)Betty Staley, took care to mention with tremendous frequency that Waldorf
)was the only teaching method that . . . blah, blah, blah . . . fill in the
)blanks. But, I had been utilizing techniques akin to those taught at RSC for
)a number of years. Teaching and reteaching is not a concept held only by
)Waldorf teachers, nor is the integration of art and music across the
)curriculum, or utilizing movement and rhythm to reinforce mathematical
)concepts.
BOB W.:
No, but IMO, the way it is all integrated *is* unique. I'd venture to say
that most if not all systems (Montessori, High Scope, Success for All,
etc.) are unique. You could say that the Complex Instruction model is
*just* Cooperative Learning (education lingo here), but it is actually
more. It is unique in its combined organization, presentation, and
intention/mental set/spirit. I see WE in a similar light.
KATHY:
)Oral language has been stressed in California for years (much to
)the dismay of current phonics enthusiasts that point to low reading scores
)as being the direct result of whole and oral lanaguage based education).
BOB W.:
Not to be nitpicky, but-- I'm well aware of the political wrangling over
Whole Language, but I've never heard anyone suggest that pervasive oral
language instruction in public schools (whatever that would be) was a
culprit in low reading scores. Was this an aside or were you suggesting
that Whole Language is used in WE along with oral language development and
since at least one of those elements has been villified that Waldorf
literacy practices are unsound? If so, I would take issue with the
comparison and would love to debate it with you.
KATHY:
)So,indeed, the pedagogy *appears* to be secular in nature. It takes a while to
)catch on when the necessary information is being withheld.
BOB W.:
I assume the "necessary information" is the Antroposophical underpinnings,
but I'm still not clear how that knowledge negates any value that the
uninformed, unsuspecting public school teacher might find *for themselves*
in the practices before that mystery has been revealed.
Excuse the length of the post and the hopscotch nature of my responses.
I've been wanting to write all week but haven't had the chance.
Respectfully,
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.6 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: review of German book criticizing Anthroposophical medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:53:41 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199905240009.RAA29818 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) http://www.indian-skeptic.de/html/esove.htm
)
) This review of "The Esoteric Seduction" doesn't touch on the
) Anthroposophical medicine content of the book at all; but there's an
) interesting critique of the "academic left" position of many of the
) articles in it.
Interesting to read a book review by someone who insightsfully considers
anthroposophy to be an "alternative therapy" in line with phytotherapy,
the latter, like anthroposophy, having Germany as its "source" (That
other and older cultures could be the source is just a rumour!).
On a site for which the University of Regensburg is expressedly _not_
responsible ("Not Responsible for this page is the University of
Regensburg" http://www.indian-skeptic.de/html/index.htm).
Very rational.
It¥s not responsible for my site either.
You never stop learning :-)
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.n1325.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: Archives uploaded
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:36:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear correspondents, this morning I uploaded the list archives for
February, March and April. We wrote so much in April it had to be divided
into three parts!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 17:37:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905231831.LAA01415 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905231939.MAA01348 lists1.best.com)
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
))The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against immunization,
))harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
))suffering and death.
)
)Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
)the results of "Waldorf preaching".
Ask those who have died at the Lukas Klinik (Anthroposophical cancer hospital).
"Rudolf Steiner describes how from the manifest cancer, a way can be found
leading back to various incarnations in which Luciferic and Ahrimanic
impulses supported each other. With the appearance of the physical tumor,
Ahriman seems to have won the final battle. When, however, as a result of
the disease, the cancerous organ or the whole body collapses, then the good
Powers save the human soul from Ahriman's clutches.
***
"It is not impossible that an individuality aims to live through this
disease, with all the suffering and the difficult trials it brings, in
order to gain the fruits from this experience, which can only be won on
earth, and bring it to the Gods. Through these, healing impulses can come
to the physician who has the strong will to heal.
***
"The patient feels really relieved when he learns the true nature of his
disease, especially if he has long been surrounded by lies. The truth tears
the mask from Ahriman's face. The physician must of course exercise great
care to choose the right moment to enlighten the patient. He himself needs
all his courage, his will to help, as well as all his tact.
***
"It is important that the patient, however ill he is, should realize that
with our treatment he is on the way to health and deliverance. Whether this
is achieved in this life or later, is of secondary importance when
considered in relation to eternity. "
[Leroi M.D., Rita. An Anthroposophical Approach to Cancer. Spring Valley,
NY: Mercury Press, 1982. pp. 7-9]
Deliverance now or later, doesn't matter. So can justify anything you do.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.9 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:39:32 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905231613.JAA07825 lists1.best.com)
(199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905240305.UAA14211 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
))Yes, I think I can tell where you're trying to go, but I think you'll find
))(if you don't already know) that there is a simple and undeniable negation
))of what you are likely to say.
))
))I won't steal your act by revealing where I know you're going.
)
)Go ahead, I don't mind. Thanks for the URLs -- I've saved them straight
)to disk and will read them later.
)
)Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
)Stephen
)
)--
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
)+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
)+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Nah. I'll wait for your best twist.
Cheers,
M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1325.10 ---------------
From: Lisa DeNike (Ldenike patuxent.com)
Subject: RE: anthro. medicine and cancer
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:39:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Dan :
I would be very interested to learn more about this Lukas Klinik (where was
it, in Germany? Or does it still exist?) as well as anything else you can
tell me about the anthroposophical approach to cancer. Perhaps you could
recommend books, etc. I frankly don't know how I feel, or what to think,
about those portions of the one book you posted.
I am open to thinking that our current lives could have some
spiritual links to past lives and to future lives. But even if I (or anyone
else!) believes that getting a disease such as cancer or a serious medical
condition is somehow linked to their journey through reincarnation, treating
the condition with an attitude of ``Well, you chose this and so you need to
go through it'' is totally unacceptable to me! I find it difficult to
believe that anyone would take that attitude should they be the person
afflicted.
I know for certain I would not accept such an attitude (or approach
to healing) for myself or a loved one. I'd love to hear from more committed
anthropops than myself on their feelings about this issue. Thanks, Dan, for
bringing it up. ----------
) From: Dan Dugan
) Reply To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Sent: Sunday, May 23, 1999 8:37p.m.
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
)
) )Dan Dugan wrote:
) )
) ))The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against
) immunization,
) ))harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing
) unnecessary
) ))suffering and death.
) )
) )Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
) )the results of "Waldorf preaching".
) Ask those who have died at the Lukas Klinik (Anthroposophical cancer
) hospital).
)
) "Rudolf Steiner describes how from the manifest cancer, a way can be found
) leading back to various incarnations in which Luciferic and Ahrimanic
) impulses supported each other. With the appearance of the physical tumor,
) Ahriman seems to have won the final battle. When, however, as a result of
) the disease, the cancerous organ or the whole body collapses, then the
) good
) Powers save the human soul from Ahriman's clutches.
) ***
) "It is not impossible that an individuality aims to live through this
) disease, with all the suffering and the difficult trials it brings, in
) order to gain the fruits from this experience, which can only be won on
) earth, and bring it to the Gods. Through these, healing impulses can come
) to the physician who has the strong will to heal.
) ***
) "The patient feels really relieved when he learns the true nature of his
) disease, especially if he has long been surrounded by lies. The truth
) tears
) the mask from Ahriman's face. The physician must of course exercise great
) care to choose the right moment to enlighten the patient. He himself needs
) all his courage, his will to help, as well as all his tact.
) ***
) "It is important that the patient, however ill he is, should realize that
) with our treatment he is on the way to health and deliverance. Whether
) this
) is achieved in this life or later, is of secondary importance when
) considered in relation to eternity. "
)
) [Leroi M.D., Rita. An Anthroposophical Approach to Cancer. Spring Valley,
) NY: Mercury Press, 1982. pp. 7-9]
)
) Deliverance now or later, doesn't matter. So can justify anything you do.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1325 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1326 --------------
001 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
003 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: anthro. medicine and cancer
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
008 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Vaccination and decline of disease (was: Anthroposophical Medi
009 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
010 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.1 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:18:15 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199905231939.MAA01348 lists1.best.com)
(199905231831.LAA01415 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905240839.BAA08754 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
))
)))The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against immunization,
)))harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
)))suffering and death.
I wrote:
))
))Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
))the results of "Waldorf preaching".
Dan Dugan wrote:
)Ask those who have died at the Lukas Klinik (Anthroposophical cancer
)hospital).
That does not answer my question, Dan. People die from cancer in every kind
of cancer clinic. Research has already established that the use of
mistletoe as practiced in the Lucas clinic has prolonged the lives of many
cancer patients. My own cousin died of cancer at the age of 43, after
extensive radiation treatment at an orthodox hospital. Perhaps she would
have lived longer if she had tried alternative treatment - I don't know.
The point is that she did not die from any preaching, but from a disease.
The same thing happens at every cancer clinic in the world.
(Incidentally, when you suggest that I ask those who have died, you appear
to believe in intercourse with the dead.)
)"Rudolf Steiner describes how from the manifest cancer, a way can be found
)leading back to various incarnations in which Luciferic and Ahrimanic
)impulses supported each other. With the appearance of the physical tumor,
)Ahriman seems to have won the final battle. When, however, as a result of
)the disease, the cancerous organ or the whole body collapses, then the good
)Powers save the human soul from Ahriman's clutches.
)***
)"It is not impossible that an individuality aims to live through this
)disease, with all the suffering and the difficult trials it brings, in
)order to gain the fruits from this experience, which can only be won on
)earth, and bring it to the Gods. Through these, healing impulses can come
)to the physician who has the strong will to heal.
)***
)"The patient feels really relieved when he learns the true nature of his
)disease, especially if he has long been surrounded by lies. The truth tears
)the mask from Ahriman's face. The physician must of course exercise great
)care to choose the right moment to enlighten the patient. He himself needs
)all his courage, his will to help, as well as all his tact.
)***
)"It is important that the patient, however ill he is, should realize that
)with our treatment he is on the way to health and deliverance. Whether this
)is achieved in this life or later, is of secondary importance when
)considered in relation to eternity. "
)
)[Leroi M.D., Rita. An Anthroposophical Approach to Cancer. Spring Valley,
)NY: Mercury Press, 1982. pp. 7-9]
)
)Deliverance now or later, doesn't matter. So can justify anything you do.
Please document this statement of yours by giving examples of how
euthenasia, for example, has been justified and practiced in
anthroposophical medicine. Or torture for the fun of it for that matter.
You do say "justify anything you do", right?
Terminal cancer is a profound and serious phenomenon. Also people from
outside anthroposophy, such as Elisabeth K¸bler-Ross, have reached
conclusions similar to those of anthroposophical research. You're making an
extremely cheap shot whaen you claim that terminally ill people die from
anthroposophical preaching. Please give me examples of people who have
suffered and died because of such preaching and explain how they could have
been cured by different medical treatment.
)
)-Dan Dugan
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:38:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905231939.MAA01348 lists1.best.com)
(199905231831.LAA01415 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com) (199905241619.JAA17897 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei,
You really still take Dan comments on anthroposophical medicine
seriously ...!!??!
Sune
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.n1326.3 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 10:07:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905240609.XAA28457 lists1.best.com)
On 24 May 99, at 2:09, Yael Resnick wrote:
) Michael KOPP asks:
)
) )But routine vaccination has been accepted by the large
) )majority for at least 50 years now, and the health benefits to the
) )community at large are statistically unchallenged. So it would seem that
) )a case could be made that "intelligent people" would be those who accept
) )the evidence of the medical efficacy of mass general vaccination, not
) )those who "question the benefits and risks".
First, there is no consensus in the scientific community about
which vaccines should be given at what age. There are standards
that have been set by panels of experts (i.e., by committee), and
physicians adhere to those standards. They are expected to do
so. But that does not mean that all experts agree that those are
the optimal standards. And as I've pointed out earlier, the
standards differ from country to country, although in each country, I
daresay that the standards are set by qualified experts.
And there may be concerns reflected in those standards that are
not strictly scientific or medical. For example, the standards may
call for vaccination at an earlier age than is optimal, because
parents, statistically, tend to be more diligent about their kids'
periodic checkups when the kids are younger. Also, insurers
might only cover "well baby checks" up to a certain age, so there
is some pressure to inoculate the kids before they are past that
age.
So the most intelligent course is probably to look at the various
standards and their rationales, and decide for one's self.
Second, you don't have to be a professional scientist to question
current scientific thinking on any particular subject, even where
there is something approaching a consensus. The great majority
of cosmologists accept the "big bang" theory, but a few do not.
My dad, who is as intelligent and scientifically-minded as anyone
you'll meet, and who is a philosophical materialist, has a pet
hypothesis which supposes a steady-state universe, and which
may explain the "red shift" without the necessity of an expanding
universe.
I think he's probably wrong about that, but who knows?
Having said all that, I'm generally in favor of vaccination against
serious diseases.
) )The only reason for believing that there is no "unbiased" information on
) )vaccination is either a belief in a conspiracy theory or a complete lack
) )of faith in scientific medicine (as opposed to normal consumer caution
) )about anything).
Oh, come on. I've already mentioned probable biases in the
vaccination schedule related to social concerns and insurance
coverage. Another obvious bias is a general bias in favor of
research that will support the sales of drugs and vaccines.
We've seen recently how the tobacco industry has suppressed
unfavorable scientific results in studies that it has funded. It does
not seem unlikely to me that pharmaceutical companies would do
the same.
More common, though, is the probable bias in the design of
experiments. If you're funded by a pharmaceutical company, I
suspect that you are more likely to get funding for a study
designed to show the benefits of a drug or vaccine than you for a
study designed to show the risks. Studies to evaluate risks are, of
course, done all the time, but I still suspect that there is a bias in
the funding in favor of studies that are designed to downplay the
risks.
) Does that mean that each time the "scientific" news breaks (thanks
) to a study funded by the Dairy Council or the Avocado Growers'
) Association or whatever) that some previously under-appreciated
) superfood (yesterday it was broccoli sprouts or psyllium or
) soybeans or red wine; today it's flax seed or blueberries or...)
) can ward off disease, one should stock one's pantry with it, and
) next month stock up on the next new thing?
Of course! Here's a recent news item from the Onion:
Eggs Good For You This Week
BOSTON--According to a Northeastern University study released
Monday, eggs--discovered last week by a University
of California-Santa Cruz study to be unhealthy, raising serum
cholesterol by as much as 20 percent--have beneficial effects
on cardiovascular health this week. "Contrary to what was
previously thought, consuming an egg a day can lower a
person's blood pressure and increase the heart's efficiency for the
next week," the Northeastern study stated. The report urged
Americans to increase egg consumption immediately, as eggs
may be unhealthy again as soon as next Monday.
) Someone please explain to me why the polio vaccine wasn't simply phased
) out after the immediate polio threat disappeared. Why are we now still
) seeking the "least risky" way to vaccinate against polio? (Sincere
) questions; answers respectfully requested please!)
Polio is still endemic in much of the world.
) Why not require immigrants to be screened for infectious diseases?
I think they do, but that is not enough. It is possible for Americans
to contract polio or other diseases while travelling and bring them
back. Also, many immigrants don't go through the INS. (That's
the Immigration and Naturalization Service, also known as "La
Migra" - yet another heavy-handed federal agency).
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.n1326.4 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 10:53:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
BLEAH! Does anyone really believe this stuff? It is precisely this
"spiritual science" crap that I hate about Waldorf!
I gave the poor Kindergarten teacher hell when she came to interview
me...nice lady, who tried to answer my questions with grace - but she did
mumble something about "cholerics"!
----------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 5:37 PM
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
))The direct connection is that Waldorf schools preach against
immunization,
))harming society by spreading ignorance and ultimately causing unnecessary
))suffering and death.
)
)Pleas give us some concrete examples where suffering and death have been
)the results of "Waldorf preaching".
Ask those who have died at the Lukas Klinik (Anthroposophical cancer
hospital).
"Rudolf Steiner describes how from the manifest cancer, a way can be found
leading back to various incarnations in which Luciferic and Ahrimanic
impulses supported each other. With the appearance of the physical tumor,
Ahriman seems to have won the final battle. When, however, as a result of
the disease, the cancerous organ or the whole body collapses, then the good
Powers save the human soul from Ahriman's clutches.
***
"It is not impossible that an individuality aims to live through this
disease, with all the suffering and the difficult trials it brings, in
order to gain the fruits from this experience, which can only be won on
earth, and bring it to the Gods. Through these, healing impulses can come
to the physician who has the strong will to heal.
***
"The patient feels really relieved when he learns the true nature of his
disease, especially if he has long been surrounded by lies. The truth tears
the mask from Ahriman's face. The physician must of course exercise great
care to choose the right moment to enlighten the patient. He himself needs
all his courage, his will to help, as well as all his tact.
***
"It is important that the patient, however ill he is, should realize that
with our treatment he is on the way to health and deliverance. Whether this
is achieved in this life or later, is of secondary importance when
considered in relation to eternity. "
[Leroi M.D., Rita. An Anthroposophical Approach to Cancer. Spring Valley,
NY: Mercury Press, 1982. pp. 7-9]
Deliverance now or later, doesn't matter. So can justify anything you do.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: anthro. medicine and cancer
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:46:47 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199905241353.GAA09816 lists1.best.com)
Lisa DeNike wrote:
) Dan :
) I would be very interested to learn more about this Lukas Klinik (where was
) it, in Germany? Or does it still exist?) as well as anything else you can
) tell me about the anthroposophical approach to cancer.
Dear Lisa,
The Lukas clinic, south of Basel in Switzerland has a home page at
http://www.lukasklinik.ch/, with an English version at
http://www.lukasklinik.ch/whatis.htm.
A search using http://www.altavista.com and +"anthroposophical medicine"
and +"cancer" turned up about 90 pages on the Internet.
A one page introduction to anthroposophical medicine can be found at
http://health-pharm.co.za/Anthroposophy.htm.
The always well informed "Health Care Reality Check" page at
http://www.hcrc.org/faqs/a/anthrop.html tells you how Rudolf Steiner was
an "austrian physician" and how "Steiner and Waldorf schools teach the
ideas of Steiner (law of Karma and reincarnation etc.) to school
children." If you want "more information" on "Anthroposophical
Medicine", there is a link on the page to "NCAHF Newsletter, Volume
18-1", where a short note on Waldorf schools, seemingly mainly based on
an article by Dan and a Daar tells you how "Waldorf schools are run by
the international Anthroposophical Society" and that "Anthroposophical
medicine, a branch of the cult, is best known for clinging to the idea
that the mistletoe extract Iscador will cure cancer. The reason is that
Steiner said so in 1920."
A somewhat more serious description of research on mistletoe in the
treatment of cancer can be found at
http://www.sph.uth.tmc.edu/utcam/therapies/mistletoe.htm, a page set up
by the The University of Texas Center for Alternative Medicine Research
(UT-CAM) at The University of Texas~Houston Health Science Center
(http://www.sph.uth.tmc.edu/utcam/).
UT-CAM is one of eleven centers established by the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine at the National Institutes of
Health to evaluate alternative therapies. UT-CAM is the only OAM center
focused solely on alternative and complementary cancer therapies and
co-funded by the National Cancer Institute.
But as Dan knows (as he knows - probably by instinct - that mistletoe
cures cancer because Steiner said so) and will tell you, they¥re all
wackos in Texas ...
According to http://www.slip.net/~anaa/ANAAFlyer.html, "Anthroposophical
Nurses Association of America is pleased to announce its 1999 Nursing
Development Initiative in the Midwest three courses to be offered in Ann
Arbor, Michigan, in cooperation with Community Supported
Anthroposophical Medicine (CSAM) of Ann Arbor". The Association has the
home page at http://www.slip.net/~anaa/.
http://twelvestar.com/Earthlight/issue04/Understanding%20Cancer.html has
some remarks on A Spiritual Understanding of Cancer from an
anthroposophical medical perspective, based on a lecture by a "Peter
Hinderberger, M.D., Ph.D", whose background and professional biography
is described at http://igg.com/bdnow/hinderberger.html.
At http://www.coloradohealthnet.org/holistic/alternative/altsys_1e.htm,
Colorado Health Net, a Colorado nonprofit corporation formed in 1995 to
provide electronic access to factual and statistical information,
support services, medical resources, and related health care information
for persons with chronic medical conditions and for other users, has an
overview of "Anthroposophically Extended Medicine"
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.n1326.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:33:44 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905240033.RAA09754 lists1.best.com)
Pandora, you wrote,
)I am extremely interested in the work of brain development
)researchers such as Jane Healy, PhD. (author of "Endangered Minds - Why
)Kids Can't Think," "Your Child's Growing Mind" and "Failure to Connect").
)The consensus that is currently coming out of the scientific community -
)and Mister Kopp, please feel free to look me up on this, there are many
)researchers besides Healy working with PET scans, etc. to determine how the
)brain develops - is that the kind of real world work, such as singing,
)bread-baking, sewing, etc., that is done in the Waldorf Kindergarten
)actually helps the brain develop more connections.
I recognize Jane Healy as a popular author, but I wonder what her
reputation is as a scientist. Has she published brain development research?
Regarding "brain connections," I suspect learning your letters makes some
good ones, too.
In her rebuttal to a speech I made in Sacramento, Arline Monks (Program
Coordinator, Waldorf in Public Schools, RSC) waved a copy of Time magazine
with a cover article "your child's brain." She said current brain research
was proving Steiner's educational methods were right.
I got the issue, studied the article, and as I read it, the researchers
timetable for intellectual development was pushing toward the younger ages,
wholly at odds with Waldorf principles.
Right now "brain research" is a hot buzzword in educational circles. When
anybody says "current brain research" I get an immediate bullshit alarm.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:20:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905240509.WAA25511 lists1.best.com)
Bob Williams, you wrote,
)P.S. Another thought (or analogy that the list must have considered in the
)past) Mindfulness meditation is often used in stress reduction programs and
)clinics. Now, if the technique derives from Buddhism or other
)contemplative/religious paths, can it be said to have a secular purpose, or
)is the use of meditation as taught in a stress reduction program a
)religious act by virtue of its genesis in a religious belief system?
Sure, a religious practice can be turned into a secular one. My example is
the secular Karate course the Army gave me. Breathing, yes, bowing, no. No
problem turning the good things in Waldorf into a secular program, but
you'll have to add a lot of non-Waldorf stuff to fill in the holes. It
won't be Waldorf-inspired, it'd be something else.
David Mollet claims to be doing this with his products.
That is what publicly-funded Waldorf programs -say- they're doing. Some
achieve it, others are close to pure Waldorf schools. Most classrooms at
Tubman, for example, weren't Waldorfian when I visited last year, but the
school has a college of teachers working to change that. Oak Ridge before
the move displayed a similar diversity. The Novato school, on the other
hand, is a model Waldorf school. Twin Ridges is as Anthroposophical as they
can get away with.
No matter what the original plan is, if they hire some Waldorf trained
teachers, they will likely make a constant effort to Steinerize the school.
That's their job. So if you want reform Waldorf, it has to have a different
name, and a body of literature to support the system. No, the methods don't
have to be scientifically proven; charter schools are supposed to be
sources of new ideas. But a responsible experiment includes feedback, a
performance evaluation system. People in public Waldorf are working to get
their own kind of subjective evaluation approved, a move in the wrong
direction. The Waldorf evaluation system has utterly failed to provide
corrective feedback to the Waldorf movement; consequently the system is
still living in 1925, lost in an orgy of self-congratulation.
Don't hold your breath waiting for PLANS to hand out seals of approval.
If I wanted to start a school, I'd hook up with the Core Curriculum people.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.8 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Vaccination and decline of disease (was: Anthroposophical Medicine (Vaccination: 1 of 2))
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:49:05 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905230459.VAA03720 lists1.best.com)
(199905231335.GAA17971 lists1.best.com)
(199905231613.JAA07825 lists1.best.com)
(199905232327.QAA11497 lists1.best.com)
(199905240305.UAA14211 lists1.best.com)
(199905240841.BAA09236 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905240841.BAA09236 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)Nah. I'll wait for your best twist.
OK, here goes -- this isn't as well researched as I'd like it to be, but
I think it serves a purpose. If there are any flaws to my argument, I
would dearly like to have them highlighted. (But I am entirely
uninterested in flaws in things I have not argued).
Firstly, let me put my personal cards on the table: I am not anti-
vaccination per se; I do believe that vaccination can be effective; I do
believe that the case for vaccination has been overstated in the past. I
am concerned about an apparent correlation between the incidence of
vaccination and the incidence of chronic immune-system-related diseases
(e.g. allergies, asthma) -- whilst I am aware that correlation does not
imply causation, I wish to be reassured, *by evidence* not by assertion,
that there is no causal relationship. However, that last point is not
one I wish to address in this post.
I am unable to verify the quality of the few data to which I refer, but
I trust that, by citing the sources, anyone wishing to contest them will
be able to do so.
If one examines the statistics for the incidence of measles and measles-
related death in the USA for the years 1960 - 1969 (Blasser, 1998),
there is an immediate slight decline followed by a marked decline
approximately 3 years after the introduction of vaccination in 1963-4.
There is, I submit, a clear correlation between the introduction of
vaccination and the decline in incidences of the disease and its
mortality.
However, the vaccination used in the early stages of the vaccination
programme "is now known to have conferred little or no immunity and, in
addition, made the vaccinated person more susceptible to the development
of atypical measles when exposed to the disease." (Miller & Keane, 1983)
So, what is going on? Is it possible that, in Blasser's data, we have a
case of correlation without causation? I submit that we have just that,
unless someone can demonstrate how an ineffective vaccine can confer
immunity. Enquiring minds will want to know whether such a marked
decline could result from something else. The answer is that it could
have done (but N.B., dear fellow skeptics, I am not claiming that it
definitely did). In my brief trawl for evidence I came upon a graph
showing the incidence of death from measles in Australia from 1925 to
1985 (Golden, 1994), which suggests that such periodic declines did
occur in the second quarter of this century, long before vaccination was
introduced (1970 in Australia).
Interestingly, this graph also shows a that a marked decline in the
incidence of measles-related death began in the 1940s and was already
well-established by the time vaccination was introduced.
Well, that's about it. An observation I have from reading various web-
sites on this is that both sides of the debate have a remarkable
penchant for ignoring inconvenient data. It seems to me that science
becomes polluted by commercial or personal considerations and, whilst I
have the greatest respect for science as a tool for enabling us to
discard dross, I submit that it is too often perverted by these other
considerations.
References:
Blasser S., _Anti-immunisation scare: the inconvenient facts_, 1998. (On
web at http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/anti-immune.htm -- thanks, MK)
Golden I., _Vaccination? A review of Risks and Alternatives_, 1994.
Miller B. and Keane C., _Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine,
Nursing, and Allied Health_, 3rd ed., 1983.
(Afficionadi of the bizarre may appreciate the following from Miller &
Keane: "The best method is to isolate the child from 3 or 4 days before
the rash appears...")
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.9 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:43:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Dan Dugan]
) Sure, a religious practice can be turned into a secular one.
) My example is
) the secular Karate course the Army gave me. Breathing, yes,
) bowing, no.
[Bob Tolz]
Yeah, this is a discussion we've had before.
[Dan Dugan]
)No
) problem turning the good things in Waldorf into a secular program, but
) you'll have to add a lot of non-Waldorf stuff to fill in the holes. It
) won't be Waldorf-inspired, it'd be something else.
)
) David Mollet claims to be doing this with his products.
)
) That is what publicly-funded Waldorf programs -say- they're
) doing.
[snip]
) So if you want reform Waldorf, it has to
) have a different
) name, and a body of literature to support the system. No, the
) methods don't
) have to be scientifically proven; charter schools are supposed to be
) sources of new ideas. But a responsible experiment includes
) feedback, a
) performance evaluation system.
[snip]
)
) Don't hold your breath waiting for PLANS to hand out seals of
) approval.
)
Speculate for a moment, because this will help me in understanding
the PLANS position on a "secular" Waldorf-methods possibility. If there
were such a thing as a PLANS seal of approval, what do you think you might
look for, other than what you've stated above?
) If I wanted to start a school, I'd hook up with the Core
) Curriculum people.
)
I confess my ignorance as to who the "Core Curriculum" people are.
Help me out here?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1326.10 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:21:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dan, you wrote,
"In her rebuttal to a speech I made in Sacramento, Arline Monks (Program
Coordinator, Waldorf in Public Schools, RSC) waved a copy of Time magazine
with a cover article "your child's brain." She said current brain research
was proving Steiner's educational methods were right.
I got the issue, studied the article, and as I read it, the researchers
timetable for intellectual development was pushing toward the younger ages,
wholly at odds with Waldorf principles.
Right now "brain research" is a hot buzzword in educational circles. When
anybody says "current brain research" I get an immediate bullshit alarm."
My response:
Dan, I feel compelled to remind you that I work with, am the parent of, and
think about (mostly) PREschool age children. I know that some people
automatically think of Waldorf schools from the perspective of an 8th grade
parent, so let me explain to you exactly what I meant:
You used the example of "learning your letters" as being good for brain
development, too. Well, not exactly, Dan: you didn't specify *at what age*.
Learning your letters at 18 months is actually detrimental to the brain's
development, because an 18 month old should be experimenting with the world
through play; in order to develop abstract thinking and understand
concepts, children must first have experience in the concrete - or, "real
world". Sitting an active, exploring toddler - who *needs* to be exploring
- down to "learn letters" is totally ignoring their brain's needs. Children
already do all they need to grow their brains; we can enrich their
experience but we should not try to change it. Play has evolved over
millions of years, and all animals do it...
When you say that the researchers' development timetable was pushing toward
younger ages, you are simply making a mis-statement.
I am not saying that you are deliberately lying because, like many people
concerned with academic success, you simply haven't grasped the true
meaning and importance of 'developmentally appropriate practice' (and I
DON'T mean the Steiner folks' version, I mean Piaget, Vygotsky, et al.) I
would never suggest that learning letters would be detrimental to a six
year old's development, for example, just as I wouldn't suggest that
curriculum should be "pushed down" to younger children. You simply *can't*
push very young children to perform higher level thinking when they haven't
got the concrete thinking down yet! In fact, teaching reading to
Kindergarteners and first graders, using the exact same techniques,
actually produces more tension and learning disabilities in the
Kindergarteners. What a shame that some people can't wait until their kids
are neurologically ready. (Yes, this is from one of Healy's books, and if
you really are interested I will list the source. I would have put it in
here, but that book is at home.)
That said, my kid reads at age four. Does that mean he's going to be
"gifted"? Probably not. It just means that my family is linguistically
talented and my son is a chip off the ol' block (I learned to read at
three, and my mother has never lost a scrabble game. Ever.) Does that mean
you should try to get your kid to read at four? No! Chances are good your
kid already has something he's just naturally good at. That should be
honored and supported while you try to expand his focus to other activites
(developmentally appropriate ones, of course. (grin))
When you read in the TIME article about "windows of opportunity" for
development, that does not mean that a 3 year old child, in the prime
window for music, requires direct instruction! Yes, you can force a small
child with immature fine motor skills to painstakingly play the piano, but
you will not produce a prodigy, and you might even kill her enjoyment of
music. A small child like this is better served by being sung to and with,
and playing with play-dough and sewing toys to develop those fine motor
skills. A more developmentally appropriate, playful music class would be
far better for such a child.
Another example of this concept is those old "Yes! You can teach your baby
to read!" programs. Parlor trick, I say! The baby can "learn" to recognize
letters and groups of them - but does baby even know what they mean? No, of
course not. Social interaction, talking to your child, reading to your
child - those are the ways to develop a future star pupil.
I am truly sorry that you get "an immediate bullshit alarm" whenever
somebody says 'current brain research'. If you feel it is nothing but a
steaming shovel-full just because the Waldorf folks are pointing to it for
validation, well, then you are just as illogical as they are. Since I don't
think that is the case, I would strongly suggest you read some of Healy's
books. They are a good introduction to the subject, and from there you can
take some classes at your local university. THIS IS IMPORTANT, DAN. IF YOU
ARE GOING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT THE ANTHROPOPS ARE NUTS, THEN YOU NEED TO
SOUND CREDIBLE YOURSELF. Attacking the work of dozens of university
researchers and PhD. teachers with decades of experience, just because the
anthropops are pointing to them for validation, is only going to make you
look bad. And you can bet they are going to keep crowing about this,
because they are at least partially right.
Would you force your baby to walk before she could stand? Of course not.
You need to know more about WHY so that you can keep arguing with the
Waldorf folks intelligently.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1326 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1327 --------------
001 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Core Curriculum
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Fourth bad netiquette by Dan
003 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
004 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
006 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Waldorf, inspired and otherwise
008 - redon (redon geocities.co - Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.1 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Core Curriculum
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:29:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Here's a website that might help:
http://www.coreknowledge.org/CKproto2/about/index.htm
P.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Fourth bad netiquette by Dan
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 00:07:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199905240009.RAA29837 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
) MAD ROSS
) )Gee Dan I guess you do not beleive in the United States Copyright Laws.
)
) DAN DUGAN
) I do and I acknowledge your copyright on your posting whether you give
) notice or not.
)
) )And you did not have my reproduction permission.
) Your permission is not required for discussion of your posting. The
) quotation was within the fair use guidelines of the waldorf-critics list.
)
) )Those final lines in my signature are there for a reason.
) It's simple: if you don't want to be quoted, don't publish your opinions.
My memory tells me I have answered on your bad netiquette on this point
before, pointing to URL:s and all and the difference between mailing
lists and home pages.
It¥s not a question of law, but of elementary netiquette.
But, on the other hand, my memory also tells me you once answered a
question that you considered throwing pies in the faces of unexpecting
people to be an expression of the essence of freedom of speech.
Right?
Once more: You give yourself rights I dont¥t think most list owners
would approve of.
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.n1327.3 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:04:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob Tolz (continues to cast his line)
))[Kathy Suthphen]
)) Well Bob, I don't think I do *know* this. Why don't you tell what the
)) secular aspects are, in your opinion, and I'll respond to that. When I
)) attended the public school teacher's training it was
)) Anthroposophy, the
)) endless fairy tales, the rhythmic movements, the wet-on-wet, the
)) pseudoscience, the strange lectures on child development ala
)) Steiner, the
)) temperaments, the *elements*, the form drawing, the pretty
)) books . . . need
)) I go on?
Bob Tolz:
) OK. Let's keep it really simple. Assume the following:
) A school district chooses to practice the following methods: keep
)the teacher with the children for 8 ears; use art in most if not all
)lessons; start with a multi-hour main lesson block each morning with a
)concentration on some subject which lasts 3-4 weeks; use a slower
"schedule"
)for getting children to read than is commonly used in most other programs.
)
) Teachers attend training sessions at the University of California
)and are taught by professors from the University. No monies go directly or
)indirectly to RSC. The teachers are not taught anything about
anthroposophy
)or Rudolf Steiner. They have been brought into this program because some
)educators and parents like the methods that they are being taught and want
)various school districts to offer the alternative.
I don't believe there is any opposition to keeping children with the same
teacher for consecutive years. It is part of the educational plan at a
number of schools. In very small schools in more rural locations, public
school teachers do stay with children year after year. I'm not sure it is a
practical teaching practice at most schools and it should be left to the
discretion of a school board and/or parents, as opposed to being a
pedagogical training focus. Many teachers intentionally focus on a
particular age group and strive to develop their skills and curriculum year
after year. To continue to move each year from grade to grade wouldn't fit
well with them or with many children. I believe that I would always be
playing catch-up if I taught in this manner. I believe that the actual basis
for having the teacher stay with students for 8 years is based on Steiner's
desire to have children emulate their teacher and utilize (subconsciously)
this individual as their primary (Anthroposphical) role model.
Multi-hour lesson blocks are a common pedagogical technique in many schools
and it's normal to concentrate on a particular subject, across the
curriculum, for several weeks. My state university called this thematic
teaching. I never taught any other way - long before Waldorf came into my
life. While I was in teacher training my curriculum units always had a
thematic focus as a requirement.
I don't believe all the votes are in regarding the use of a slower approach
to reading instruction. A dear friend of mine is a reading specialist and it
is her belief that early introduction to reading lends the best results. She
doesn't, however, believe that this should be done in a pressured manner.
Personally, I believe that delayed reading, in the manner you're speaking
of, is based on Anthroposophical reincarnation belief. It has little to do
with a true benefit to children in an across the board sort of sense.
Hope this answered your question.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.4 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 23:27:08 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am personally opposed to many vaccination programs. But my point is that
most vaccination programs must be and are community decisions not individual
ones. One must consider very carefully which vaccinations are necessary for
a given community, but the decision to be immunized must be based on the
risk benefit to a community, not on individual fancy.
Alan S. Fine MD
-----Original Message-----
From: Yael Resnick (njpmail mindspring.com)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Date: Saturday, May 22, 1999 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
)Alan Fine posted:
)
))There certainly are cases of grey where the desease being immunized is of
a
))mild or nonthreatening nature, and I am certainly open debate about
whether
))immunization is necessary for any particular illness.
)
)In my understanding, this is exactly the point. Intelligent people who
)question routine vaccination of all children seek unbiased information on
)the benefits and risks of *each* vaccine, on an individual basis. Unbiased
)information, however, is extremely hard to come by. Caring parents who seek
)reliable data on which to base their decisions are thus left in a real
)dilemma; they must make the best decisions they can with the limited
)information they have.
)
)While there are certainly some parents who choose not to vaccinate at all,
)there are also many (more?) who pick and choose in order to maximize the
)chances that their children will stay healthy, both in the short term and
)in the long term. (From what I understand, one theory is that eradicating
)acute illness -- and/or bombarding a small child's body with many vaccines
)in a short span of time -- may tax the immune system and affect the child's
)natural disease-fighting ability, leading to a decrease in overall health
)and an increase in the incidence of chronic illness later on.)
)
)It is hard to ignore the fact that new, "safer" vaccines (such as the
)acellular pertussis component of the new DTP vaccine) are constantly being
)introduced. If the new ones are safer, what does that say about the old
)ones? And even the newest vaccines carry risks (that may well be worth
)taking in many cases), and contain potentially toxic ingredients such as
)formaldehyde and genetically engineered components. And, of course, even
)newer vaccines will continue to come along as the risks of the current ones
)become evident. (Only recently, the recommended schedule for polio
)vaccination was revised to include several doses of killed polio in place
)of the live oral vaccine -- in order to decrease the risk of the vaccine
)causing... polio. That said, when I was a student for a year in Israel a
)decade ago, there was an outbreak of polio and I certainly wasn't picketing
)outside the health centers for my right to remain unvaccinated. I do think
)it's a different story when there is a clear and present danger.)
)
)People like to point to the smallpox vaccine as a model, but it's not
)really valid as an example for today's situation. When the smallpox vaccine
)program was implemented, there were few (if any?) other vaccines routinely
)given to children. It's a different story today, when two-month-old infants
)are subjected to multiple vaccinations in a jam-packed schedule that
)continues through the early childhood years. Also, the smallpox vaccine was
)phased out (I think somewhere around 1970?) when there was no longer a
)clear and present danger.
)
)Vaccination is a complex and emotionally charged issue. I don't know what
)the answers are, but I'm willing to bet they are somewhere in the middle of
)the two extreme viewpoints (that's where the answers usually are).
)
)) What I am saying is
))that for many serious illness, the decision whether or not to immunize
must
))be a community decision and not an individual one. It is like pollution
))control. Many communities have laws about car emissions. You may not
))believe that carbon monoxide is harmful. You may feel that pollution
))control devises on your car do more harm than good. You may point out that
))the air is clean in your community. You may see no reason to have
pollution
))control on your vehicle. But if you are one of the few choosing not to
))exercize pollution control on your vehicle, you are deriving the health
))benefits of your neighbor's compliance, with no sacrifice of your own. I
))see that as selfish. I view many immunization programs in the same way.
)
)This isn't a great analogy. I understand the many-person prisoner's dilemma
)concept, and I understand social responsibility. But when it comes to the
)health of one's children, one must sometimes stand alone.
)
)I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that there is a connection
)here between the issue of mandatory routine vaccination and the
)introduction of genetic engineering, irradiation, etc. into our food
)supply... Maybe the connection has to do with the "powers that be" (and I
)don't mean God) determining that for our own good and for the good of Big
)Business (like Monsanto, maker of Roundup Ready soybeans, bovine growth
)hormone, and much, much more), certain things will be done that will affect
)our families, whether we like it or not.
)
)Scientists can make a great case for the benefits of genetically modifying
)crops, and for irradiating our food to eliminate pathogenic bacteria... and
)it certainly can start to sound like all this technological interference is
)in everyone's best interest...
)
)I'm not sure what the direct connection is between all this and
)Anthroposophy/Waldorf, except that my grappling with these issues is
)evidence that it's not only Anthroposophists who deviate from the "norm"
)here. If you surveyed a random sample of Anthroposophists on these issues
)and a random sample of Californians, for example (and I'm neither of
)these), you'd probably find similar responses.
)
)Lots of people who read Natural Jewish Parenting are trying to be informed
)about these issues as well...
)
)Feedback is welcome; I'm thinking as I type (a risky proposition on this
)list...).
)
)Yael
)
)
)
)
)
)
)*****
)
)Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
)mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
)173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
)phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
)
)The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective on
)childraising and health!
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RSC Public School Teachers Training
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:29:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Kathy Sutphen]
)
)
) Bob Tolz (continues to cast his line)
[Bob Tolz]
Geez. I never liked fishing.
[Kathy Sutphen]
)
) Hope this answered your question.
)
[Bob Tolz]
It'll have to do.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.6 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:26:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
PLEASE FORGIVE THE CAPS -- THE SOFTWEAR I USE DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY (ENCARAT) QUOTED MATERIAL, AND THIS IS THE BEST WAY I KNOW TO DEMARCATE KATHY'S TEXT FROM MY ANTIPHON
))) "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net) - 5/22/99 11:08 AM )))
WRITES:
MRx posts:
)*In response to someone else on the list issuing a warning about Waldorf
teachers' practice of meditating about their pupils, a list-member requests
information about the topic. I compose a medium-length description of
teachers' meditations -- content, method and purpose -- and... it's exactly
as if I hadn't(
AND RESPONDS:
I believe I was the one that did not respond to your description of
teacher's meditations. I apologize for my oversight and/or the fact that
your post was ignored. I didn't, to my knowledge, receive the list in which
your description was posted.
MRx HERE:
HI, KATHY. THE LIST IN WHICH MY DESCRIPTION WAS POSTED WAS DAN DUGAN'S WALDORF CRITICS LIST; THIS ONE. IF BY "LIST" YOU MEAN SOMETHING ELSE HERE, IT'S BEYOND MY KEN; MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.
I don't know if this was an error on my ISP's
part (there have been other days in which I received *no* email from this
list and other sources), or if I was simply so busy that I didn't read the
list and subsequently deleted it in error. It wasn't my intent to ignore
your post.
What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you posted an enraged
insult
BUT THAT WASN'T ME; THAT WAS CHARLIE FREY...
regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
meditating on students.
WAIT! THAT WASN'T ME! IT WAS CH--
The flavor of this reply and another that you
posted toward me
NO! STOP! IT WAS CHARLIE! IT WAS CHARLIE!
has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
with you.
LOOK! YOU RESPONDED TO HIM YOURSELF!
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: Meditating on Students
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 17:35:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Charlie posts:)
)Kathy Sutphen writes:
)
))I am unsettled by Anthroposophists *meditating* on students
))with the hopes, I assume, of getting in touch with their karmic destiny or
))evolutionary path. . .
)More inflammatory piffle! Please keep your far-fetched assumptions about
)"evolutionary path" to yourself; and I see no problem with trying to
)understand a student's destiny as a tool for helping him/her achieve
)goals. The idea is NOT to EVER pigeon-hole a student. That would be a
)grave misuse of the technique.
Gosh Charlie, why can't you simply respond to my post without the outrage.
It's apparent that I don't know exactly *what* the guidelines are for this
particular act of meditation.
)And there is a great difference between meditating and 'spending time
)thinking' about something.
Why don't you describe to me how it is different. I really don't know.
) Anybody who has undertaken the discipline of quietly meditating on a
)person or a situation for even 5 minutes a day can attest to the enormous
)insights and clarity to be gained.
) This practice is one of the greatest gifts Waldorf education gives to
)children and, as far as I know, its systematic practice is unique to
)Waldorf.
Why don't you describe to me how you do this.
) I am floored by the possibility of someone objecting to a teacher's
)meditating on a child.
I'm sorry this floors you, but I believe there are many people that would
object to a teacher meditating on their child. Without a clear description
of what this process entails and what the purpose of it is, its intent is
simply left to the imagination.
)How paranoid can you get?
Well, I don't know that I am paranoid. Boy oh boy. I got slammed hard today
by two of you guys. Are my posts really that obnoxious? I am always curious
about the amount of outrage I generate from the male Anthroposophists on
this list. Now - please know I'm *not* being accusatory . . . but I can't
help but meditate . . . oops . . . on this phenomena each time it occurs. Is
it because I am a Critic *and* I am female? Is it because I have some
personal experience that many Waldorf proponents on this list have taken
issue with? Is it simply the nature of my posts?
On this list today I have been accused of likely being a gay basher, of
believing that Waldorf allows and/or encourages violence, and of being a
paranoid. A few years ago these accusations would have laid me low, but I've
become quite thick-skinned with you folks and now I only find it interesting
and, at times, amusing. Why is it that character assassination as a means of
response appears to be one of the strong suits of many of the Waldorf
defenders I've met?
Best to you too Charlie.
Kathy
...AND HE LATER APOLOGIZED FOR HIS HARSHNESS. AND YOU FORGAVE HIM, REMEMBER?
NOW HERE'S WHAT I WROTE BACK IN THOSE HEADY APRIL DAYS:
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Meditating on Students
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 22:02:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Can someone help slow MRx out here?
))) "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net) - 4/25/99 8:35 PM )))
that is, Kathy, wrote, with regard to Waldorf teachers meditating on their students:
)It's apparent that I don't know exactly *what* the guidelines are for this
)particular act of meditation.(
and reiterates:
)Why don't you describe to me how it is different. I really don't know.(
and:
)Why don't you describe to me how you do this.(
and she says she seeks:
)a clear description
)of what this process entails and what the purpose of it is(
[snip]
Here's MRx, wondering what happened to my post of April 22; that is, three days before Kathy posted the above?
[snip]
The following is what I (not a Waldorf teacher) have learned about how Waldorf teachers "meditate on" their pupils; doubtless there's more to be said...
I have heard from teachers that they make a practice each evening of forming a visual image of each child in their class. The effort is made systematically to bring the child to mind as he or she IS; pure and simple (the image, if not always the child (g)): to reconstruct the way the nose turns up, the dip of the eyebrows; the pallor or flush to the cheek, without (for the duration of this particular exercise) judging, wishing, bemoaning, approving, disapproving -- you can always do that later if it seems fruitful. For now, you just let the phenomena speak, and you "listen" to it.
Regular practice of this exercise soon leads one to realize what one has failed to observe in the course of the day (what color shirt was Jimmy wearing?), and the intention to accomplish the exercise ever more thoroughly will lead you to be more observant at successive opportunities. For example, when shaking the child's hand as she comes through the classroom door in the morning, you will pay more attention to the temperature of her skin, it is moist or dry? -- how is it on Monday as compared to last Friday? -- to the sparkle-quotient in her eyes, to the tenor and mood in the voice greeting you. This deliberately cultivated interest will in turn teach you, the teacher, how to find said child's interest through your instruction; will awaken your dormant capacities to "reach" him or her, whether academically or socially/behaviorally, by clearing away some of the projected bramble that each of produces and that obscures our view of one another. (By the way, there is no law proh!
!
ibiting non-teachers from practicing this exercise, nor need it be restricted to work with children. If you are trying to "find your way" better to someone in your life, "paying attention to what you pay attention to" in this manner -- a definition of meditation I heard from a teacher-trainer -- is a good place to start. It might even fortify one's equanimity to encounter others on lists like...)
Please note, Fearful Readers: There is no notion here of influencing the child BY meditating on him/her; rather, it's a tool to teach the teacher ABOUT THE CHILD, his or her individuality -- as manifest in the sense world, only that we are often insufficiently observant to notice. Specializing in noticing for a few minutes a day is like playing your scales on your instrument; the purpose here is to let the teacher be freely "worked on" by the pupil (as a preventive to being "worked over" quite so easily the next day) at an opportunity when the teacher is not distracted by other duties, such as responding to the child directly. For teachers who in the course of, say, eight years with the same crowd might once or twice find themselves getting a little impatient at one time or another, or irritated, or even, Goodness!, involuntarily angry, the resource of such meditative encounters serves to lend some perspective to one's reactions. The design of imaginatively transposing subject!
!
and object in order to become more objective about one's own reflexes and hence gain mastery over them, and empathetically identifying with another's, yields increased compassion and insight for what the child placed in your care needs of your capacities.
************
BACK TO KATHY"S NEW POST OF MAY 22 -- HER FIRST, VERY FIRST POST! TO ME, MRx:
)Oh, and [sniff] please don't say anything. I want to remember you just the
way you are. Wistfully, /MRx
And how shall we remember you MRx?
I WISH I KNEW. MAYBE AS MRx WOULD BE NICE.
I would like to feel as if I could
dialogue intelligibly with you,
SOMETIMES I FEEL THAT WAY MYSELF -- I MEAN REGARDING MY SOLILOQUIES, NOT TO SPEAK OF CAUCUSING WITH MY ALTER EGOS (I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE REALIZED WAY BACK WHEN I JOINED THE CRITICS LIST THE FUTILITY OF DEVISING WHAT I THOUGHT WERE DISTINCTIVE INITIALS...)
but I admit that when I see your name on a
post I have an expectation of anger and indignation.
YOURS OR MINE?
WELL, SO FAR AS THAT GOES, I HOPE ALWAYS TO DISAPPOINT YOU ON BOTH COUNTS.
)Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to see how
parenthood places one a better position to know what one's offspring need
ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's teachers? Or did I misunderstand the
objection?
This is an interesting question. Are you a parent?
HERE"S PART OF WHAT I DELETED WHEN I TRANSFERRED MY QUERY FROM THE SJU WALDORF LIST TO THE CRITICS LIST. NEVER KNOW WHAT PEOPLE WILL WANT TO READ, I GUESS.
)Now, please recall, folks, that I have never raised children, and THAT"S WHY I'M ASKING (-- before you all beat up on me saying that my question shows that I've never raised children. I KNOW THAT. [Defensive? Who you callin' defensive?])(
I am a parent and a
teacher. Certainly I believe that I have more education and practice at
teaching than an individual that is not a teacher by profession. So, I do
believe that it's likely, in most situations, I would know more about the
practice of teaching, say math, than a parent that doesn't have this sort of
training. However, this doesn't negate the parents' knowledge about their
child.
WE AGREE (SEE? AND IT DIDN'T HURT A BIT).
More often than not information from parents adds more to what I know
about a particular student.
MORE POWER TO THE THREE OF YOU!
This goes without saying.
SORRY.
An informed,
interested parent, very likely is in a better position to know what their
child needs academically.
I GATHER FROM WHAT YOU WROTE JUST ABOVE THAT BY "BETTER" YOU MEAN "BETTER THAT AN UNIFORMED AND/OR UNINTERESTED PARENT" RATHER THAN "BETTER THAN THE TEACHER." AS YOU MIGHT SAY, THIS GOES WITHOUT SAYING. (AND AS I MIGHT LOYALLY DISAGREE, SOMETIMES IT IS THE OBVIOUS THAT MOST NEEDS POINTING OUT.)
I believe the best educational team for any child
consists of a collaborative group of that child's teachers *and* parents.
MAY YOU EVER BE IN THE MAJORITY HERE (AND I'VE MET NO WALDORF TEACHER -- NOR ANY TEACHER THIS SIDE OF ANCIENT SPARTA -- WHO WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THIS).
It's not an either/or situation. And sometimes the parent simply has a
hunch/belief that something else would be better or that something isn't
working *and* this hunch/belief is likely correct.
AND NONE OF MY WALDORF-TEACHER FRIENDS WOULD DISPUTE THAT. BUT MY QUERY CONCERNED NOT YOUR "SOMETIMES," ABOUT "SOMETHING [THAT] ISN'T WORKING," BUT "GENERAL ASTONISHMENT," AS IN:
)Here and there I've read indignant posts, maybe not all on this list,
)expressing astonishment -- that is, general astonishment, not merely
)concerning a specific instance -- at the audacity displayed by certain
)teachers by professing to know better what their pupils need than do the
)pupils' parents.
Kathy
WELL, PHILOSOPHY BEGINS IN ASTONISHMENT. MINE TOO, MULTIPLY.
WISHING YOU WELL, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Waldorf, inspired and otherwise
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 00:07:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
)))) Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) - 5/23/99 5:17 PM )))
)
))Michael KOPP:
))As the Waldorf people say, if you take
))out the thing that makes Waldorf Waldorf (i.e., the religion of
))Anthroposophy, Steiner's remanufactured middle-ages mumbo jumbo) IT AIN'T
))WALDORF ANYMORE.
)
)Bob Williams replies:
)My understanding is that public schools that use Waldorf methods are not to
)identify themselves as Waldorf schools but rather as Waldorf *inspired.* (I
)can hear the snickering already.) My sense is that if it ain't got that
)Steiner swing, then... "it ain't Waldorf anymore" but obviously has some
)relationship that needs to be described-- if not by "inspired"-- by some
)other term.
********
"Waldorf-inspired" [with or without the hyphen] schools also include indpendent [ie, private; not public; not magnet; not charter] schools that have not been accredited by the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America. The Waldorf name is trademarked, and this is the provisional step that young schools can take en route to accreditation. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.8 ---------------
From: redon (redon geocities.com)
Subject: Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 00:05:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199905232327.QAA11381 lists1.best.com)
) From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
) Subject: Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered
) Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:25:24 -0700
)
) )He also ordered the school district to end religious exercises and
) )paraphernalia at Fox Lane High School's "truly bizarre" Earth Day
) )celebrations. He said a creed students listened to -- "This is what we
) )believe. The Mother of us all is Earth. The Father is the Sun," constituted
) )religious worship of the Earth.
)
) That was indeed bizarre, more explicit than Waldorf's verses. The grace
) before meals, for example,
)
) Earth who gives to us this food
) Sun who makes it ripe and good
) Dear Earth dear Sun
) By you we live
) Our loving thanks to you we give
)
) is acceptable to most parents as 'generic spirituality', but equally
) violates the constitution as a nature-worship prayer.
Scientific Translation by line:
The globe or planet which we inhabit; the world, in distinction from
the sun, moon, or
stars, (who) yields furnishes or produces, (this) substance that can be
metabolized by an
organism to give energy and build tissue.
The luminous orb, the light of which constitutes day, and its absence
night; the central
body round which the earth and planets revolve, by which they are held
in their orbits, and
from which they receive light and heat, with a mean distance from the
globe or planet which
we inhabit; the world, in distinction from the sun, moon, or stars,
being about 92,500,000
miles away, and having a diameter of about 860,000, ( who) gives rise
to, cause to happen or
occur, (its) fully developed or matured and ready to be eaten or used,
(and) having desirable
or positive quality especially those suitable for a thing specified, not
to mention yummy.
Earnest, sweet or innocent, perhaps mild-mannered globe or planet which
we inhabit; the
world, in distinction from the sun, moon, or stars.
Earnest; sweet or innocent, perhaps mild-mannered luminous orb, the
light of which
constitutes day, and its absence night; the central body round which
the earth and planets
revolve, by which they are held in their orbits, and from which they
receive light and heat,
having a mean distance from the globe or planet which we inhabit; the
world, in distinction
from the sun, moon, or stars being about 92,500,000 miles away, and
having a diameter of
about 860,000.
(By you we) be alive, have life; to have, as an animal or a plant, the
capacity of
assimilating matter as food, and to be dependent on such assimilation
for a continuance of
existence; as, animals and plants that live to a great age are long in
reaching maturity.
(Our) delight or pleasure in, and or having a strong liking or desire
for, with interest in
and or to be pleased with an expression of gratitude and acknowledgment
expressive of a
sense of favor or kindness received, gratitude (to you we) yield,
furnish or produce.
Source -Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Personally, for the little ones I think something is lost in the
translation...
The tiny verse cited at the beginning of the post is one of a variety of
nature poems that a
teacher may recite during snack or lunch time with the children,
generally ages three to seven. The verse is poetic in nature, however,
by the time the children reach 6th or 7th grade they have been given a
scientific understanding similar to the facts in the translation above.
Throughout American history there has been important ties to science,
poetry and the beautiful through sometimes heroic nature stories, such
great naturalist and writers as Ernest Thompson Seton, Robert Frost, and
Jack London just to name a few. Through this tiny verse (approximately
15 seconds to recite) the children acquire a little of the poetic nature
and aesthetics values of the English language, anyone can find thousands
of similar poems which are available and categorized by age in your
local public library.
**********************************************************************************************
Every Child should have mud pies, grasshoppers, water bugs, tadpoles,
frogs and turtles,
elderberries, wild strawberries, acorns, hickory nuts, tress to climb,
animals to pet, hayfields, pine cones, rocks to roll, sand, snakes,
huckleberries and hornets -- and any child who has been deprived of
these has been deprived of the best part of his education.
- Luther Burbank Naturalist
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 06:04:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905250239.TAA15577 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905250239.TAA15577 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
)I am personally opposed to many vaccination programs.
Specifically which, and why?
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1327.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 02:36:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) - 5/22/99 7:46 AM )))
writes:
I've enjoyed reading your posts, Michael. I appreciate your
participation...especially when I imagine you writing late at night with
your archtypical fedora pushed back on your head.
Bob Williams
***********
The Fedora image is from the other list, Bob. I'm a cross- (rarely very cross) poster; not a cross-dresser. Best, /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1327 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1328 --------------
001 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
D
003 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
004 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Anniversary impressions
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
007 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Natural Jewish Parenting
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Anniversary impressions
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Natural Jewish Parenting
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.1 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 03:06:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
PLEASE FORGIVE THE CAPS AGAIN. THEY'RE JUST TO DISTINGUISH ANTITHESIS FROM THESIS, WHICH MY SOFTWARE DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY (ENCARAT).
))) "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) - 5/22/99 6:17 AM )))
WRITES:
) -----Original Message-----
) From: MICHAEL RONALL [mailto:mronall rabecker.com]
) Question to all: What have I missed that would enable me to
) see how parenthood places one a better position to know what
) one's offspring need ACADEMICALLY than that offspring's
) teachers? Or did I misunderstand the objection?
AND RESPONDS:
Hope you don't mind if I break the silence.
Many parents do believe that they know better than their teachers
what their children need ACADEMICALLY. That's why they shop around for
different schools, why someone might choose Waldorf over a "regular"
education, and why someone else might look at Waldorf and run very fast in
the other direction. Since there are many options, in every case the parent
is required to use his or her discernment to determine what is best for the
child academically, notwithstanding that the teachers in the "rejected"
venue might disagree.
MRx:
THE OPERATIVE WORD IS "THEIR" TEACHERS, VIZ., POST-CHOICE. (WHY DO I FIND MYSELF SO OFTEN EXPLICATING MY AGREEMENT?)
BT:
You may or may not have followed the thread on external absolute
moral authority. [SNIP REST OF POST, WITH WHICH I ALSO FOUND ( * SIGH * ) NOTHING TO DISAGREE]
MRx:
I ALSO FOLLOWED THE THREAD ON "LIVING THINKING," WHICH IS (ACKNOWLEDGING THE APPARENT PARADOX) MY PASSION. SOME TIME I'D ENJOY EXPLORING THAT WITH YOU IF YOU ARE INCLINED, BUT I FIND EMAIL MEDIUM VERY HARD TO USE FOR THAT PURPOSE . WHETHER THAT SPEAKS ONLY OF (OR AS YOU LAWYERS SAY, "TO") MY OWN INEXPERIENCE WITH EMAIL [OR WITH LIVING THINKING], OR WHETHER THE DIFFICULTY IS INHERENT TO THE TECHNOLOGY, I AM UNDECIDED, AND WILL CONTINUE PUSHING MY SMALL ENVELOPE WITH EMPIRICAL FORAYS. -- I KNOW I'VE JUST DISQUALIFIED MYSELF FROM RATIONAL DISCOURSE BY APODICTICALLY METASTASIZING ANOTHER FUNDAMENTALIST LUDDITE DOGMA. BUT WHAT ELSE CAN ONE EXPECT FROM A
DEFENDER OF THE FAITH tm, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 23:43:00 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905232327.QAA11381 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
Redon [another anonymous poster reminiscent of "the mysterious -El" because
they both love epigrams, and have the same didactic,
Anthroposophically-programmed Waldorf-teacher style] is trying to justify
the Waldorf grace before meals:
)) Earth who gives to us this food
)) Sun who makes it ripe and good
)) Dear Earth dear Sun
)) By you we live
)) Our loving thanks to you we give
REDON:
)Scientific Translation by line:
[snip most of the bullshit]
)(Our) delight or pleasure in, and or having a strong
)liking or desire for, with interest in and or to be
)pleased with an expression of gratitude and acknowledgment
)expressive of a sense of favor or kindness received,
)gratitude (to you we) yield, furnish or produce.
)
)Source -Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
)
)Personally, for the little ones I think something is lost
)in the translation...
)
)The tiny verse cited at the beginning of the post is one
)of a variety of nature poems that a teacher may recite
)during snack or lunch time with the children, generally
)ages three to seven. The verse is poetic in nature, however,
)by the time the children reach 6th or 7th grade they have
)been given a scientific understanding similar to the facts
)in the translation above. Throughout American history there
)has been important ties to science, poetry and the beautiful
)through sometimes heroic nature stories, such great naturalist
)and writers as Ernest Thompson Seton, Robert Frost, and
)Jack London just to name a few. Through this tiny verse
)(approximately 15 seconds to recite) the children acquire
)a little of the poetic nature and aesthetics values of the
)English language, anyone can find thousands of similar poems
)which are available and categorized by age in your local
)public library.
Michael KOPP says:
I assume this is some sort of attempt at satirizing Waldorf critics.
I'm not certain what it is that REDON is trying to say here. Perhaps that
the Waldorf critics' objection to the "poem" is based on a desire to reduce
all things natural to some cold, lifeless, rational, inhumane, atheistic
hell on earth.
But the WC objection to the "poem" is no such thing.
It is impossible to translate poetry into science. No rational person tries
to do it. No lover of poetry tries to do it. Poets, however, often remark
upon nature (translate is the wrong word; it's as impossible to translate
natural science into poetry as it is to translate poetry into science --
and both attempts would be ridiculous).
Many scientists have been poets as well, and most scientists who have had a
proper education in literature and the humanities appreciate poetry for
what it does for the human spirit (that natural part of us which we call
our selves, not the part religious believers think is something
supernatural).
But scientists and rationalists do not confuse science with poetry; and
poets do not confuse poetry with reason. Poets know that poetry is emotion,
and not amenable to rational analysis in the same way that intellectual
thought is.
This "poem" is nothing but a prayer in disguise.
REDON's attempt to cast this religious prayer of thanks to a nature-spirit
realm (animism by a hifalutin name given by Rudolf Steiner) as a "nature
poem" and a learning experience in English language aesthetics is
disingenous to say the least, and doublespeak propaganda at the worst.
The purpose of the prayer in Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools is
transparently obvious: to inculcate in children, by stealth, spiritualistic
belief in a personal world of supernatural characters to which the child is
led to speak directly.
It is not a prayer to God thanking him for creating and providing these
life-sustaining natural forces and objects.
It is a prayer to these forces and objects themselves as living entities.
It is a prayer to the PERSONAL sun god, the PERSONAL mother earth; an
OBEISANCE to ANIMATE SPIRITUAL INSTRUMENTALITIES.
This is totally antithetical to the scientific understanding of these
things, which science makes no judgement about in terms of animation, which
is not in evidence. Science knows these things as inanimate matter and
energy arising out of the moment of creation of the Universe. Science is
silent on the causation of the creation of the Universe, but it is not
silent on the way in which matter and energy have become what we know as
the real Universe, including ourselves.
It is this prayer's intentional implanting of spiritualism in pre-rational
young minds to which Waldorf critics object.
But the objection is not to the mere practice of this religious observance.
Waldorf critics have no right or interest in controlling private religious
practices.
Their only interests are these: insuring that these practices (which are
loosely consistent with the inclusion of Anthroposophy in every aspect of a
Waldorf school curriculum, private or public) are not allowed in public or
publicly-funded schools (in the U.S., where they are forbidden by the
Constitution); and insuring that consumer rights to a full understanding of
the true nature of Waldorf education are met by full disclosure and truth
in advertising.
If REDON wants to pray to inanimate objects as if they were spirits, that's
fine with me. If REDON wants to teach children to pray to such animistic
spirits -- and the parents of those children do not mind -- that's fine
with me.
(I would think that parents whose religions forbade prayers to any but a
monotheistic deity might be somewhat taken aback to learn that their kids
were praying to the sun -- and might even think twice about sending their
kids to such a school.)
If Rudolf Steiner College's public Waldorf education infiltration attempts
bring such prayers into public classrooms, that's NOT fine with me. It
wasn't fine with me when my kids had to say the prayer in our Steiner
school in New Zealand, where such "charter" or "integrated" schools are
already a part of the state (public) school system, and religion is
allowed.
It was one of the reasons we left the school, in the end. We had been
promised that all religious matters and observances were essentially
Christian. We had been promised that Anthroposophy was not in the
curriculum or classroom in any way. We accepted a certain amount of
Christian religiosity as the least harmful of influences that our children
might suffer in a variety of schools.
We had a contract with the school, even if it was only a verbal contract.
That contract was sold to us by duplicity. That contract was broken by the
school. The school did, in many ways, try to inculcate spiritualistic mumbo
jumbo in our children. I have enumerated these offenses many times in many
ways on this list.
The "nature poem" -- really a disguised prayer to animistic entities -- was
only the thin end of the wedge.
REDON and all the other Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical apologists and
propagandists should stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes with such
puerile stuff as this exercise.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.3 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:33:45 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251143.EAA13307 lists1.best.com)
On 25 May 99, at 23:43, Michael Kopp wrote:
) Redon:
)
) )) Earth who gives to us this food
) )) Sun who makes it ripe and good
) )) Dear Earth dear Sun
) )) By you we live
) )) Our loving thanks to you we give
)
) This "poem" is nothing but a prayer in disguise.
I don't see any disguise. It's called a blessing, which is a type of
prayer.
) The purpose of the prayer in Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools is
) transparently obvious: to inculcate in children, by stealth,
) spiritualistic belief in a personal world of supernatural characters to
) which the child is led to speak directly.
Nothing stealthy about it. Kids in Waldorf schools, in the younger
grades, are openly taught that nature spirits (gnomes, fairys, etc.)
exist.
I have no problem with small kids seeing nature as a living entity.
I kind of see it that way myself, emotionally. The stuff about
gnomes and fairies rubs me the wrong way, though, although I have no
major objection to it. I see it as the Waldorf equivalent of Santa
Claus (except that the teachers believe it too).
) But the objection is not to the mere practice of this religious
) observance. Waldorf critics have no right or interest in controlling
) private religious practices.
)
) Their only interests are these: insuring that these practices (which are
) loosely consistent with the inclusion of Anthroposophy in every aspect of
) a Waldorf school curriculum, private or public) are not allowed in public
) or publicly-funded schools (in the U.S., where they are forbidden by the
) Constitution); and insuring that consumer rights to a full understanding
) of the true nature of Waldorf education are met by full disclosure and
) truth in advertising.
Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
public school.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.4 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:04:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905251143.EAA13307 lists1.best.com)
(199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251535.IAA15547 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo wrote:
)
)Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
)public school.
Especially not in the presence of U.S. Marshals and with the prospect of
six months in jail for the teacher (sharing cell with cutthoats, rapists,
and armed robbers) and punishement for the students so cruel and tortuous
that they will wish they had died at birth.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Anniversary impressions
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:38:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
Thursday night I'll be winging away to a place where I won't have
access to this list for a week, and I thought it was now time to communicate
a very simple impression I've gained after participating on this list for a
year, which is: No matter how strong the disagreement I may have with the
opinions, logic and method of presentation by anyone on this list, it's my
perception that each and every single person who participates here does so
from what they believe is their best intention of making things better, in
whatever way they may each define "better" to be. That, at least, we have
in common.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:38:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: MICHAEL RONALL [mailto:mronall rabecker.com]
)
) What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you
) posted an enraged
) insult
)
) BUT THAT WASN'T ME; THAT WAS CHARLIE FREY...
)
) regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
) meditating on students.
)
) WAIT! THAT WASN'T ME! IT WAS CH--
)
) The flavor of this reply and another that you
) posted toward me
)
) NO! STOP! IT WAS CHARLIE! IT WAS CHARLIE!
)
) has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
) with you.
)
) LOOK! YOU RESPONDED TO HIM YOURSELF!
Hmmm... So the misidentification virus has now hit Kathy in
addition to Michael. Perhaps a vaccination would be in order to protect the
rest of us.
Seriously, though, this (and other criticisms by several Waldorf
Critics) seems to demonstrate a phenomenon which I studied long ago in my
college course in political psychology (if anybody wants a copy of my paper
studying -- through content analysis of publicly available speeches --
whether or not Spiro Agnew and William Kunstler were or were not clinically
paranoid, I think it's still sitting around somewhere). The phenomenon is
that when there is a broad spectrum of opinions on an issue, one tends to
make very fine distinctions between opinions of those who are similar to but
distinguishable from one's own, but then the countervailing tendency is to
lump everyone else together in a single pot.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.7 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism Decision Rendered)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:43:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199905251535.IAA15547 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251605.JAA01709 lists1.best.com)
On 25 May 99, at 18:04, Tarjei Straume wrote:
) Steve Premo wrote:
) )
) )Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
) )public school.
)
) Especially not in the presence of U.S. Marshals and with the prospect of
) six months in jail for the teacher (sharing cell with cutthoats, rapists,
) and armed robbers) and punishement for the students so cruel and tortuous
) that they will wish they had died at birth.
That's not the half of it. The teachers and students are then
shipped off to a top secret government facility, operated by
Scientologists, where they are brainwashed and turned into automatons
bent on destroying the world conspiracy of Anarchesophagus, er,
Anarchoposophists, who, as we know, are all that stand between us and
global domination by the evil minions of the Ahriman/Lucifer
alliance. But don't worry. Tazman, sworn enemy of the nefarious Dr.
Scientology, will save us from his evil clutches!
Oops, sorry...didn't mean to get so...frivolous...it's just hard to
take anything seriously this close to the Strawberry Music
Festival...
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Natural Jewish Parenting
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 02:00:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I just got my copy of Natural Jewish Parenting (No. 7, Spring 1999) today.
Beautiful job, Yael.
There is no doubt that it is a magazine with a strong religious view, but
it feels more open than other religious magazines I see. Yael prints a good
letter from a doctor challenging an anti-vaccination article.
There is a special section "The Waldorf Question" with four articles and a
sidebar:
What Every Jewish Parent Should Know About the Waldorf Philosophy
Deborah Salazar
(sidebar) Waldorf Teacher Training
Rudolf Steiner College Foundation Year Book List 1993-94 (excerpts)
Rudolf Steiner and the Jews
Dan Dugan
Jewish Parents Who Support Anthroposophy Explain: Why Waldorf
Francine Eastwood
Three People Reflect on Waldorf Education: Recollections
Ellen Arian, Yael Malfatto, Yosef Resnick
All Hebrew words are italicized, and there is a glossary in the back of the
magazine. Nice touch, Yael.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Anniversary impressions
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:13:45 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905251635.JAA17859 lists1.best.com)
) No matter how strong the disagreement I
) may have with the opinions, logic and method of presentation by anyone on
) this list, it's my perception that each and every single person who
) participates here does so from what they believe is their best intention
) of making things better, in whatever way they may each define "better" to
) be. That, at least, we have in common.
Yes indeed! Although I think you and I are the only people who have
publicly admitted that we actually *enjoy* participating in the
list...
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1328.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Natural Jewish Parenting
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:19:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199905251651.JAA25958 lists1.best.com)
On 25 May 99, at 2:00, Dan Dugan wrote:
) I just got my copy of Natural Jewish Parenting (No. 7, Spring 1999) today.
) Beautiful job, Yael.
I intended to order a copy, but lost the instructions on how to do
that. Would you reprint them, please, Yael?
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1328 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1329 --------------
001 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
002 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Anniversary impressions
003 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Waldorf, inspired and otherwise, redux
005 - Bob Williams (danabob she - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
006 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
008 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anniversary impressions
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Anniversary impressions -- Choral Arrangement
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - relationships we would not normally assume ( -- a sign that
y
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.1 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:18:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The discussion about this "blessing" is fascinating!
I am a Unitarian Universalist; for those of you who don't know what that
is, I have snipped the following from the uua website. Those of you who
know or don't care can skip to my point, below.
http://www.uua.org
We Believe
Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion born of the Jewish and
Christian traditions. We keep our minds open to the religious questions
people have struggled with in all times and places.
We believe that personal experience, conscience and reason should be the
final authorities in religion. In the end religious authority lies not in a
book or person or institution, but in ourselves. We put religious insights
to the test of our hearts and minds.
We uphold the free search for truth. We will not be bound by a statement of
belief. We do not ask anyone to subscribe to a creed. We say ours is a
noncreedal religion. Ours is a free faith.
We believe that religious wisdom is everchanging. Human understanding of
life and death, the world and its mysteries, is never final. Revelation is
continuous. We celebrate unfolding truths known to teachers, prophets and
sages throughout the ages.
We affirm the worth of all women and men. We believe people should be
encouraged to think for themselves. We know people differ in their opinions
and life-styles and believe these differences generally should be honored.
We seek to act as a moral force in the world, believing that ethical living
is the supreme witness of religion. The here and now and the effects our
actions will have on future generations deeply concern us. We know that our
relationships with one another, with other peoples, races and nations,
should be governed by justice, equity and compassion.
Now that you have an idea of what we are about, I'd like to come to my
point:
The "Dear Sun, Dear Earth" blessing was used by our UU fellowship in our
Thanksgiving celebration (an American patriotic holiday-cum-harvest
festival, usually involving eating a turkey and being thankful that the
British landed on the East Coast). The prayer was identified as an old
native American prayer. I will try to verify this for sure, but I have
every reason to believe that it is true and correct.
I liked the ecological slant of the prayer, to put it rather
un-emotionally, so we started using it at home before dinner. It seemed to
me that it was an effective way of teaching our son to be mindful of where
his food comes from; we are the only species that "shit where we eat," so
to speak, so I thought using this blessing before eating might be better
than say, celebrating "Earth Day," at teaching him our environmentalist
values. (No, we don't use a composting toilet, but we do recycle, buy
organic food, drive very little, etc.)
I find it strange that our son will be attending a Waldorf Kindergarten in
the fall, and it turns out this will be the blessing they use! I had no
idea, because it is actually a native American prayer.... it is even more
interesting that you automatically read 'Steiner stealth' into it. I doubt
very much if the people in my Kinderhaus intend to convert my son to
Anthroposophy by using this simple blessing... it *is* a very weird
religion, to say the least, but their adoption of a native prayer doesn't
exactly make the prayer itself a method of conversion - especially when
it's from a different religion entirely! I agree with you that many of
these people (the serious anthropops) are nuts, but how can you slander an
entire culture's religion which never did you a bit of harm?
I suppose Native American Indians had a nefarious plan to usurp
Christianity, too.....?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.2 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Anniversary impressions
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:48:11 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Default
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
AAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWW........ thanks, Bob. I will try to keep that in mind the
next time I feel like I am going to tear my hair out!
----------
From: Tolz, Robert (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Anniversary impressions
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 9:38 AM
Thursday night I'll be winging away to a place where I won't have
access to this list for a week, and I thought it was now time to
communicate
a very simple impression I've gained after participating on this list for a
year, which is: No matter how strong the disagreement I may have with the
opinions, logic and method of presentation by anyone on this list, it's my
perception that each and every single person who participates here does so
from what they believe is their best intention of making things better, in
whatever way they may each define "better" to be. That, at least, we have
in common.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.3 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 02:06:43 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905251605.JAA01709 lists1.best.com)
(199905251535.IAA15547 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251645.JAA23048 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo wrote:
)) )
)) )Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
)) )public school.
I wrote:
))
)) Especially not in the presence of U.S. Marshals and with the prospect of
)) six months in jail for the teacher (sharing cell with cutthoats, rapists,
)) and armed robbers) and punishement for the students so cruel and tortuous
)) that they will wish they had died at birth.
Steve Premo wrote:
)
)That's not the half of it. The teachers and students are then
)shipped off to a top secret government facility, operated by
)Scientologists, where they are brainwashed and turned into automatons
)bent on destroying the world conspiracy of Anarchesophagus, er,
)Anarchoposophists, who, as we know, are all that stand between us and
)global domination by the evil minions of the Ahriman/Lucifer
)alliance. But don't worry. Tazman, sworn enemy of the nefarious Dr.
)Scientology, will save us from his evil clutches!
)
)Oops, sorry...didn't mean to get so...frivolous...it's just hard to
)take anything seriously this close to the Strawberry Music
)Festival...
I did ask if it was a joke. It was assured me that it isn't. But when I
listen to how American prosecuters speak about teenagers they are sending
to the death chambers, describing them as subhuman alien monsters, the
psychopathic approach by a judge to teenagers praying to a deity (who is
not a flag or a founding father) does not surprise me.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Waldorf, inspired and otherwise, redux
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:08:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Yesterday I wrote that:
"Waldorf-inspired" [with or without the hyphen] schools also [ie, in addition to some public schools] include independent [ie, private; not public; not magnet; not charter] schools that have not been accredited by the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America. The Waldorf name is trademarked, and this is the provisional step that young schools can take en route to accreditation.
Today I learned that written permission from AWSNA is required to use the term "Waldorf-inspired." (I don't know about that hyphen.) /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.5 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:32:47 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Michael Ronall wrote:
)The Fedora image is from the other list, Bob. I'm a cross- (rarely very
)cross) poster; not a cross-dresser. Best, /MRx
After Stephen and MRx's posts, I'm becoming selfconscious (in the
mainstream sense). I was poking fun at Michael with this "thread" based on
his invisible man post and a reply, I believe to that post, on "the other
list" in which his name was misspelled (grammar problems there, I know). I
found the timing of the misspelling comical, and so the fedora image was
meant to suggest the genesis of the subject line to the bi-posters on the
list... I guess, I'm just concerned that my netiquette dosier might get me
in trouble in the future.
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.6 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:59:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Michael Ronall posts:
)
)MRx HERE:
)HI, KATHY. THE LIST IN WHICH MY DESCRIPTION WAS POSTED WAS DAN DUGAN'S
WALDORF CRITICS LIST; THIS ONE. IF BY "LIST" YOU MEAN SOMETHING ELSE HERE,
IT'S BEYOND MY KEN; MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.
Yes, I know that. When I wrote that I perhaps not receive *the list* or
perhaps had inadvertantly deleted *the list* I meant the list we are now
communicating with each other through - the Waldorf Critics List.
Kathy wrote:
)What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you posted an enraged
)insult
Michael responded:
)BUT THAT WASN'T ME; THAT WAS CHARLIE FREY...
Kathy:
)regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
)meditating on students.
Michael:
)WAIT! THAT WASN'T ME! IT WAS CH--
Kathy
) The flavor of this reply and another that you
)posted toward me
Michael:
)NO! STOP! IT WAS CHARLIE! IT WAS CHARLIE!
)
) has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
)with you.
Okay Michael - so very sorry. I realized some time later that night . . .
much later, that it wasn't you that had been so very, very rude. (And it
wasn't Charlie I was referring to either.) It was the ever elusive *redon*.
Somehow I mixed up *redon* with *MRx*. I think both monikers are
unconsciously sinister in tone to me. Nooooo, I'm not trying to say you are
sinister. I've just had my belly full of Anthroposophical sorts that go by
some rather strange pseudonyms. But then . . . I suppose the same could be
said of me when I used my old ISP and it appeared that I wanted to be
referred to as *spike* since this was part of my email address.
Anyway, I did find your reposted post on meditation a good description of
the practice. Thank you for posting it the 1st time and thank you for
posting it again. I do want to say, however, that the practice you describe
is what any astute individual will do as they interact with any number of
folks in their life, including their students. I was in a tedious meeting
today with fussy bureaucrats from the State Dept. of Ed. At one point I
began studying the faces, body language, movements, etc., of others at the
meeting in order to guage their internal reactions to the matter before us
(and, yes, to pass the time in a more interesting fashion). I do this quite
often, but I wouldn't categorize this practice on my part as a meditation.
I do believe that this is a good practice for teachers (and other
professionals that work closely with people), because it is important that
we stay in touch with our students' emotional states in addition to their
academic progress. They do, inevitably, go hand-in-hand, although not always
in the relationship we would normally assume.
I'll make a special effort not to confuse you with *redon*.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 00:00:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) - 5/25/99 2:32 PM )))
Michael Ronall wrote:
)The Fedora image is from the other list, Bob. I'm a cross- (rarely very
)cross) poster; not a cross-dresser. Best, /MRx
After Stephen and MRx's posts, I'm becoming selfconscious (in the
mainstream sense). I was poking fun at Michael with this "thread" based on
his invisible man post and a reply, I believe to that post, on "the other
list" in which his name was misspelled (grammar problems there, I know). I
found the timing of the misspelling comical, and so the fedora image was
meant to suggest the genesis of the subject line to the bi-posters on the
list... I guess, I'm just concerned that my netiquette dosier might get me
in trouble in the future.
Bob Williams
**********
Not on this list it won't, Bob. And it's RonFELD, RonFELD. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.8 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anniversary impressions
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:14:48 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905251635.JAA17859 lists1.best.com)
(199905251715.KAA09726 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251715.KAA09726 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
(Bob T):
)) No matter how strong the disagreement I
)) may have with the opinions, logic and method of presentation by anyone on
)) this list, it's my perception that each and every single person who
)) participates here does so from what they believe is their best intention
)) of making things better, in whatever way they may each define "better" to
)) be. That, at least, we have in common.
)
)Yes indeed! Although I think you and I are the only people who have
)publicly admitted that we actually *enjoy* participating in the
)list...
Yeah, well you know what they say about men of your profession... (VBG)
Seriously, though, I concur with Bob's sentiments -- and I wouldn't be
here if I didn't enjoy it (but, my God, it eats up time sometimes!).
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Anniversary impressions -- Choral Arrangement
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 00:37:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Bob Tolz wrote:
)) I think you [Steve Premo] and I are the only people who have
)publicly admitted that we actually *enjoy* participating in the
)list...
********************
Invisible from the start, I guess:
rom: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: WOW!
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 21:03:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hello Critics and Criticized:
New to the list, appreciating much that I read here. [snip]
*********************
/MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1329.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: relationships we would not normally assume ( -- a sign that
you're on the Critics list)
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 01:01:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net) - 5/25/99 11:59 PM )))
writes:
[snip] Anyway, I did find your reposted post on meditation a good description of
the practice. Thank you for posting it the 1st time and thank you for
posting it again. I do want to say, however, that the practice you describe
is what any astute individual will do as they interact with any number of
folks in their life, including their students. I was in a tedious meeting
today with fussy bureaucrats from the State Dept. of Ed. At one point I
began studying the faces, body language, movements, etc., of others at the
meeting in order to guage their internal reactions to the matter before us
(and, yes, to pass the time in a more interesting fashion). I do this quite
often, but I wouldn't categorize this practice on my part as a meditation.
MRx:
I wouldn't either, unless you made a practice of doing it when NOT in the meeting; ie, when NOT met by the contents-of-perception/phenomena in the sense-world (sorry, don't know how else to phrase it). Employing one's powers (eg, of observation) in vivo is not coeval with practicing exercising them retro- or prospectively in the absence of a prod from contemporaneous events.
Kathy:
I do believe that this is a good practice for teachers (and other
professionals that work closely with people), because it is important that
we stay in touch with our students' emotional states in addition to their
academic progress. They do, inevitably, go hand-in-hand, although not always
in the relationship we would normally assume.
MRx:
Now THAT's a provocative (in the sense of intriguingly enigmatic) statement. Care to elaborate?
Kathy:
I'll make a special effort not to confuse you with *redon*.
MRx:
And I'll do the same for you. /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1329 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1330 --------------
001 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
002 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield? Parishioner of the Church
Invisib
003 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Kathy's aversion to names like Redon
004 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
005 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Vaccine Question
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
007 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
008 - Bob Williams (danabob she - Re: Non-Waldorf but derived from.....
009 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Touche, Bob!
010 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.1 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 05:44:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905260347.UAA14611 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905260347.UAA14611 lists1.best.com)
Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) wrote:
)After Stephen and MRx's posts, I'm becoming selfconscious (in the
)mainstream sense). I was poking fun at Michael with this "thread" based on
)his invisible man
Ahhhh -- I do believe that my ignorance of American movies is exposed...
(g)
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.2 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield? Parishioner of the Church
Invisible.
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 01:37:45 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk) - 5/26/99 12:44 AM )))
writes that:
Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
wrote:
)After Stephen and MRx's posts, I'm becoming selfconscious (in the
)mainstream sense). I was poking fun at Michael with this "thread" based on
)his invisible man
Ahhhh -- I do believe that my ignorance of American movies is exposed...
(g)
*******************
Mine too, Stephen. Because, predictably, as a Defender of the Faith (tm) I'm more familiar with Luddite-friendly narrative media (they're slower, y'know, like me). And in that frame of reference I am employed as a foreman in a sweatshop producing the Emperor's New Clothes. And like him, if I but knew my true state, I'd long for invisibility. So I stay on this list... /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.3 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Kathy's aversion to names like Redon
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:29:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OH! That's why Mister New Zealand was so insulting about my "net-name"! I
did not realize that anthropops used "unusual" names (but then, so do a lot
of people, I suppose)!
I prefer to go by the name of my cat - Pandora - than to use my real name
because of privacy issues. A really skilled hacker could maybe figure out
who I am by hacking into my ISP, but that is pretty unlikely. I feel it's
important safety issue to stay anonymous, because I use this computer at
work (don't have one at home), and I don't want any psychos tracking me
down at my preschool!
Hmmm.... the anthropops usually accuse the critics of being paranoid....I
guess this is proof that I am one.
Hehe. I must have sounded like a real nut - maybe a DOF who was an ancient
Greek in a previous life?!
HAHAHAHA! *chuckle* *snarf*
Actually, I'm just a humble cat lover. :-)
----------
From: ksutphen (ksutphen jps.net)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 8:59 PM
Michael Ronall posts:
)
)MRx HERE:
)HI, KATHY. THE LIST IN WHICH MY DESCRIPTION WAS POSTED WAS DAN DUGAN'S
WALDORF CRITICS LIST; THIS ONE. IF BY "LIST" YOU MEAN SOMETHING ELSE HERE,
IT'S BEYOND MY KEN; MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.
Yes, I know that. When I wrote that I perhaps not receive *the list* or
perhaps had inadvertantly deleted *the list* I meant the list we are now
communicating with each other through - the Waldorf Critics List.
Kathy wrote:
)What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you posted an
enraged
)insult
Michael responded:
)BUT THAT WASN'T ME; THAT WAS CHARLIE FREY...
Kathy:
)regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
)meditating on students.
Michael:
)WAIT! THAT WASN'T ME! IT WAS CH--
Kathy
) The flavor of this reply and another that you
)posted toward me
Michael:
)NO! STOP! IT WAS CHARLIE! IT WAS CHARLIE!
)
) has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
)with you.
Okay Michael - so very sorry. I realized some time later that night . . .
much later, that it wasn't you that had been so very, very rude. (And it
wasn't Charlie I was referring to either.) It was the ever elusive *redon*.
Somehow I mixed up *redon* with *MRx*. I think both monikers are
unconsciously sinister in tone to me. Nooooo, I'm not trying to say you are
sinister. I've just had my belly full of Anthroposophical sorts that go by
some rather strange pseudonyms. But then . . . I suppose the same could be
said of me when I used my old ISP and it appeared that I wanted to be
referred to as *spike* since this was part of my email address.
Anyway, I did find your reposted post on meditation a good description of
the practice. Thank you for posting it the 1st time and thank you for
posting it again. I do want to say, however, that the practice you describe
is what any astute individual will do as they interact with any number of
folks in their life, including their students. I was in a tedious meeting
today with fussy bureaucrats from the State Dept. of Ed. At one point I
began studying the faces, body language, movements, etc., of others at the
meeting in order to guage their internal reactions to the matter before us
(and, yes, to pass the time in a more interesting fashion). I do this quite
often, but I wouldn't categorize this practice on my part as a meditation.
I do believe that this is a good practice for teachers (and other
professionals that work closely with people), because it is important that
we stay in touch with our students' emotional states in addition to their
academic progress. They do, inevitably, go hand-in-hand, although not
always
in the relationship we would normally assume.
I'll make a special effort not to confuse you with *redon*.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.4 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:36:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Movies? What movies? I didn't see anything about any movies.....!
;-)
P.
----------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 9:44 PM
Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com) wrote:
)After Stephen and MRx's posts, I'm becoming selfconscious (in the
)mainstream sense). I was poking fun at Michael with this "thread" based on
)his invisible man
Ahhhh -- I do believe that my ignorance of American movies is exposed...
(g)
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.5 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Vaccine Question
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:42:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The recent discussion on this list about vaccines has caused me to check
out all of the links people have included in their posts... I read
(somewhere, I dunno which site) that the Hep B vaccine is cultured in fetal
tissue. I know this is a little off-subject, but does anyone know where to
get more information on this?
Pandora the cat lover
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 20:49:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905261635.JAA09913 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905261635.JAA09913 lists1.best.com)
pandora (pandora aa.net) wrote:
)Movies? What movies? I didn't see anything about any movies.....!
)
);-)
OK, so of what icons of US kulcha am I demonstrating abysmal ignorance?
TV? (Mea culpa!) Shiterature (tm)?
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.7 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 15:11:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I DON'T KNOW, STEPHEN, THAT WAS MY POINT.
And I thought we were discussing Waldorf here.......(please note
humorous/ironic tone of voice)
----------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Re: Who is Michel Ronfield?
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:49 PM
pandora (pandora aa.net) wrote:
)Movies? What movies? I didn't see anything about any movies.....!
)
);-)
OK, so of what icons of US kulcha am I demonstrating abysmal ignorance?
TV? (Mea culpa!) Shiterature (tm)?
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.8 ---------------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
Subject: Re: Non-Waldorf but derived from.....
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 18:21:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I apologize if I've got the wrong subject line. I lost that information.
PANDORA(responding to Dan's post):
)I am not saying that you are deliberately lying because, like many people
)concerned with academic success, you simply haven't grasped the true
)meaning and importance of 'developmentally appropriate practice' (and I
)DON'T mean the Steiner folks' version, I mean Piaget, Vygotsky, et al.)
BOB W.:
From the little I've gleaned over the years, I see Piaget and Vygotsky as
very different characters with different views of human learning and
development. I can't speak for Dan's grasp of "the true meaning and
importance of 'developmentally appropriate practice'", or to whether he
should be lumped with the nefarious "people concerned with academic
success" (perhaps we need a more specific label here), but I am wary of
using experts or references to the topics of their research as descriptors
of our own point of view. It means little to me to surmise that you agree
with Piaget, Vygotsky, et al. (I'm not sure who else 'et a'l includes for
you) because in my mind those theorists are not saying the same thing. I
would love to read about your own view of what DAP (if I make take the
anacronymistic liberty) is. If I knew your view *and Dan's* (or your
interpretation of Dan's, if you are taking him to task), I'd be able to
think about your post more deeply...if not actually 'taking into sleep.'
PANDORA (to Dan):
)I am truly sorry that you get "an immediate bullshit alarm" whenever
)somebody says 'current brain research'. If you feel it is nothing but a
)steaming shovel-full just because the Waldorf folks are pointing to it for
)validation, well, then you are just as illogical as they are.
)(snip)Attacking )the work of dozens of university researchers and PhD.
)teachers with decades of )experience, just because the anthropops are
)pointing to them for validation, is )only going to make you look bad. And
)you can bet they are going to keep crowing )about this, because they are
)at least partially right.
BOB W.:
As touched on in the comments above, I think that the question of
specificity comes up again. I agree with Dan that the term 'current brain
research' is over/misused. IMO, it is often used to confer legitimacy on a
point of view by linking it with some authority and so limit discussion.
I'm not saying (and I don't think Dan is either--wait, check for beard)
that brain research is a steaming shovel-full, but rather that it is being
used uncritically to obscure rather than illuminate (no reference to "the
sun with loving light") topics of discussion. My understanding is that most
appeals to brain research depend upon extrapolations from that research and
that very little, if any, research actually proves many of the sweeping
generalizations that are made in its name.
I would find it more enlightening (oh no, another light metaphor...), in
making sense of a topic, to discuss actual studies and their results rather
than to be told that 'current brain research' says so and so. Appeals to
experts or theories can imply consensus, or that the matter is settled and
not open to debate. I'd like folks to be more specific about what and why
they believe xyz, and not shorthand to experts and "research says." I find
it hard to respond to those shorthands. On the other hand, I can discuss
whether the "Mozart effect" experiments suggest that children should sleep
with Mozart piped through their Walkmans.
PANDORA wrote:
)In fact, teaching reading to Kindergarteners and first graders, using the
)exact )same techniques, actually produces more tension and learning
)disabilities in )the Kindergarteners.
BOB W.:
Two thoughts. First, I am interested in what different reading techniques
you think would be developmentally appropriate for the kinder and first
child, respectively.
Second, do you have evidence that learning disabilities in kinders are
being caused by the use of first grade "techniques" in kindergarten? What
are the techniques that are the culprit here?
I would say that I am very critical of literacy practices in lots of
places, but in posing the above questions, just want to better understand
your point
of view.
Respectfully,
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.9 ---------------
From: "pandora" (pandora aa.net)
Subject: Touche, Bob!
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 18:59:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Unfortunately, I agree with every point you made.
Sometimes I guess I just don't have the time for this kind of list. *sigh*.
You are correct, Piaget and Vygotsky had some very different opinions about
child development. There is, however, a body of work that early childhood
professionals look to for guidance, and that body of work includes both of
those guys'. NAEYC, Montessori, Core Knowledge.... many different
definitions there are (some consensus has been reached about how kids
learn, but obviously there are differing interpretations).
I was just trying to make the point, if somewhat quickly/carelessly, that I
was not referring to _Steiner's_ ideas of "developmentally appropriate."
As to the other points of your post....
Well, here it is - 6:48 pm, I just got done with my work, my husband is
home sick, my mother is expecting my son and I for dinner (about 20 minutes
ago), I still have an errand to run for the "Last Day of School party"
tomorrow - which is supposed to be my day off, but I'm coming in anyway -
and I am going to respond to your (very valid) points without being vague
or referring to research which I can not actually quote right this
second...HAH!
That's what got me into this mess in the first place - I didn't take enough
*time* to say what I really would have liked to, because I just didn't have
it.
SOOO.....I am going to Grandma's now, and I might respond tomorrow, or it
might not be until the weekend. But you can rest assured that I will try to
be SPECIFIC in my responses, and answer all of your questions with clarity
- as well as with the care that a less-rushed schedule may allow.
As Mikey would say,
Cheers from the island of the cat lover!
~P.
----------
From: Bob Williams (danabob shell16.ba.best.com)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Subject: Re: Non-Waldorf but derived from.....
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 10:21 AM
I apologize if I've got the wrong subject line. I lost that information.
PANDORA(responding to Dan's post):
)I am not saying that you are deliberately lying because, like many people
)concerned with academic success, you simply haven't grasped the true
)meaning and importance of 'developmentally appropriate practice' (and I
)DON'T mean the Steiner folks' version, I mean Piaget, Vygotsky, et al.)
BOB W.:
)From the little I've gleaned over the years, I see Piaget and Vygotsky as
very different characters with different views of human learning and
development. I can't speak for Dan's grasp of "the true meaning and
importance of 'developmentally appropriate practice'", or to whether he
should be lumped with the nefarious "people concerned with academic
success" (perhaps we need a more specific label here), but I am wary of
using experts or references to the topics of their research as descriptors
of our own point of view. It means little to me to surmise that you agree
with Piaget, Vygotsky, et al. (I'm not sure who else 'et a'l includes for
you) because in my mind those theorists are not saying the same thing. I
would love to read about your own view of what DAP (if I make take the
anacronymistic liberty) is. If I knew your view *and Dan's* (or your
interpretation of Dan's, if you are taking him to task), I'd be able to
think about your post more deeply...if not actually 'taking into sleep.'
PANDORA (to Dan):
)I am truly sorry that you get "an immediate bullshit alarm" whenever
)somebody says 'current brain research'. If you feel it is nothing but a
)steaming shovel-full just because the Waldorf folks are pointing to it for
)validation, well, then you are just as illogical as they are.
)(snip)Attacking )the work of dozens of university researchers and PhD.
)teachers with decades of )experience, just because the anthropops are
)pointing to them for validation, is )only going to make you look bad. And
)you can bet they are going to keep crowing )about this, because they are
)at least partially right.
BOB W.:
As touched on in the comments above, I think that the question of
specificity comes up again. I agree with Dan that the term 'current brain
research' is over/misused. IMO, it is often used to confer legitimacy on a
point of view by linking it with some authority and so limit discussion.
I'm not saying (and I don't think Dan is either--wait, check for beard)
that brain research is a steaming shovel-full, but rather that it is being
used uncritically to obscure rather than illuminate (no reference to "the
sun with loving light") topics of discussion. My understanding is that most
appeals to brain research depend upon extrapolations from that research and
that very little, if any, research actually proves many of the sweeping
generalizations that are made in its name.
I would find it more enlightening (oh no, another light metaphor...), in
making sense of a topic, to discuss actual studies and their results rather
than to be told that 'current brain research' says so and so. Appeals to
experts or theories can imply consensus, or that the matter is settled and
not open to debate. I'd like folks to be more specific about what and why
they believe xyz, and not shorthand to experts and "research says." I find
it hard to respond to those shorthands. On the other hand, I can discuss
whether the "Mozart effect" experiments suggest that children should sleep
with Mozart piped through their Walkmans.
PANDORA wrote:
)In fact, teaching reading to Kindergarteners and first graders, using the
)exact )same techniques, actually produces more tension and learning
)disabilities in )the Kindergarteners.
BOB W.:
Two thoughts. First, I am interested in what different reading techniques
you think would be developmentally appropriate for the kinder and first
child, respectively.
Second, do you have evidence that learning disabilities in kinders are
being caused by the use of first grade "techniques" in kindergarten? What
are the techniques that are the culprit here?
I would say that I am very critical of literacy practices in lots of
places, but in posing the above questions, just want to better understand
your point
of view.
Respectfully,
Bob Williams
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1330.10 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 21:35:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am opposed to most of the prenatal vaccinations, because I feel the risks
have not been well deterimined. The Varivax program presents a risk benefit
profile which although favorable, is not overwhelming enough to endorse
without reservation. The winter flu vaccines rely on trying to guess the
likely pathogen, and i'm not too keen about that soft an approach. Of course
the CDC in Atlanta recognizes the greyness of these vaccines, and limits the
indications to high risk situations. These are not community-wide programs
to which i was referring in my previous posts on the subject. Incidentally,
good information about vaccinations is available from the CDC.
http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/
Alan S. Fine MD
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
)Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
))I am personally opposed to many vaccination programs.
)
)Specifically which, and why?
)
)Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
)Stephen
)
)--
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
)+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
)+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1330 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1331 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Kathy's aversion to names like Redon
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: "Mikey" (Was Re: Touche, Bob!)
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Vaccine Question
005 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: shorter sigs, please
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
010 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanis
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Kathy's aversion to names like Redon
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:51:15 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905261629.JAA06606 lists1.best.com)
"Pandora" says:
)OH! That's why Mister New Zealand was so insulting about my "net-name"! I
)did not realize that anthropops used "unusual" names (but then, so do a lot
)of people, I suppose)!
Michael KOPP says:
Excuse me? Insulting about your "net-name"?
Ummm, I've checked all my posts since you reappeared on the list, and I
don't see any reference to your "net-name" other than to cite it when
commenting on your posts. Are you perhaps objecting to the use of the
quotation marks around it? That's a journalistic and authorial convention
that is used whenever quoting a source that is pseudonymous or anonymous.
It does not connote my use of the fashionable neologistical pejorative
implication.
Or are you saying that my criticism of your ideas automatically translates
to an "insult" to either your "net-name" or your self?
Would you care to refresh my memory as to the supposed insult? I may have
missed something.
But I didn't miss the following, written about me by you:
)You sound like a stressed-out, hormonal teenager in an unsupervised
)chatroom!
PANDORA:
)I prefer to go by the name of my cat - Pandora - than to use my real name
)because of privacy issues. A really skilled hacker could maybe figure out
)who I am by hacking into my ISP, but that is pretty unlikely. I feel it's
)important safety issue to stay anonymous, because I use this computer at
)work (don't have one at home), and I don't want any psychos tracking me
)down at my preschool!
KOPP:
Look, "Pandora", it doesn't take a "really skilled hacker" to figure out
who you are. Your shingle is hanging out all over the place for anyone who
wants to look.
Unless, of course, there just happen to be two "Pandora"s.
I know more about you from public sources already than you seem to want
people to know. So, if you want true anonymity, and have a good reason for
it, try convincing the list moderator, Dan Dugan, to post anonymously for
you; or, use one of the Internet's anonymizing services. Or get yourself
another persona and Internet account. (You might have a hard time
disguising your credulous, naive, gushing commentary style, though.)
But you're already known to anyone who cares to look -- and I'll bet I'm
not the only one on this list who has looked, including Defenders of the
Faith.
It isn't necessary to "hack" into your ISP. Here's what I know about you
from public sources: You once had a "home page" (which turns out to be a
music group fan page you have shifted to someone else's server). I know
where you live (street address) and what your phone number is. I know the
name and location of the pre-school which you are the "director" of;
though, curiously, your name in association with it is misspelt. I know how
you describe your pre-school. I know the name and location of the Waldorf
school you say is nearby, and to which you will send your own child. I know
that while you say you "live on an island", this island is in the middle of
about five million people, and you live in a small city on that island.
Your house, your pre-school and the Waldorf school are all within about two
or three miles of each other.
Now, all this "detective work" is nothing unusual for the Net; it's simply
following public trails in order to find out more about someone or
something.
You see, I know a lot about this anonymity and ISP probing business,
because I was the original anonymous person on this list, and the campaign
to out me and vilify me, and to connect my real name, when I began posting
publicly, with my formerly anonymous postings, included actual approaches
to my ISP for private information about me.
The vilification of me and others by such Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical mafiosi as the fascist "Waldorf List" owner David "Lefty"
Schlesinger (who was on this list until he was finally booted for going too
far) was really something to behold.
So the first stones about anonymity were cast by Defenders of the Faith.
My reason for anonymity was that I still had children in a Steiner school
about which I was making private complaints, while I was relating publicly
our experiences at the school. I took pains never to identify the school
publicly, and I never have since. This is because New Zealand's draconian
defamation laws are frequently used to silence critics in many areas of
life here. Of course anyone who cares can find out easily.
That's not the point. The point was that this school had a reputation for
reprisals against parents and children who got out of line. I had been
warned by other parents whose children had suffered these reprisals. I had
read on this list of other such reprisals against children at other SWA
schools. My children knew of teachers treating poorly children who were
"bolshie", or whose parents were not favoured.
I can't say for certain if my own children ever were affected in this way;
my children probably wouldn't tell me. I do know that some teachers seem to
have done things in regard to my children which I did not like, and which
went further than the Anthroposophical looneyness to which I objected on
general principle. And I have heard from other parents that the backchat is
that my kids did get singled out, at least occasionally, unfairly.
If you, Pandora, really want to protect your privacy, and you're worried
about people finding out where you live, then you need to get a lot more
clued-up about the Internet
Now, as to REDON.
[By the way, the title of your post, "Re:Kathy's aversion to names like
Redon", is also difficult to understand, especially as you don't mention
Kathy at all in this post, and there does't seem to be any other post of
that title to which you might be referring. The "Re:" in a post title is
usually added automatically by an email client when responding to an
earlier post. Just as I checked my posts to see if I had "insulted" your
handle, I checked Kathy's to see if she had ever insulted "Redon". The only
thing I could find was this: "...the ever elusive *redon*". If that's an
"aversion" or insult, then blow me down.]
Redon was a minor French painter, perhaps of some interest to the person
who calls themselves by that name on this list. (I don't know if Redon the
painter, or any of his paintings, have any Steiner/ Waldorf/
Athroposophical significance.) There is a Redon (the painter) home page on
Geocities, the ISP/Web host with which "REDON" has their account, but there
is no direct identification with "our" REDON or any other person. It's an
anonymous Web site. There are some people on Geocities who list their real
names as Redon, and there are plenty of Redons in the U.S. telephone
directories, but none are obviously our "Redon".
Over the three years I have been on this list -- and I have rechecked the
archives to be sure -- there have been more anonymous Defenders of the
Faith than critics.
The outcry against anonymity came first from DoFs. And the most sustained
and nasty objection to it has always come from the DoFs. Critics, OTOH,
tend to use sarcasm and satire to poke fun at people like "Pandora" and
"Redon" and "MomOf2Gals" and "the mysterious `-El' ". We even had a DoF
once whose e-mail name was just "{~_~} (allure netcom.com)". (There was not
much alluring about "allure"'s posts. And, while this person claimed Net
ignorance, it is obvious from their choice of "{_}" and the nondescript and
ordinary word allure that they knew they would throw search engines and
other Net tools off their track, because those are confusing to boolean
searching.)
So, "Pandora", would you like to come out of the closet, as have a few
people like Lisa DeNike (MomOf2Gals)? I haven't noticed that coming out has
made any difference to anyone -- and knowing who you really are and where
your pre-school is might lend a little something to your credibility.
Let me say that I still support anonymous posting, where warranted. And I
am not the judge of what is warranted, which is why I didn't divulge what I
know of you, and why I won't press you any further to eschew anonymity. I
don't want the moderator accusing me of "harassing" those who want to be
obscure.
And, finally, why should any of this matter, and why am I wasting time
answering your silly post, "Pandora"? Just to keep the record straight.
It matters because the Defenders of the Faith use anonymity and ridicule of
ianane, usually false points like the ones you make above to shield
themselves from direct exposure as real people who could not long stand it,
given the nature of their comments, which are mostly ad hominems. Few
anonymous DoFs make reasoned, factually-backed arguments.
It matters because it's a propaganda technique to play the man rather than
the ball, and to do it unfairly, as in your ("Pandora") attacks on me and
Kathy for supposedly having some weird hangup about e-mail handles. It
matters because such propaganda labels stick, and come to obscure the
critics' real criticism.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
)
)Hmmm.... the anthropops usually accuse the critics of being paranoid....I
)guess this is proof that I am one.
)
)Hehe. I must have sounded like a real nut - maybe a DOF who was an ancient
)Greek in a previous life?!
)
)HAHAHAHA! *chuckle* *snarf*
)
)Actually, I'm just a humble cat lover. :-)
)
)----------
)From: ksutphen (ksutphen jps.net)
)To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Subject: Re: Parents certifiying teachers?
)Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 8:59 PM
)
)Michael Ronall posts:
))
))MRx HERE:
))HI, KATHY. THE LIST IN WHICH MY DESCRIPTION WAS POSTED WAS DAN DUGAN'S
)WALDORF CRITICS LIST; THIS ONE. IF BY "LIST" YOU MEAN SOMETHING ELSE HERE,
)IT'S BEYOND MY KEN; MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.
)
)Yes, I know that. When I wrote that I perhaps not receive *the list* or
)perhaps had inadvertantly deleted *the list* I meant the list we are now
)communicating with each other through - the Waldorf Critics List.
)
)Kathy wrote:
))What I do believe I recall is that shortly after this you posted an
)enraged
))insult
)
)Michael responded:
))BUT THAT WASN'T ME; THAT WAS CHARLIE FREY...
)
)Kathy:
))regarding my opposition to the practice of Waldorf teachers
))meditating on students.
)
)Michael:
))WAIT! THAT WASN'T ME! IT WAS CH--
)
)Kathy
)) The flavor of this reply and another that you
))posted toward me
)
)Michael:
))NO! STOP! IT WAS CHARLIE! IT WAS CHARLIE!
))
)) has definitely not encouraged my willingness to dialogue
))with you.
)
)Okay Michael - so very sorry. I realized some time later that night . . .
)much later, that it wasn't you that had been so very, very rude. (And it
)wasn't Charlie I was referring to either.) It was the ever elusive *redon*.
)Somehow I mixed up *redon* with *MRx*. I think both monikers are
)unconsciously sinister in tone to me. Nooooo, I'm not trying to say you are
)sinister. I've just had my belly full of Anthroposophical sorts that go by
)some rather strange pseudonyms. But then . . . I suppose the same could be
)said of me when I used my old ISP and it appeared that I wanted to be
)referred to as *spike* since this was part of my email address.
)
)Anyway, I did find your reposted post on meditation a good description of
)the practice. Thank you for posting it the 1st time and thank you for
)posting it again. I do want to say, however, that the practice you describe
)is what any astute individual will do as they interact with any number of
)folks in their life, including their students. I was in a tedious meeting
)today with fussy bureaucrats from the State Dept. of Ed. At one point I
)began studying the faces, body language, movements, etc., of others at the
)meeting in order to guage their internal reactions to the matter before us
)(and, yes, to pass the time in a more interesting fashion). I do this quite
)often, but I wouldn't categorize this practice on my part as a meditation.
)
)I do believe that this is a good practice for teachers (and other
)professionals that work closely with people), because it is important that
)we stay in touch with our students' emotional states in addition to their
)academic progress. They do, inevitably, go hand-in-hand, although not
)always
)in the relationship we would normally assume.
)
)I'll make a special effort not to confuse you with *redon*.
)
)Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: "Mikey" (Was Re: Touche, Bob!)
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:07:03 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905270200.TAA22810 lists1.best.com)
"Pandora" writes:
)As Mikey would say,
)Cheers from the island of the cat lover!
Michael KOPP says:
I'll assume that the "Mikey" that "Pandora" is referring to is her husband,
to whom she referred earier in her post as being "home sick".
However, there's no person by the initial "M" with "Pandora"'s last name
in the phone book for the address listed for her, under HER name, so it's
either a middle name, nickname, or ... Pandora has a thoroughly modern
relationship (there IS an "M" with "Pandora"'s last name in the same
locality, but at a different address).
I'll assume she's not referring to Michael Kopp in some sort of riposte
(one would call it revenge if she were actually that mean, but "Pandora" is
too sweet for that) for the presumed slight by me to her "net-name", about
which she complained in another post.
If "Pandora" IS referring to me (the allusion to the "cheers from" makes it
a slight possibility) ... NO-ONE, EVER, has called me "Mikey". (Mickey, as
in Mouse, sure, though I'd make a pretty big mouse.)
Lastly, if "Pandora" WAS referring to her husband ... he has my deepest
sympathies. Especially if she really IS a cat, as implied by her words.
(Cat who is a lover, rather than lover of cats. Cat-lover is hyphenated.)
Maybe we should start calling our anonymous friend "Pandy", or "Panda"?
"Pandora is so ... unwieldy ... and has such negative connotations.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 06:47:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199905270343.UAA06335 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905270343.UAA06335 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD (asf peakpeak.com) wrote:
)I am opposed to most of the prenatal vaccinations, because
[...]
Thanks for reasons -- always useful to have a physician's perspective on
matters medical (g)
)Incidentally,
)good information about vaccinations is available from the CDC.
)http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/
Thanks -- I'll check it out.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Vaccine Question
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 19:46:47 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905261741.KAA19845 lists1.best.com)
)The recent discussion on this list about vaccines has caused me to check
)out all of the links people have included in their posts... I read
)(somewhere, I dunno which site) that the Hep B vaccine is cultured in fetal
)tissue. I know this is a little off-subject, but does anyone know where to
)get more information on this?
)
)Pandora the cat lover
Pandora, you really must spend more effort backing up your posts with
citations of what you've read and where. It's not fair for me and others to
have to do all your work for you.
I know you said you were very busy, but so are we all. Posting major issue
hearsay and "I read it somewhere" is not credible. Your postings are
getting ludicrous, especially in light of your trying to teach Dan Dugan
how to suck eggs on the issue of _his_ credibility.
That said, here is some information on the subject of fetal tissue cultured
vaccines, as well as more up-to-date methods.
Anti-vaccination campaigners still trot out the old news that some vaccine
cell lines were **originally** cultured in fetal tissue -- out of literally
hundreds of cell lines in use today. It is wildly exaggerated to claim that
vaccines are "made out of" fetal tissue. Only a few vaccines were ever
cultured in fetal cell lines.
Hepatitis B vaccines, even the early ones, were not. Not even the wildest
of the anti-vaccination nutters have ever claimed this.
The old Hep B vaccine was a serum vaccine, made from blood taken from human
chronic hepatitis B virus carriers, which of course was less desirable due
to possible infection. The recombinant DNA vaccine is a huge improvement.
Some other vaccines have been made using fetal cell cultures, but that
practice is almost dead now.
http://www.immunize.org/genr.d/quesfreq.htm
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/hbvandms.htm
Hope this helps, "Pandora", and I won't have to do too much of your
homework, as I have had to do for others, like Ezra Beeman, who spouted the
ridiculous nonsense about HIV from the discredited Deusman.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.5 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 09:42:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (26729524 toto.iv)
Alan S. Fine MD writes:
) The winter flu vaccines rely on trying to guess the
) likely pathogen, and i'm not too keen about that soft an approach. Of course
) the CDC in Atlanta recognizes the greyness of these vaccines, and limits the
) indications to high risk situations. These are not community-wide programs
) to which i was referring in my previous posts on the subject.
The CDC may try to limit them, but people with money are free to
ignore the recommendation. For instance, my employer (which also just
happens to house CDC on it's campus) gives the flu vaccine to all of
its employees and their families. Most of us are not high risk at
all, but Emory would rather that we did miss a day of work.
Of course, we are free not to take the vaccine.
--Michael
--
Michael D. Hirsch Work: (404) 727-7940
Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 FAX: (404) 727-5611
email: hirsch mathcs.emory.edu http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~hirsch/
Public key for encrypted mail available upon request (or finger
hirsch cssun.mathcs.emory.edu).
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: shorter sigs, please
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:59:52 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The other day when I accidentally posted my long business signature to the
list, it reminded me I've been wanting to ask, could people make an effort
to use shorter signatures on the list, if you must use signatures at all?
How about limiting it to two lines? Taz? Stephen?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:21:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905251535.IAA15547 lists1.best.com)
(199905251143.EAA13307 lists1.best.com)
(199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251605.JAA01709 lists1.best.com)
STEVE PREMO
))Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
))public school.
TARJEI STRAUME
)Especially not in the presence of U.S. Marshals and with the prospect of
)six months in jail for the teacher (sharing cell with cutthoats, rapists,
)and armed robbers) and punishement for the students so cruel and tortuous
)that they will wish they had died at birth.
Is that the way they do it in your country, Tarjei? It certainly isn't that
way here.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:39:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199905251838.LAA05493 lists1.best.com)
)The "Dear Sun, Dear Earth" blessing was used by our UU fellowship in our
)Thanksgiving celebration (an American patriotic holiday-cum-harvest
)festival, usually involving eating a turkey and being thankful that the
)British landed on the East Coast). The prayer was identified as an old
)native American prayer. I will try to verify this for sure, but I have
)every reason to believe that it is true and correct.
In Anthroposophical literature it's credited to Christian Morganstern.
Translations vary. Here's a nice one that's a little different:
Earth, who gave us all this food,
Sun, who made it ripe and good-
Sun and Earth, we pray that ye
Never shall forgotten be.
[Pusch, Ruth, Editor. Waldorf Schools: Volume I: Kindergarten and Early
Grades: Thirty-three articles from "Education as an Art", Bulletin of the
Waldorf Schools of North America 1940-1978. Spring Valley, NY: Mercury
Press, 1993, p. 171]
)I liked the ecological slant of the prayer, to put it rather
)un-emotionally, so we started using it at home before dinner. It seemed to
)me that it was an effective way of teaching our son to be mindful of where
)his food comes from;
I think nature-religion is an unrecognized wave of new spirituality
worldwide. I suspect it creeps into a lot of public school classes, outside
of the whole Waldorf question. It sure showed up in the Bedford case.
As I said in another post, how about thanking the grocer, the truck driver,
and the farmer? They're living, breathing and working to make your meal
possible. Instead of thanking romantic abstractions.
we are the only species that "shit where we eat," so
)to speak, so I thought using this blessing before eating might be better
)than say, celebrating "Earth Day," at teaching him our environmentalist
)values.
If one of your environmentalist values is that human=bad, we part company
there.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:19:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
(199905232327.QAA11381 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905251143.EAA13307 lists1.best.com)
Thanks for the cogent analysis, Michael, and mission statement.
)The purpose of the prayer in Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools is
)transparently obvious: to inculcate in children, by stealth, spiritualistic
)belief in a personal world of supernatural characters to which the child is
)led to speak directly.
)
)It is not a prayer to God thanking him for creating and providing these
)life-sustaining natural forces and objects.
)
)It is a prayer to these forces and objects themselves as living entities.
)
)It is a prayer to the PERSONAL sun god, the PERSONAL mother earth; an
)OBEISANCE to ANIMATE SPIRITUAL INSTRUMENTALITIES.
)
(snip)
)It is this prayer's intentional implanting of spiritualism in pre-rational
)young minds to which Waldorf critics object.
)
)But the objection is not to the mere practice of this religious observance.
)Waldorf critics have no right or interest in controlling private religious
)practices.
)
)Their only interests are these: insuring that these practices (which are
)loosely consistent with the inclusion of Anthroposophy in every aspect of a
)Waldorf school curriculum, private or public) are not allowed in public or
)publicly-funded schools (in the U.S., where they are forbidden by the
)Constitution); and insuring that consumer rights to a full understanding of
)the true nature of Waldorf education are met by full disclosure and truth
)in advertising.
I think exercises in gratitude -are- good for people young and old. My idea
of an appropriate "grace" would be for the children to thank their teacher
for the snack, grocery store people, the truck drivers, the farmworkers,
and the farmer, the sustaining human food chain. Why should they thank
inanimate nature while there are invisible people working away for them,
unthanked?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1331.10 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem? (Was Re: Bedford Satanism
Decision Rendered)
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 20:09:50 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199905251605.JAA01709 lists1.best.com)
(199905251535.IAA15547 lists1.best.com)
(199905251143.EAA13307 lists1.best.com)
(199905250517.WAA20412 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199905271727.KAA16591 lists1.best.com)
)STEVE PREMO
)))Indeed. Such blessings, being religious in nature, have no place in
)))public school.
)
)TARJEI STRAUME
))Especially not in the presence of U.S. Marshals and with the prospect of
))six months in jail for the teacher (sharing cell with cutthoats, rapists,
))and armed robbers) and punishement for the students so cruel and tortuous
))that they will wish they had died at birth.
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
)Is that the way they do it in your country, Tarjei? It certainly isn't that
)way here.
But that's what we were told in an earlier post. I asked if it was a joke,
and I was assured that it wasn't.
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism, Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality, death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1331 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1332 --------------
001 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Anthroposophical Nurses Association
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Mellett on Steiner's reincarnations
005 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Duane: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
006 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Well I guess I really am just an idiot.
007 - "pandora" (pandora aa.net - Re: Vaccine Question
008 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: Duane: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
009 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Now Kopp is a "stalker"!
010 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Natural Jewish Parenting
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1332.1 ---------------
From: "Duane Koons" (dkoons gundluth.org)
Subject: Re: Prayer to sun god or nature poem?
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:06:29 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Dan your are confusing nature-religion for biophillia. Human beings
evolved in a natural environment and needed to both love and fear this
natural world in order to survive. Read a little poetry now and then.
Lighten up. Having a love of nature and using poetry to transmit this to
children is not evil. Is your critique of waldorf education so profound
that you feel compelled to deny any genuinely healthy aspect of this
movement. If we don't cultivate a love for the world of nature upon which
our survival depends then god help us...
.................
On another topic..the reason I was drawn to this list was because the
correspondence of Bob Jones about life in Viroqua Wisconsin. With the
availability of the Feb and March archives I have been able to review his
other reports. I suspect that past contributions are generally not to
occupy the current discussion. Nonethelsss, I want to reassure people
that mainstream medicine is alive and well here and that the waldorf school
is not responsible for all the problems facing farmers.
Also the notion that the waldorf parents are responsible for the
incidence of lymes disease and misquito born encephalitis is pathetic.
Most of the cases of the LaCrosse encephalitis are associated with old
tires that the oldtimers left as trash on their land which they then sold
to unsuspecting out of towners at a reasonable profit. Compared to natural
occuring tree holes in our oak/hickory forests, the tires are more
efficient incubators producing faster reproduction times resulting in more
aggressive foraging (blood sucking) beharior leading to more human illness.
I watched my comatose five year old daughter go through CT scans lumbar
punctures and several days in the ICU with this disease. The local
entomologist vector control officer found the tires later that week full of
the disease spreading misquitoes left as a gift from the previous steward
of the land who happened to be a farmer.
Perhaps I am a little ticked off but where did Mr. Jones go now that there
is somone willing to disput his paranoid sounding interpretation of reality
here in Viroqua? Should this inspire my confidence in the "reporting" done
about other waldorf schools?
Duane
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1332.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Anthroposophical Nurses Association
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 10:51:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
There is a new web site for the Anthroposophical Nurses Association of America:
http://www.slip.net/~anaa/
In the last decade nursing has been swept by quack fads, like Ott light
theory and Therapeutic Touch. The profession is particularly susceptible.
Being focussed on caregiving rather than medical science, and chafing at
subordination to doctors, nurses tend to express an opposite pole to
medicine.
-Dan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1332.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophical Medicine
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 10:40:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (26729524 toto.iv)
In-Reply-To: (199905271343.GAA19570 lists1.best.com)
)Alan S. Fine MD writes:
)
)) The winter flu vaccines rely on trying to guess the
)) likely pathogen, and i'm not too keen about that soft an approach. Of course
)) the CDC in Atlanta recognizes the greyness of these vaccines, and limits the
)) indications to high risk situations. These are not community-wide programs
)) to which i was referring in my previous posts on the subject.
My anecdote: After being down for a week the winter of 97-98, I promised
myself I'd get a flu shot the next year. I did, and I didn't get sick this
year. I shake hundreds of hands at trade shows, and ride public
transportation, so I feel I get a lot of exposure to whatever is going
around.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1332.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Mellett on Steiner's reincarnations
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 10:30:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I just have to share this exchange from the mailing list "anthropos-views."
Tom Mellett's ever the jester of Anthroposophy, but his tale is actually
backed up by Anthropop literature. BTW "fructify" is a favorite phrase of
Steiner's, as commonly translated. Complete post reproduced by permission
of the author.
-Dan Dugan
***
Catherine Alexander wrote:
-------------------------
(( I am a student of life. And not just on the observatory level. ;-)
BTW, the Wookie in the old Star Wars epic reminded me of Enkidu. The
hairy companion to Gilgamesh. From the Epic of Gilgamesh.
To my friends he reminds them of Big Foot.:-)
CA ))
______________________
TOM MELLETT
Dear Catherine,
I don't know if you realize it, but Enkidu is alleged by many
anthroposophists to be the very first incarnation of Rudolf Steiner. And
furthermore, Gilgamesh is said to be Steiner's real soul-mate, the medical
doctor, Ita Wegman. And for reasons that I will give shortly after quoting
from the epic itself, I will explain why it is crucially important for
anthroposophists today in 1999, to study the Gilgamesh story.
I would like to quote this passage from the Penguin Books edition of
_The Epic of Gilgamesh_, translated by N. K. Sandars. It is from very near
the beginning of Chapter One which is entitled: "The Coming of Enkidu."
A little background to set up this passage: In the city of Uruk,
Gilgamesh rules with no equal. But he is arrogant and his subjects cry out to
the gods for help, so the gods create this hairy wild man Enkidu out of clay
to be an equal to Gilgamesh and also, a literal soul-mate. Enkidu lives with
the animals and eats grass with them. He is kind of like Tarzan, with no
human contact yet. But one day, a trapper sees him and is afraid. I quote the
epic at this point:
_________________
"So the trapper set out on his journey to Uruk and addressed
himself to Gilgamesh saying, 'A man unlike any other is roaming now in the
pastures; he is as strong as a star from heaven and I am afraid to approach
him. He helps the wild game to escape; he fills in my pits and pulls up my
traps. Gilgamesh said: 'Trapper, go back, take with you a harlot, a child of
pleasure. At the drinking-hole, she will strip, and when he sees her
beckoning, he will embrace her and the game of the wilderness will surely
reject him.'
Now the trapper returned, taking the harlot with him. After
three days' journey, they came to the drinking-hole, and there they sat down;
the harlot and the trapper sat facing one another and waited for the game to
come. For the first day and for the second day the two sat waiting, but on
the third day the herds came; they came down to drink and Enkidu was with
them. The small wild creatures of the plains were glad of the water, and
Enkidu with them, who ate grass with the gazelle and was born in the hills;
and she saw him, the savage man, come from far-off in the hills. The trapper
spoke to her: 'There he is. Now, woman, make your breasts bare, have no
shame, do not delay, but welcome his love. Let him see you naked; let him
possess your body. When he comes near, uncover yourself and lie with him;
teach him, the savage man, your woman's art, for when he murmurs love to you,
the wild beasts that shared his life in the hills will reject him.'
She was not ashamed to take him, she made herself naked and
welcomed his eagerness; as he lay on her murmuring love she taught him the
woman's art. FOR SIX DAYS AND SEVEN NIGHTS THEY LAY TOGETHER, for Enkidu had
forgotten his home in the hills; but when he was satisfied he went back to
the wild beasts. Then, when the gazelles saw him, they bolted away; when the
wild creatures saw him they fled. Enkidu would have followed, but his body
was bound as though with a cord, his knees gave way when he started to run,
his swiftness was gone. And now the wild creatures had all fled away; Enkidu
was grown weak, for wisdom was in him, and the thoughts of a man were in his
heart. So he returned and sat down at the woman's feet, and listened intently
to what she said. 'You are wise, Enkidu, and now you have become like a god.
Why do you want to run wild with the beasts in the hills? Come with me. I
will take you to strong-walled Uruk, to the blessed temple of Ishtar and of
Anu, of love and of heaven: there Gilgamesh lives, who is very strong, and
like a wild bull he lords it over men.'
________________________
Jesus Penus, Catherine! I mean, whenever my "eagerness is welcomed,"
I consider myself lucky if it doesn't fall off after seven MINUTES of
vigorous fructificatory activity! But here is the future Rudolf Steiner, as
the wild man Enkidu, getting his chimes rung for six DAYS and seven NIGHTS!!!
A full matrifructifying WEEK!!! Is this in the Guinness Book of World
Records or what?
For anthroposophists anyway, this has to be the most stupendous
"Fuck-a-thon" in all of human history! I mean, in the opening of Genesis, we
have the Seven Days of Creation; but in the Gilgamesh epic, we have the Seven
Nights of Fructification. Wow!
What a way for Rudy boy to get literally sucked down into earthly
incarnation! For it was this event that brought Enkidu out of the spiritual
Cosmos and down to earth, so he could begin the handful of incarnations that
would lead to the man we know and love as Rudolf Steiner.
The question is: what is the karmic lesson for us and why is it so
important for us today? Well, the key is in the number 7. You see, Enkidu
was a child of the Cosmos; he did not really go through the "fall of man."
His number WAS 12, which is the number of Space, the vast Universe, the
Cosmos, the number of the World of Being. But Enkidu's destiny was to start
the stream that would bring the essence of Time into human evolution, and the
number of Time is 7, the number of the World of Becoming, the world of
evolution which unfolds itself according to the pattern of the number 7 (as
so clearly pointed out by Arthur M. Young in his "Reflexive Universe" book,
for example).
Now, to me, each day/night of the Enkidu Fuck-a-thon represents one
incarnation of the being we know as Rudolf Steiner. According to
anthroposophical lore, the incarnation of Rudolf Steiner is the 6th of the 7
incarnations that this human being experiences. And Rudolf Steiner predicted
that he would be back again for his 7th incarnation at the beginning of the
21st Century. (Arguments rage over whether he meant born as a baby in 2000 or
else come of age in 2000, say as a 30 year old man (or woman), but that is a
side issue).
Now, let me enumerate the 7 incarnations (6 known) of the being we
know as Rudolf Steiner and then later I will place them in a certain pattern
which will then tell us of the importance of revisiting the lesson of the
Epic of Gilgamesh.
Here they are listed in chronological order:
-----------------------------
1. Eabani (Enkidu) (3000 BC-beginning of Kali Yuga)
---the "wild man" of the Gilgamesh saga
-----------------------------
2. Cratylus (Kratylos) (6th or 7th C. BC)
--- priest of Temple of Ephesus; subject of dialogue of Plato where eurythmy
is described. (I translated this whole dialogue in 1980 as part of my
Ancient Greek studies at UT-Austin.)
-----------------------------
3. Aristotle (4th C. BC)
-----------------------------
4. Schionatulander (9th-10th century)
--- Steiner's 1st post-Christian incarnation which puts him in the
Grail stream. I believe he was killed because he was
mistaken for Parsifal.(He dies in Sigune's arms. She is said to be Ita
Wegman. Some a-pops reverse the two of them.)
-----------------------------
5. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1270)
-----------------------------
6. Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925)
-----------------------------
7. Incarnation at end of 20th century, possibly as a woman, very likely in
the United States.
-----------------------------
Now let's put the 7 in the proper pattern of becoming. This was first
suggested to me by Yale Bulldog Robert S. Horner, my longtime friend and
anthroposophist, now living in Birmingham, Alabama. It is the archetypal
pattern of 7 stages of development on 4 levels of reality. We find this
pattern of becoming in Blavatsky's theosophy, in Steiner and it is best
articulated for modern consciousness by Arthur M. Young in his "Theory of
Process." Here is the archetypal pattern:
LEVELS STAGES
I. 1-------------------------7
II. 2-------------------6
III. 3---------5
IV. 4
There is a descent from the initial stage & level down to level 4,
whereupon there is a turn and the 3 levels are regained. The important point
is to see that Stage 5 recapitulates 3; 6 recaps 2; and 7 recaps 1, while 4
stands alone to experience the Turning Point of Time.
Now let us put the 7 incarnations of Steiner into this pattern.
1. Enkidu-------------------------- 7th incarnation (NOW!!!)
2. Kratylos----------------6. Rudolf Steiner
3. Aristotle--------5. St. Thomas Aquinas
4. Schionatulander/Sigune?
It is fairly easy to see how Aquinas at (5) recaps Aristotle at (3).
And Rudolf Steiner at (6) recaps Kratylos at (2). Remember that Kratylos is a
priest of the Temple of Ephesus, where eurythmy was born, This stream
represents the mysteries of speech and reproduction through the forces of
speech. Then look at the present but unknown incarnation of Rudolf Steiner
at (7) which recapitulates Enkidu at (1).
Here i