return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
By audreyallison hotmail.com
Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
By antigonabaires hotmail.com
Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: antroposophy vs. holism
By hagenaar wxs.nl
RE: antroposophy vs. holism
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
Re: antroposophy vs. holism
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 08:30:38 -0800
From: "Audrey Allison" (audreyallison hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
The latest newsletter from my step-daughter's school brags about being the
only anthroposophically designed school in North America ... go figure ...
:)
Audrey Allison
5307 Timble Lane
Kelowna BC, V1W 4T9
(250) 764-2913
audreyallison hotmail.com
)From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics (waldorf-critics topica.com)
)Subject: From a RS College brochure
)Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:37:18 -0500
)
)
)
)Just going through some old papers and came across a few things I thought
)would be interesting to this group and might generate some discussion.
)
)In front of me is a brochure from Rudolf Steiner College, dated spring 2002
)(a year ago.) The pamphlet outlines various courses and workshops are
)available there, to teachers, teacher trainees and the general public.
)
)What strikes me as I read these offerings is how Anthroposophic they are!
)Reading this brochure, the tie between Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy
)are
)clear and unequivocal.
)
)Examples:
)
)* Foundations of Astrosophy - A New Star Wisdom
)The class description says, in part: "Astrosophy is based in Anthroposophy,
)Esoteric Christianity, and the renewal and further development of Star
)Wisdom contained in Astronomy and Astrology.
)
)* Anthroposophical Classes
)These classes include:
)* Natal Charts: an introduction to Astronomy and Astrology in light of
)Anthroposophy. With the Goethean Studies Program.
)* Star Wisdom Intensive: An overview of Planetary and Human Evolution in
)the
)light of Anthroposophy.
)* Drawing the Seven Planetary Seals and the Human and Planetary Evolution
)* Karma and Reincarnation: an in-depth study of Rudolf Steiner's
)Manifestations of Karma
)* Christology: An in-depth study of the stages of incarnation of Christ in
)the light of Anthroposophy.
)
)Other offerings include:
)
)Spring Conference: Discovering the Spiritual Destiny of America/the Land of
)the Holy Spirit
)
)* International Arts in Architecture Symposium II: The Seven Arts As a
)Sacramental Path Toward Easter (pictured here is a seven-pointed star
)inside
)a circle, with each point of the star hitting a certain word, including
)eurythmy, drama, painting, music, architecture, etc. along w/various occult
)symbols.
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 00:16:09 -0300
From: (antigonabaires hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
One of the Waldorf schools in Argentina was built according to the
principles of "organic architecture" (i.e. according to anthroposophy).
Among the many unusual features is the complete (and I do mean "complete")
absence of right angles. The construction is certainly quite weird but still
very interesting. I ignore what evil influence can right angles have on
children.
Agustina C. Eiff
Buenos Aires, Argentina
----- Original Message -----
From: "Audrey Allison" (audreyallison hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
) The latest newsletter from my step-daughter's school brags about being the
) only anthroposophically designed school in North America ... go figure ...
) :)
)
)
) Audrey Allison
) 5307 Timble Lane
) Kelowna BC, V1W 4T9
) (250) 764-2913
) audreyallison hotmail.com
)
)
)
)
)
) )From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
) )Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) )To: waldorf-critics (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) )Subject: From a RS College brochure
) )Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:37:18 -0500
) )
) )
) )
) )Just going through some old papers and came across a few things I thought
) )would be interesting to this group and might generate some discussion.
) )
) )In front of me is a brochure from Rudolf Steiner College, dated spring
2002
) )(a year ago.) The pamphlet outlines various courses and workshops are
) )available there, to teachers, teacher trainees and the general public.
) )
) )What strikes me as I read these offerings is how Anthroposophic they are!
) )Reading this brochure, the tie between Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy
) )are
) )clear and unequivocal.
) )
) )Examples:
) )
) )* Foundations of Astrosophy - A New Star Wisdom
) )The class description says, in part: "Astrosophy is based in
Anthroposophy,
) )Esoteric Christianity, and the renewal and further development of Star
) )Wisdom contained in Astronomy and Astrology.
) )
) )* Anthroposophical Classes
) )These classes include:
) )* Natal Charts: an introduction to Astronomy and Astrology in light of
) )Anthroposophy. With the Goethean Studies Program.
) )* Star Wisdom Intensive: An overview of Planetary and Human Evolution in
) )the
) )light of Anthroposophy.
) )* Drawing the Seven Planetary Seals and the Human and Planetary Evolution
) )* Karma and Reincarnation: an in-depth study of Rudolf Steiner's
) )Manifestations of Karma
) )* Christology: An in-depth study of the stages of incarnation of Christ
in
) )the light of Anthroposophy.
) )
) )Other offerings include:
) )
) )Spring Conference: Discovering the Spiritual Destiny of America/the Land
of
) )the Holy Spirit
) )
) )* International Arts in Architecture Symposium II: The Seven Arts As a
) )Sacramental Path Toward Easter (pictured here is a seven-pointed star
) )inside
) )a circle, with each point of the star hitting a certain word, including
) )eurythmy, drama, painting, music, architecture, etc. along w/various
occult
) )symbols.
) )
) )==^================================================================
) )You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic.
) )New threads are always welcome.
) )
) )
)
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
) http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:14:22 -0500
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
That's interesting. I just spent an hour reading through the Parent Handbook
from our former Waldorf School (for the 1999-2000) school year, and I could
find only ONE reference to Anthroposophy. The pages and pages of
introduction about what a Waldorf school is did not make a single mention of
Anthroposophy; the only time the word was used, that I could find, was under
a section about Therapeutic Eurythmy (an oxymoron if there ever was one!) In
that section, a sentence says something about an evaluation by an
anthroposophic physician.
That's it, and I am afraid the story is the same for many Waldorf schools.
Things would be much better all around if Waldorf schools would simply own
what they are, which is Anthroposophical schools. You can be sure the
teachers consider the schools Anthroposophic amongst themselves; one cannot
help but wonder why they feel the need to conceal this fact from parents.
Lisa
) The latest newsletter from my step-daughter's school brags about being the
) only anthroposophically designed school in North America ... go figure ...
) :)
)
)
) Audrey Allison
) 5307 Timble Lane
) Kelowna BC, V1W 4T9
) (250) 764-2913
) audreyallison hotmail.com
)
)
)
)
)
))From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
))Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
))To: waldorf-critics (waldorf-critics topica.com)
))Subject: From a RS College brochure
))Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:37:18 -0500
))
))
))
))Just going through some old papers and came across a few things I thought
))would be interesting to this group and might generate some discussion.
))
))In front of me is a brochure from Rudolf Steiner College, dated spring 2002
))(a year ago.) The pamphlet outlines various courses and workshops are
))available there, to teachers, teacher trainees and the general public.
))
))What strikes me as I read these offerings is how Anthroposophic they are!
))Reading this brochure, the tie between Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy
))are
))clear and unequivocal.
))
))Examples:
))
))* Foundations of Astrosophy - A New Star Wisdom
))The class description says, in part: "Astrosophy is based in Anthroposophy,
))Esoteric Christianity, and the renewal and further development of Star
))Wisdom contained in Astronomy and Astrology.
))
))* Anthroposophical Classes
))These classes include:
))* Natal Charts: an introduction to Astronomy and Astrology in light of
))Anthroposophy. With the Goethean Studies Program.
))* Star Wisdom Intensive: An overview of Planetary and Human Evolution in
))the
))light of Anthroposophy.
))* Drawing the Seven Planetary Seals and the Human and Planetary Evolution
))* Karma and Reincarnation: an in-depth study of Rudolf Steiner's
))Manifestations of Karma
))* Christology: An in-depth study of the stages of incarnation of Christ in
))the light of Anthroposophy.
))
))Other offerings include:
))
))Spring Conference: Discovering the Spiritual Destiny of America/the Land of
))the Holy Spirit
))
))* International Arts in Architecture Symposium II: The Seven Arts As a
))Sacramental Path Toward Easter (pictured here is a seven-pointed star
))inside
))a circle, with each point of the star hitting a certain word, including
))eurythmy, drama, painting, music, architecture, etc. along w/various occult
))symbols.
))
))==^================================================================
))You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
))New threads are always welcome.
))
))
)
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
) http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
) New threads are always welcome.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 08:01:49 +0200
From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
Hi Sharon,
Thanks for your answers. I know Ant. is similar to holism, that is
why we choose the school in the first place. Now, to be able to take
my son out, I need to prove the differences. So yes, I do believe in
some things like reincarnation. I just hoped there is somebody
somewhere who can give my some more differences!
Bye,
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 00:25:00 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: antroposophy vs. holism
Edith wrote:
)I know Ant. is similar to holism, that is why we choose the school in
the )first place. Now, to be able to take my son out, I need to prove
the )differences. So yes, I do believe in some things like
reincarnation. I just )hoped there is somebody somewhere who can give my
some more differences!
Edith, I think we'd really have to know more about your own views to get
at where anthroposophy might differ. For instance there are various
versions of reincarnation and karma, I understand the Hindu version is
quite different from anthroposophy. Steiner's is an explicitly punitive
version of reincarnation/karma - at least that is how I would
characterize it. We are supposed to be making up for mistakes made in
past lives. Illnesses, accidents, injuries are all viewed as karmic
compensations in anthroposophy. There were posts here on this several
months ago; I could probably find them if this might be helpful. I think
this is why people were asking you to define what you meant by "holism."
Also, I'm curious about how detailed a presentation you will want or be
allowed to make to a court about how your views or values differ from
anthroposophy. If you gave us some details like this, about your own
views and what you initially thought anthroposophy was - why it appealed
to you enough to put your child in a school based on anthroposophy - I
think you might get answers more focused on what you need.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:52:42 -0800
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
Edith,
Wouldn't it just be easier to have your child tested by a qualified
educational psychologist? If your son's IQ scores show he has a mental age,
let's say, 7 years ahead of his actual age, then all you would have to do is
say to the courts,
"Oops, this method of education moves too slowly for a kid like mine - they
don't teach reading/writing/higher math to their students until much later
than other schools do. But when I enrolled him I didn't know he had an IQ of
160+, so how could I know that the school could not possibly provide for his
special learning needs?"
You just tell them you have new information which changes things. Easy. :-)
Sarina McDonald
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1008
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: steve walden
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: antroposophy vs. holism
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: antroposophy vs. holism
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Anthroposophically Designed School
By spectmore yahoo.com
important meeting
By hagenaar wxs.nl
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:21:05 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
) The latest newsletter from my step-daughter's school brags about being the
) only anthroposophically designed school in North America ... go figure ...
) :)
) Audrey Allison
Not only is Anthroposophy *in* the classroom... Anthroposophy *is* the
classroom. I guess they incarnate better that way....
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:24:37 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: steve walden
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--Boundary_(ID_ksr7le2cDS5hNyk5/c+6mA)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Annie,
Your English is fine - aucun problem! I must admit, though... I am
confused. What "project" is waldorf education? Can you explain?
Merci.
-Walden
Annie wrote:
probably my english isn t that good afterall... the project is
waldorf education...that s what I find weird because these schools
usually have a more particular project like sports or something like
that...I just don' t get why it isn t qualified as a normal
alternative school...
am I confusing everyone?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:31:13 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
Edith wrote:
So yes, I do believe in some things like reincarnation.
Walden: This is a good start if you take the Waldorf Path. This one
element, IMO, must be clearly stated at the first meeting with parents. "We
are helping to incarnate your child because we believe in reincarnation a la
Rudolf Steiner. Please read this material by Steiner and other
Waldorf/Anthroposophy teachers before you give us any money and more
importantly... your child."
I am curious, Edith - are you *interested* in reincarnation or do you really
*believe?* If you believe - how did this belief come to be? I hope I'm not
intruding... I am curious.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 19:35:39 -0500
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
on 4/2/03 5:31 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
) Edith wrote:
) So yes, I do believe in some things like reincarnation.
Sharon: Which model of reincarnation do you subscribe to Edith,
Theosophical, Rosicrucian, Hindu, Psychianan, Scientologist,...the list is
long? Do you think "the spiritually advanced" will reincarnate on earth in
core groups spread around the earth as Steiner taught, and that these groups
will instruct the rest of humanity in what they may "think, feel, will and
do? Do you believe in Atlantis? Do you believe that Manu led "the advanced"
out of Atlantis? Do you believe in future prophesied periods called Jupiter,
Venus and Vulcan? Do you believe there will be a war of all against all? Do
you believe there will be a Sixth Epoch? Or that humans have an etheric,
astral, I and physical body? Your version of reincarnation might very well
be quite different from the Anthroposophic perspective.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 01:07:32 +0000
From: (spectmore yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophically Designed School
But contemporary and 'modern' - if one agrees that is the period before
contemporary ; ) - architects have long struggled with attempting to
create organic structures absent of right angles. Some, such as Paolo
Soleri have some very real connections to the ideas of Steiner. Others
long before even have strong ties to the ancient rock hewn carved
structures of Turkey, et al with no real 'spiritual' ties other than
attempts to make things which reflect the natural orb on which we live.
(Please excuse if there are "flat earth' supporters)
Personally, I find Steiner architecture naive at best and really
unimportant. Public schools and common chapels have the same intent but
better execution.
Best, J
antigonabaires hotmail.com wrote:
) One of the Waldorf schools in Argentina was built according to the
) principles of "organic architecture" (i.e. according to anthroposophy).
) Among the many unusual features is the complete (and I do mean
) "complete")
) absence of right angles.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 07:56:24 +0200
From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
Subject: important meeting
Dear all,
today I have my meeting with the civil servant of our city who will
decide whether he will tolerate us taking our child out of school or
prosecute us. Thanks for the information and answers to questions I
received from you all (on giftednes & Waldord and holism &
antroposophy). As you can see, I had no time to read Steiner (apart
from the things I had read before) so I took some quotes out of the
website and your emails to use.
So, wish me luck! I will let you know this afternoon what happened.
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1009
-- Topica Digest --
Re: steve walden
By anitamorin hotmail.com
walden again
By anitamorin hotmail.com
Re: walden again
By audreyallison hotmail.com
Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: important meeting
By audreyallison hotmail.com
Admin: web counter 112,356
By dan dandugan.com
Re: walden again
By dan dandugan.com
Re: walden again
By anitamorin hotmail.com
Re: walden again
By dan dandugan.com
Admin: Upcominf owntime (sic)
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Sun Temple / was walden again
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:07:50 +0000
From: "Annie Mathieu" (anitamorin hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: steve walden
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)(BR)that is exactly the problem I can t resolve!!! the project is
teaching kids waldorf way...I think that s what I understood of it!
probably, it doesn t meet the criterias for being a alternative
school (always in public system )so they didn t know in what
category of school it was fitting into so they choose the
one " school with a project" !(BR)(BR)Annie (/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)>From: walden (AWALDENPOND SHAW.CA)
(DIV)(/DIV)>Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>Subject: Re: steve walden
(DIV)(/DIV)>Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:24:37 -0800
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Annie,
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Your English is fine - aucun problem! I must admit,
though... I am confused. What "project" is waldorf education? Can you
explain? Merci.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>-Walden
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Annie wrote:
(DIV)(/DIV)>probably my english isn t that good afterall... the
project is waldorf education...that s what I find weird because these
schools usually have a more particular project like sports or
something like that...I just don' t get why it isn t qualified as a
normal alternative school...
(DIV)(/DIV)>am I confusing everyone?
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>==^================================================================
(DIV)(/DIV)>You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here,
no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)MSN 8 with (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMZENCA/2740")e-mail virus protection
service: (/a) 2 months FREE*
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:34:55 +0000
From: "Annie Mathieu" (anitamorin hotmail.com)
Subject: walden again
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)don t know why I am adressing my mails to particular people, it
just feels more personnal. Ok, as I was telling you guys, I have done
some research here in Quebec (still very incomplete!) cause I am a
journalism student and was curious about waldorf school. A friend of
a friend is being trained at the moment and it all started from there
(and from the National Post article). There is one school in Chambly
that did the front page of the newspaper here a couple of years ago
and when I tried to talk to them, I was "blocked" by a parent
commitee....the lady said she didn t wanna talk to any
journalists...so I ve done many effort to get in touch with the
director (cause they are public school, they need a director) and she
said she was sorry for the answer I got, that It was bad publicity
and that they were approved by MEQ (Ministere Education du Quebec)
and UNESCO...etc...but I still had to write down the questions before
the interview so she could discuss them with a group of !
parents!!!!!!!!!wow!(BR)For the private school, it was different but
I couldn t go to the school apart from when they were doing a group
visit! AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO CULT-ressource
centre on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous here because he
would one of the only expert that could talk about cult like Ordre du
Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is writting a book
about waldorf school..it should be available soon.(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(BR)(BR)(BR)Annie
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)>From: walden (AWALDENPOND SHAW.CA)
(DIV)(/DIV)>Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
(DIV)(/DIV)>Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:31:13 -0800
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Edith wrote:
(DIV)(/DIV)>So yes, I do believe in some things like reincarnation.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Walden: This is a good start if you take the Waldorf
Path. This one
(DIV)(/DIV)>element, IMO, must be clearly stated at the first
meeting with parents. "We
(DIV)(/DIV)>are helping to incarnate your child because we believe
in reincarnation a la
(DIV)(/DIV)>Rudolf Steiner. Please read this material by Steiner and other
(DIV)(/DIV)>Waldorf/Anthroposophy teachers before you give us any
money and more
(DIV)(/DIV)>importantly... your child."
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>I am curious, Edith - are you *interested* in
reincarnation or do you really
(DIV)(/DIV)>*believe?* If you believe - how did this belief come
to be? I hope I'm not
(DIV)(/DIV)>intruding... I am curious.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>-Walden
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>==^================================================================
(DIV)(/DIV)>You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here,
no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)The new (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMZENCA/2737")MSN 8: (/a) smart spam
protection and 2 months FREE*
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 08:07:42 -0800
From: "Audrey Allison" (audreyallison hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: walden again
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_315e_21f0_3d21
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
keep in touch about the book. I tried to research him on the internet but
everything was in French ... and OUCH ... my french is poor ... even after
years of it in school!
Thanks ... Audrey
)From: Annie Mathieu (anitamorin hotmail.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: walden again
)Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:34:55 +0000
)
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------=_NextPart_000_315e_21f0_3d21
Content-Type: message/rfc822
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEHjJx36Oi8+Q1OJDRSDidP
Received: from out006.tpca.net ([66.180.244.26]) by
mc5-f9.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600);
Thu, 3 Apr 2003 05:35:21 -0800
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
From: Annie Mathieu (anitamorin hotmail.com)
Subject: walden again
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:34:55 +0000
Message-ID: (2062308187-1463792382-1049376921 boing.topica.com)
Errors-To:
(blst-errors.1700032592.1712491397.1731099979.007.15118.1 boing.topica.com)
Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
X-Topica-Id: (1049376916.inmta002.4069.1195120)
List-Help: (http://topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/)
List-Unsubscribe: (mailto:waldorf-critics-unsubscribe topica.com)
Return-Path: (anitamorin hotmail.com)
Received: (qmail 16845 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 13:35:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 16837 invoked by uid 0); 3 Apr 2003 13:35:15 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.31)
by 0 with SMTP; 3 Apr 2003 13:35:15 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Thu, 3 Apr 2003 05:34:56 -0800
Received: from 64.228.248.23 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:34:55 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [64.228.248.23]
X-Originating-Email: [anitamorin hotmail.com]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Apr 2003 13:34:56.0483 (UTC)
FILETIME=[D0BF7330:01C2F9E5]
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)don t know why I am adressing my mails to particular people, it
just feels more personnal. Ok, as I was telling you guys, I have done
some research here in Quebec (still very incomplete!) cause I am a
journalism student and was curious about waldorf school. A friend of
a friend is being trained at the moment and it all started from there
(and from the National Post article). There is one school in Chambly
that did the front page of the newspaper here a couple of years ago
and when I tried to talk to them, I was "blocked" by a parent
commitee....the lady said she didn t wanna talk to any
journalists...so I ve done many effort to get in touch with the
director (cause they are public school, they need a director) and she
said she was sorry for the answer I got, that It was bad publicity
and that they were approved by MEQ (Ministere Education du Quebec)
and UNESCO...etc...but I still had to write down the questions before
the interview so she could discuss them with a group of !
parents!!!!!!!!!wow!(BR)For the private school, it was different but
I couldn t go to the school apart from when they were doing a group
visit! AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO CULT-ressource
centre on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous here because he
would one of the only expert that could talk about cult like Ordre du
Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is writting a book
about waldorf school..it should be available soon.(BR)(/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(BR)(BR)(BR)Annie
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)>From: walden (AWALDENPOND SHAW.CA)
(DIV)(/DIV)>Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>Subject: Re: antroposophy vs. holism
(DIV)(/DIV)>Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:31:13 -0800
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Edith wrote:
(DIV)(/DIV)>So yes, I do believe in some things like reincarnation.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Walden: This is a good start if you take the Waldorf
Path. This one
(DIV)(/DIV)>element, IMO, must be clearly stated at the first
meeting with parents. "We
(DIV)(/DIV)>are helping to incarnate your child because we believe
in reincarnation a la
(DIV)(/DIV)>Rudolf Steiner. Please read this material by Steiner and other
(DIV)(/DIV)>Waldorf/Anthroposophy teachers before you give us any
money and more
(DIV)(/DIV)>importantly... your child."
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>I am curious, Edith - are you *interested* in
reincarnation or do you really
(DIV)(/DIV)>*believe?* If you believe - how did this belief come
to be? I hope I'm not
(DIV)(/DIV)>intruding... I am curious.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>-Walden
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>==^================================================================
(DIV)(/DIV)>You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here,
no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)The new (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMZENCA/2737")MSN 8: (/a) smart spam
protection and 2 months FREE*
(PRE)==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.(/PRE)
(/html)
------=_NextPart_000_315e_21f0_3d21--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 11:05:10 -0500
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophically Designed School
on 4/2/03 8:07 PM, spectmore yahoo.com at spectmore yahoo.com wrote:
)
) Personally, I find Steiner architecture naive at best and really
) unimportant. Public schools and common chapels have the same intent but
) better execution.
Sharon: Reminds me of a meeting I attended. Some Anthroposophists had
brought in an organic architect to roust up support for the school's dream,
which was to build an Anthro-correct structure to house the school in the
future. I was appalled by the examples shown, (they were hideous) and I
advised that our school should find other architects before we made our
choice (G) (little did I know in those days (G)). At the time I didn't
understand that there was an Anthroposophic subtext, I thought they were
just after good design! I didn't even know about the first and second
Goetheanum, nor had I seen pictures of Steiner's Rosicrucian temples. In
those days I did not know that Steiner was a religious leader...I thought he
was a scientist, educator and philosopher (G).
There's a Waldorf school in Sweden (I think it is) that actually does have
nice design. For some reason, it has right angles. When Waldorfers would go
on about things having to be rounded I'd always say why? (G) They would say
"it's natural", and I'd say "so are right angles! Ever seen a salt crystal?"
I think Anthro buildings have rounded corners so that they can attract
certain beings in the cosmos and radiate other forces out(G).
I think the first Goetheanum looked like a German helmet. It was a
monstrosity in my opinion, but never-the-less, quite amazing. I'm sorry it
burnt down. I'm just not a fan of Anthroposophic aesthetic.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 08:08:46 -0800
From: "Audrey Allison" (audreyallison hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: important meeting
I hope all goes well for you. I can't imagine having to go through that to
make a choice about your own children and lives.
Audrey Allison
)From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: important meeting
)Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 07:56:24 +0200
)
)Dear all,
)
)today I have my meeting with the civil servant of our city who will decide
)whether he will tolerate us taking our child out of school or prosecute us.
)Thanks for the information and answers to questions I received from you all
)(on giftednes & Waldord and holism & antroposophy). As you can see, I had
)no time to read Steiner (apart from the things I had read before) so I took
)some quotes out of the website and your emails to use.
)
)So, wish me luck! I will let you know this afternoon what happened.
)--
)Edith Hagenaar
)http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:28:56 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: web counter 112,356
Sorry, I missed checking the web counter on March first.
On April 1, 2003, the PLANS web site had registered 112,356 visitors
since August 12, 1996. (Visitors, not hits, repeats on the same day
are not counted. Thanks, Web-Counter: http://www.digits.com.)
We had 6345 visitors in the last 60 days, averaging 106 per day. This
is an increase again, 111% of January, which was itself a high figure.
Hit counters give much higher but less meaningful numbers, because
they count every page and image viewed. The hits on our site in the
months of February and March, 2003, totaled 393,459, averaging 6558
per day, a big increase.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:52:46 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: walden again
Annie, you wrote,
)AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO CULT-ressource centre
)on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous here because he would
)one of the only expert that could talk about cult like Ordre du
)Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is writting a book
)about waldorf school..it should be available soon.
Is that Yves Casgrain?
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 20:33:39 +0000
From: "Annie Mathieu" (anitamorin hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: walden again
(html)(div style='background-color:')(DIV)
(P)(BR)yes,its him, why?(/P)
(P)(BR) (/P)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)(BR)(BR)(BR)Annie
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)(/DIV)>From: Dan Dugan (DAN DANDUGAN.COM)
(DIV)(/DIV)>Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>To: waldorf-critics topica.com
(DIV)(/DIV)>Subject: Re: walden again
(DIV)(/DIV)>Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:52:46 -0800
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Annie, you wrote,
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>>AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO
CULT-ressource centre
(DIV)(/DIV)>>on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous
here because he
(DIV)(/DIV)>>would one of the only expert that could talk about
cult like Ordre
(DIV)(/DIV)>>du Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is
writting a book
(DIV)(/DIV)>>about waldorf school..it should be available soon.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>Is that Yves Casgrain?
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>-Dan Dugan
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>==^================================================================
(DIV)(/DIV)>You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here,
no matter how
(DIV)(/DIV)>basic. New threads are always welcome.
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)>
(DIV)(/DIV)(/div)(br clear=all)(hr)Protect your PC - (a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMXENCA/2755")Click here (/a) for McAfee.com
VirusScan Online
(/html)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 18:58:41 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: walden again
Annie Mathieu, you wrote:
)yes,its him, why?
He came to San Francisco to do research in the PLANS library last year.
-Dan Dugan
) )Annie, you wrote,
) )
) ))AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO CULT-ressource centre
) ))on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous here because he
) ))would one of the only expert that could talk about cult like Ordre
) ))du Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is writting a book
) ))about waldorf school..it should be available soon.
) )
) )Is that Yves Casgrain?
) )
) )-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:51:14 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: Upcominf owntime (sic)
Hello,
We would like to let you as a Topica Exchange List Owner know that
the Topica Web site will be unavailable for approximately 3 hours
this Saturday, April 5, 2003 beginning at 9:00 am PST (16:00 GMT).
During this time, we'll be making system improvements to ensure that
we continue to support your needs.
All functionality and data will be restored immediately after the
maintenance period.
Thank you for your patience as we make these improvements.
Sincerely,
Topica Support
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 09:13:21 -0500
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Sun Temple / was walden again
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3132292401_213960_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
on 4/3/03 3:33 PM, Annie Mathieu at anitamorin hotmail.com wrote:
)
))AND there is in MOntreal a group called INFO CULT-ressource centre
))on cultic thinking...their ex director (famous here because he
))would one of the only expert that could talk about cult like Ordre
))du Temple Solaire and other groups) so this guy is writting a book
))about waldorf school..it should be available soon.
Sharon: When I took my class on cults and New religious movements I was
fascinated to learn that the Order of the Solar Temple was a Rosicrucian
group, like Anthroposophy is. I was also intrigued to learn that the Solar
Temple was based in Switzerland, (the world headquarters and Spiritual
Center for Anthroposophy is located in Dornach, Switzerland). I doubt that
the two groups are connected in any way other than theology, but who knows?
That's the problem with secret societies.
There's an Anthro. book called "Art Inspired by Rudolf Steiner" by John
Fletcher which is my favorite Anthro. book I own. In it, there are some
pictures of Steiner's Apocalyptic Seals, Planetary Seals, Rosicrucian
temples, Goetheanums and stills from his mystery dramas, including a scene
with a backdrop depicting Steiner's Sun Temple. Here's a "poetic excerpt"
from scene XI, "The Sun Temple" from one of his mystery dramas:
Theodora: "From out of your heart
There looms a sheen of light
A human image springs from it,
And words can now be heard
Which flow from this same human form.
'Tis so they sound:
I have now won myself
The power to reach the light."
My friend, oh trust yourself!
'Tis you, yourself, shall speak these words
When once your time shall be fulfilled. (Steiner, p. 133.
Truth.Wrought.Words and other Verses. Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley,
NY 1979).
Anthroposophist, Bradford Riley wrote a paper entitled-- "Lord of the Rings:
a Study in New Mystery Centers." In his paper he said that the first
Goetheanum, (the wooden Anthro. Temple that burnt down), has been taken into
the etheric region of our earth and become:
?[T]he beacon Sun Temple for the Michael School as souls seek to incarnate
on the earth; or as they are born again back into the spiritual world at
death. It acts as a weigh (sic) station to gather forces for the coming
reincarnation and receive fruits brought from a life well wrought.
Riley claims that this etheric temple is also "a place to journey to, or be
invited to, when on the path of initiation here on earth" (Riley, p.1).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 17:07:44 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
John over at OpenWaldorf.com was asking in one of his forums (Academics and
Curriculum) for primary Steiner references on left-handedness. I checked the
archives here, but could only find secondary references about karmic
weaknesses. He was also wondering if anyone had experiences of left-handed
children being forced to switch in Waldorf. My left-handed daughter hasn't
had a problem writing left-handed, although she's learned to knit
right-handed (neither her handwork teacher nor I can teach left-handed
knitting). Does anyone have anything they'd like to add? If so they can
either post directly in the Academics and Curriculum forum at OpenWaldorf
or, if they don't want to be involved in yet another Waldorf environment,
they can post it here and I'll formulate a reply for him.
Nicole
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 09:36:10 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
) John over at OpenWaldorf.com was asking in one of his forums (Academics
and
) Curriculum) for primary Steiner references on left-handedness. I checked
the
) archives here, but could only find secondary references about karmic
) weaknesses. He was also wondering if anyone had experiences of left-handed
) children being forced to switch in Waldorf. My left-handed daughter hasn't
) had a problem writing left-handed, although she's learned to knit
) right-handed (neither her handwork teacher nor I can teach left-handed
) knitting). Does anyone have anything they'd like to add? If so they can
) either post directly in the Academics and Curriculum forum at OpenWaldorf
) or, if they don't want to be involved in yet another Waldorf environment,
) they can post it here and I'll formulate a reply for him.
)
) Nicole
We went through that some time ago here. Many of us had kids who were
forced to switch from left to right in Waldorf. I thought my children were
kidding when I heard about it. It was difficult for my kids (two left
handers) as they thought they were different and bad or wrong. Confusing
for a child. We talked about it with more than one teacher and told them
that we would not support this old fashioned custom. At the time I had NO
IDEA it had to do with Anthroposophy or any other occult belief system. Our
kids refused to switch and they were eventually allowed to write and draw
with left hands. Another case of "they must tell parents of this oddity
prior to families hopping on board the Magical Mystery Ship."
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1010
-- Topica Digest --
Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
By alice.javanet rcn.com
Re: was handedness - switching to pick and choose doctrine...
By alice.javanet rcn.com
Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with relig
By willow.firesong creative-interweb.com
Re: was handedness - switching to pick and choose doctrine...
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 07:45:06 -0500
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
on 4/4/03 12:07 PM, Nicole Foss at nmfoss hotmail.com wrote:
) John over at OpenWaldorf.com was asking in one of his forums (Academics and
) Curriculum) for primary Steiner references on left-handedness. I checked the
) archives here, but could only find secondary references about karmic
) weaknesses. He was also wondering if anyone had experiences of left-handed
) children being forced to switch in Waldorf. My left-handed daughter hasn't
) had a problem writing left-handed, although she's learned to knit
) right-handed (neither her handwork teacher nor I can teach left-handed
) knitting). Does anyone have anything they'd like to add? If so they can
) either post directly in the Academics and Curriculum forum at OpenWaldorf
) or, if they don't want to be involved in yet another Waldorf environment,
) they can post it here and I'll formulate a reply for him.
)
) Nicole
There's a section on the Bob and Nancy site about this, (probably what you
already have). Steiner taught that before the age of nine children,
generally, should be broken of left handedness. Some Waldorf teachers
attempt to change children?s dominant hand in order to help them in future
incarnations. This occurred at our ex-school. A friend of mine's child was
left-handed and the teacher wanted to switch her. The teacher sent home a
flyer informing parents of lefties that she would be working with left
handed kids to change their dominant hands. When my friend told me this I
was very confused, and wondered "Isn't that frowned upon nowadays?" (But
Waldorfers would say that Waldorf is so new and in future all schools would
be like Waldorf (G) Boy was I gullible (G)). Unfortunately, I don't have a
copy of the letter. Bob and Nancy quote from some Steiner books that mention
the left hand thingy, you could track down those Steiner books.
Steiner: The phenomenon of left-handedness is clearly karmic, and, in
connection with karma, it is one of karmic weakness. Allow me to give an
example: A person who was overworked in their previous life, so that they
did too much, not only physically or intellectually, but in general,
spiritually, within their soul or feeling, will enter the succeeding life
with an intense weakness.
Steiner, R. (1923). Conferences with Waldorf school teachers. (GA 300a,b,c.)
Child development, left handed cross-dominance. Remarks by Rudolf Steiner on
left-handedness from May 25, 1923. (R. F. Lathe & N. Parsons
Whittaker,Trans.). Retrieved March, 3, 2003, from www.bobnancy.com (click on
Waldorf then Developing Child).
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 09:53:53 -0500
From: Al's stuff (alice.javanet rcn.com)
Subject: Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
)snips(
) There's a section on the Bob and Nancy site about this, (probably what you
) already have). Steiner taught that before the age of nine children,
) generally, should be broken of left handedness. Some Waldorf teachers
) attempt to change children?s dominant hand in order to help them in future
) incarnations. This occurred at our ex-school. A friend of mine's child was
) left-handed and the teacher wanted to switch her. The teacher sent home a
) flyer informing parents of lefties that she would be working with left
) handed kids to change their dominant hands. When my friend told me this I
) was very confused, and wondered "Isn't that frowned upon nowadays?" (But
) Waldorfers would say that Waldorf is so new and in future all schools would
) be like Waldorf (G) Boy was I gullible (G)). Unfortunately, I don't have a
) copy of the letter. Bob and Nancy quote from some Steiner books that mention
) the left hand thingy, you could track down those Steiner books.
)
) Steiner: The phenomenon of left-handedness is clearly karmic, and, in
) connection with karma, it is one of karmic weakness. Allow me to give an
) example: A person who was overworked in their previous life, so that they
) did too much, not only physically or intellectually, but in general,
) spiritually, within their soul or feeling, will enter the succeeding life
) with an intense weakness.
)
)
) Steiner, R. (1923). Conferences with Waldorf school teachers. (GA 300a,b,c.)
) Child development, left handed cross-dominance. Remarks by Rudolf Steiner on
) left-handedness from May 25, 1923. (R. F. Lathe & N. Parsons
) Whittaker,Trans.). Retrieved March, 3, 2003, from www.bobnancy.com (click on
) Waldorf then Developing Child).
)
Alice here;
Just a quick anecdotal piece. My mother, who was a microbiologist,
upstanding, mid-western, brilliant perfectionist, was forced to write
right-handed, although she does everything else left handed (like eating..)
We used to tease her about it because she would occasionally show signs of
dyslexic thinking - reversing names etc. She did not attend a Waldorf
school, just a very small traditional school in the 1920's and 1930's in
rural Indiana (a one room schoolhouse)
I am just now dealing with her recent life altering stroke and I have not
been active on this list because of this change in my family. But it is
interesting to have grown up with the confusion and damage this archaic
practice produced in my mother. She has developed severe anxiety over the
years and I believe that part of her functional confusion continues to have
its origin in the forcing of her handedness..
Her brother, a veterinarian two years older, was never forced to switch. He
shows no sign of dyslexic functioning or anxiety for that matter...
hmmmmm.
makes ya' wonder....
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 10:03:02 -0500
From: Al's stuff (alice.javanet rcn.com)
Subject: Re: was handedness - switching to pick and choose doctrine...
Alice here:
Now that I am thinking about it, I was wondering if we have ever covered the
topic of how different W. schools pick and choose the Steiner doctrine that
they refuse to compromise vs. the things that are allowed to become more
gray and dictated to by the popular vote of the board/ the
parents/prevailing theory etc.
It seems that many W. schools must at least give lip service to the current
theories on say, learning disabilities, but at the same time scramble to
provide the proper Steiner based pedagogy to support the W. curriculum. It
works for some things.. it worked for me as a parent for awhile, (supporting
developmental theory) the "whole child" approach etc. But I guess my
question is about the authenticity of shifts within the schools..Just how
much can they change if they are committed to Steiner's words as "gospel"
truth? If he was truly enlightened, how can they pick and choose different
parts of what he said? Was he having a bad day and so they can dismiss it?
Was he misinformed by certain naughty spirits during one or two lectures?
I just don't understand how they can eliminate certain aspects..I am sure
they could tell ignorant (sorry - like I was..) parents that they have
recently seen the light, but aren't they just bending to the will of the
parents who are pushing for certain things to change? Do they base the
changes on the "spiritual integrity" of the people pushing for change?
On their political/financial standing in the community(ie. power)?
It's just creepy to imagine such decisions made regarding children,based on
financial survival of the school or inauthentic "compromise" not on truly
accepting of a stronger and more effective way of educating children..
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 15:48:39 +0930
From: Willow Firesong (Willow.Firesong creative-interweb.com)
Cc: waldorf-survivors-only yahoogroups.com
Subject: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with religious proselytization, specifically Christian -
and a review of my pre-Waldorf views of the school
I found an old message in my email box I thought I'd share with you. I
wrote this in apology for a somewhat negative response to yet another
Christmas greeting that assumed that I, too, was Christian - not "may the
spirit of the season cause me to act well toward all men", which I would
have welcomed and reciprocated, but something more like (sung to the tune
of an old Dr. Pepper commercial) "I'm a Christian, he's a Christian, she's
a Christian, they're all Christians, wouldn't you like to be a Christian
too - be a Christian, cel-e-brate Christmas"... (sigh) I have nothing
against the celebration of your own holidays, but enforcing them on others
bothers me (one of the problems I have with Waldorf/Steiner). The part
about Waldorf, and the post's relevance, is toward the middle - but the
rest is necessary for context.
------
Didn't mean to rant - just wanted to make sure I wasn't coming across as a
Grinch. I try hard not to reject the positive emotional messages, or the
impulse that prompted them to be sent, even when the context is one of
evangelism. (smile) I don't consider a difference of opinion to be good
grounds for returning ill will for good.
FYI - my views on this subject are strong enough that I don't prescribe
even my own religious beliefs for my child - I try very hard to give her a
spiritual education, in that I've read that children raised without one
tend to feel deprived of a number of things including common ground, later
in life when they do choose to explore their religious or spiritual
beliefs. But, I also try very hard to make sure that she knows that what
my husband and I believe is just that - what *we* believe, and that other
people believe other things.
I've made sure she won't be at a loss when people make references to
floods, doves, rainbows, mangers, and all of the other religious symbolism
which has been assimilated into the assumed language metaphors of the
culture in which she lives. At the same time, I've sought to make sure she
knows at least something of why we believe what we do, and why other people
believe what they do, to such extent as she finds it interesting and
comprehensible - she is only 4, after all.
But since she's been raised in a household where certain principles (like
the energetic flow within the body, pretty obvious when Mommy's going from
grey to pink thanks to microcurrent treatment) are just as much an obvious
fact of life as the fact that we put on a sweater when we are cold and
don't want to be, it's been easier to put some things (like being nice to
the earth, because if we make the earth sick, our food is sick, and we are
sick) in a way that is easy for even a 2-year-old to understand.
From there to the idea that we're part of a larger interconnected web of
life, just like our cells are part of a larger network, namely our bodies,
seems like a pretty obvious step. Since I've had no use for any religion
that requires me to believe things that conflict with my scientific
beliefs, or requires me to take anything on faith without allowing me at
very least a series of logical steps by which the belief may be established
from demonstrable facts, providing that kind of support for the things I
teach Sprout is a little easier than it would be if I were trying to teach
her that there was this omnipotent old guy up in the sky wearing a
nightgown and having small children torn apart by bears for teasing a bald guy.
Some of my own "co-religionists" are at least as disturbed by this as are
some of my Christian friends, though my Jewish friends tend to be more
understanding, because Judaism isn't about faith, it's about practise - I
have Jewish friends who are deists, atheists, and agnostics, and all are
sincere and devout practicing Jews.
Sprout just interviewed at the Steiner school earlier this week, which is
probably part of why I'm going on about this - the teachers there are
anthroposophists, and I'm having to find out just what exactly they're
teaching in science and history. I don't care what beliefs my child's
teachers hold, as long as they do not teach them to my child as fact - fact
is not the same thing as theory is not the same thing as belief.
I don't mind my child being taught creationism - in a comparitive religion
class, as part of the Christian or other creationist belief systems. I do
want my child taught that evolution through natural selection is a fact
demonstrable by the Birmingham moths, which were white prior to the
industrial revolution (to match the white bark of the trees on which they
lived), then turned dark grey-black during the intensely polluted period of
the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the trees were black from air
pollution. When the air pollution in the area was curtailed, the moths,
with the trees, returned to their previous white coloration. On the other
hand, *Darwin*'s Theory of Evolution is just that, a theory, and not
guaranteed correct in all its aspects - it simply correlates with the known
data, and can be retained as a working model until refined or disproven by
further data.
The existence of Atlantis is a matter of debate, however it is likely that
one of the many civilizations lost to cataclysmic disaster provided some
degree of factual origin for the myths that later rose up around the
tradition - personally, I subscribe to the theory that the Atlantis legends
arose around either the volcanic destruction of the Minoan island of Thera,
or another Minoan trading port, possibly as far away as the coast of South
America - I happen to follow the archaeological research regarding ancient
voyages and trading routes, and there's evidence that the Egyptians were
trading with South America, and some suggestion (though by no means any
certitude) in the historical record that the Minoans, whose open-sea
navigational skills were among the greatest of their era, may have done so
as well. The problem is in determining just which of the "Pillars of
Hercules" the accounts reference. My point is that there are many
*theories* regarding a possible historical Atlantis, just as there are also
many bizarre and completely unfounded *beliefs* on the subject, as well -
and I don't want my child taught that it's a matter of historical fact that
the advanced civilizations of the world are all descended from the Atlanteans.
The problem is that for educating Sprout, we have a choice between
* the local public school - where we get headaches every time we go on
campus, from the chemical exposure, and where Sprout's already been
indoctrinated into Santa and Christmas, in the few days she attended.
* The Steiner school - which we know is non-toxic, and not going to
force Sprout into a Christian mold (another of their lies - once I found
out about all the Christian holidays and activities she'd be forced to
participate in... (sigh)), but where they are anthroposophists, with some
outdated theories of child development, advancing the children solely on
the basis of age, not teaching reading until age 7, and not teaching
computers until Year 10, and offering NO elective subjects until Year
12. This would give Sprout her best chance at a social life, as there are
other chemically-sensitive families involved with the school, many of whom
chose it for the non-toxic environment.
* The Marbury school - which may or may not be adequately non-toxic, is
completely non-discriminatory with regard to religious beliefs, and doesn't
teach any, is much more age integrated and offers the children more choice
of what to learn/how to approach the things they are learning, and is our
preferred choice - but only if it won't poison us going on the campus.
* Homeschooling - which my health precludes, because I can't give
Sprout full-time care; and, which would render it even more difficult to
provide her with a decent social life.
It sucks having to decide which part of my child to poison, body, mind, or
spirit... (sigh)
I think it's made me a little touchy with regard to prescriptions of what
to teach my child, not to mention the constant annoyance of being assumed
to be Christian. This time of year is worse than ever, since we moved to
Australia - at least in the Northern Hemisphere, we were celebrating Yule
at the same time everyone else was celebrating Christmas. It's hard on a
kid to be on the outside of anything. The fact that her birthday falls at
this time of year makes it easier, since she doesn't have to feel present
deprived - but the fact that everyone keeps assuming at her makes it
confusing for her, and I hate anything that hurts her.
Oh, yes, and then there's the Christmas letter from my husband's born-again
fundamentalist family celebrating the fact that the neighbors for whom
they've been praying for years have "finally accepted Christ as their
Saviour". I keep thinking of King Olaf of Norway, going through his
country lining up the populace and converting them to Christianity -
"Convert or die?" "I convert!" "Next - convert or die?" "I'll never
convert! Urk..." "Next..." They made him a Saint for it - when he and
his longships full of Warriors sailed into Rome to see the Pope and tell
him that Norway had been converted. Apparently the Pope's primary
objective was to get Olaf to go away again without deciding to "convert"
any members of the Roman church who didn't follow his particular brand of
Christianity. I think that praying for anyone to change their sincerely
held beliefs doesn't show a lot of respect for that person.
But then, these are the same family members who, when my husband was
unemployed and had no food in the house, in a town with no jobs, told him
that their church's food bank was only for church members. I seem to
remember a Samaritan who didn't feel that good works should be confined to
people who believe the same things as the person performing the act of
kindness, but then, I'm sure there are lot of Arabs who would be happy to
assure me that this is no longer a part of the Christian tradition as
practised in the US. Sadly, I'm sure that many of them are US citizens who
are just as loyal as the Japanese-Americans interned during WWII.
As I said, I'm both a bit touchy and bitter on the subject. It wouldn't be
so bad if it weren't for the fact that I was raised to believe in the truly
selfless, generous, charitable kind of Christianity - and for years, even
after I left the church to acknowledge and practise my own beliefs, that
was the kind of Christianity in which I didn't believe (just as I have very
good taste in the beer I don't drink) - but I thought that's what it meant
to be Christian. I mean, who could possibly believe in the kind that says
that only 144,000 people in all of history are going to be treated
decently, and the rest are destined to eternal torment - and are supposed
to somehow have deserved this?
But then I ran into things like my husband's parents' church, where a
Christmas Eve carol service starts its readings with the Fall of Man, and
gets worse from there, culminating in a sermon that is a story telling the
kids that Christ was born so that THEY could kill him (no mention of
Easter, just Good Friday), and it was all their fault, and they should
spend their whole lives feeling guilty, and grateful that he could be so
merciful as to allow them the chance to spend their whole lives making it
up to him, groveling, deriding themselves, and if they were really lucky,
they would get to spend all Eternity saying thank you for this privilege,
and praising his kindness and generosity (but don't expect to get to be
with anyone you loved during this Eternity, for in Heaven there is neither
marriage, nor giving in marriage, and of course, most of the people you
loved in life will be writhing in eternal torment for having failed to feel
adequately guilty or grovel low enough).
I've had a belief for a long time that if a thing is immoral without
religious justification, no religion can provide adequate justification to
make it a moral act. Emotional abuse of children, telling them that they
are worthless, that they can never be anything else, and that it's their
own fault, and so is everything bad that's ever happened to them or anyone
they care about - well, if a parent did that, I'd be tempted to call Child
Protective Services (if I'd ever seen them do any good). Emotional abuse
of that extreme extent is very damaging to children; there are laws
preventing any government-sanctioned carer for children from such
behaviour, and it would be considered adequate grounds for divorce - why
should it be tolerated in a religious setting???
How often have you seen a sports star take the blame for all of their
failure - but give the credit to "God" whenever they do well? I see it all
the time, in sports, in business, in many forms of competition - and I
can't see it as healthy, to believe that the only things one is capable of
are bad things, that any good must be divine intervention and not come from
within the individual, who is nothing but a miserable sinner, save that
they have God in their life.
I suppose that's probably why churches like the one my husband grew up in
preach against psychiatrists and psychologists - because any mental health
professional worth their salt WOULD consider such beliefs unhealthy and try
to cure the patient who held them.
I also have a few problems with the Christmas story (since when is it okay
for a lord to knock up his handmaidens, when they're betrothed to other
men? I'm supposed to worship someone who practises "Droit de Signeur" on
his subjects/children? This is something to celebrate? I thought I left
the SCA, and with it the loonies bent on bringing back all the worst parts
of the Middle Ages...), but I mention them ONLY because I want to make
clear how and why a season seen by so many as a festive celebration of
peace and love and joy could be disturbing to anyone, including me. I'm
ALWAYS happy to see people celebrating peace and love and joy, it's just
that I feel like a Native American on Columbus Day - I want to celebrate my
love of my land, my country, at least as much as the next person, but this
symbol of that love just really doesn't work for me.
I'm thinking maybe I should write this up on my website, as an
article. You see, it's not that I have any problem with you, it's just
that you prompted me to think, and I have no one to talk to, most of the
time, so when I think, I write.
Willow Firesong
---
A belief is a conclusion to which one subscribes strongly: "Our belief in
any particular natural law cannot have a safer basis than our unsuccessful
critical attempts to refute it" (Karl Popper).
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 00:00:17 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: was handedness - switching to pick and choose doctrine...
Good questions. I remember being annoyed at Waldorf Critics because I found
the generalizations here - and at the old site - quite ridiculous. It was
if every single Waldorf teachers had horns hidden under hair and hats.
After spending time reading and understanding Waldorf/Anthro from a
different (objective) angle I understand the issue to go much deeper than
simple generalizations.
I believe there are very decent, caring, loving, honest Waldorf teachers. I
believe some Waldorf schools talk openly about the mission of Anthroposophy
and the teacher's connection to children via Steiner's soul work. Where the
generalization *does* seem to stick is in the same dogma we see in so many
Waldorf schools. I believe it has to do with the religious nature of the
entire organization. Anthroposophy permeates Waldorf as it clings to
Biodynamics and Eurythmy. Yes - there are teachers who simply put up with
the weirdness and others who openly ignore it but the ambiance created by it
simply cannot be avoided for any length of time, IMO. I remember a teacher
once being begged to teach one year (ever heard of a Waldorf School with a
waiting list for teachers? (g)) and finally agreed to take a class for a
year *if* it was clearly stipulated in his contract that he would not have
to attend faculty meetings of any sort. He had been there/done that years
before. He was willing to teach *children* in a Waldorf school because he
felt that particular environment was more conducive to what he had to offer
than the local public school. Period. He barely lasted the year. The kids
missed out on a good teacher. The weirdness got in the way.
) But I guess my
) question is about the authenticity of shifts within the schools..Just how
) much can they change if they are committed to Steiner's words as "gospel"
) truth?
I see them change if they are threatened - especially with closure. I
remember *wanting* very hard to believe that Waldorf was, in fact, an
organic process - changing with the tide of energy that
parents/children/teachers brought to the school each year. "Threefold
Social Organism." That sort of thing. I would go out of my way to ignore
the heavy weirdness - the mission to Vulcan, etc. I guess we see what we
want to see.... until the dream (nightmare) finally ends and we wake up.
If he was truly enlightened, how can they pick and choose different
) parts of what he said? Was he having a bad day and so they can dismiss it?
) Was he misinformed by certain naughty spirits during one or two lectures?
If only it were so simple! Sorry, Alice - no luck. I cannot be certain but
I doubt I will see the day when I tune in to Anthro news to hear that
"Steiner simply had a bad day when he spoke of the Aryan race and Atlantis
and Indigenous people devolving into apes... and all that nonsense about the
decadent French allowing Blacks into France really is nonsense because we
now know that particular wacky speech was simply the result of a bad batch
of pommes frites in Paris that Steiner did not quite digest properly."
Nope. Looks like he said it and he meant it and today's Anthroposophists
believe it. Strangely, the only real picking and choosing of Steiner quotes
(apart from Critics pulling them "out of context") comes from Waldorf School
newsletters, pamphlets and web sites. The occultist is always dressed as a
philosopher/scientist/educator. Funny how that works.
) It's just creepy to imagine such decisions made regarding children,based
on
) financial survival of the school or inauthentic "compromise" not on truly
) accepting of a stronger and more effective way of educating children..
I cannot hide my cynicism here. I don't believe Waldorf Education (I am not
saying *every* W teacher) really has to do with "stronger and more
effective way of educating children." It goes much deeper into the Anthro
mission. That, IMO, is the problem. And it hurts.
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1011
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 18:39:12 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: waldorf-survivors-only yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with relig
Willow, you wrote at great length (please!), including,
)But since she's been raised in a household where certain principles
)(like the energetic flow within the body, pretty obvious when
)Mommy's going from grey to pink thanks to microcurrent treatment)
)are just as much an obvious fact of life as the fact that we put on
)a sweater when we are cold and don't want to be,
There's no such thing as "energetic flow within the body," Willow,
however obvious it may seem to you.
)The existence of Atlantis is a matter of debate,
Not among historians or archeologists. I read a good book on it
recently, *Imagining Atlantis*.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1012
-- Topica Digest --
Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
By alice.javanet rcn.com
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
By alice.javanet rcn.com
RE: simple example
By dkimble mystrotv.com
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
By willow.firesong creative-interweb.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 08:46:44 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: primary Steiner references on left-handedness
on 4/4/03 12:07 PM, Nicole Foss at nmfoss hotmail.com wrote:
) John over at OpenWaldorf.com was asking in one of his forums (Academics and
) Curriculum) for primary Steiner references on left-handedness. I checked the
) archives here, but could only find secondary references about karmic
) weaknesses. He was also wondering if anyone had experiences of left-handed
) children being forced to switch in Waldorf. My left-handed daughter hasn't
) had a problem writing left-handed, although she's learned to knit
) right-handed (neither her handwork teacher nor I can teach left-handed
) knitting). Does anyone have anything they'd like to add? If so they can
) either post directly in the Academics and Curriculum forum at OpenWaldorf
) or, if they don't want to be involved in yet another Waldorf environment,
) they can post it here and I'll formulate a reply for him.
Sharon: I just remembered something else that relates to this subject. After
leaving Waldorf, a parent from my daughter's old class phoned me wanting to
talk to me about something, she came over to my house. Sadly, she had a baby
girl born without a right hand. She was concerned because one of the hard
core Anthroposophist teachers had come to her after the birth of her little
girl, and with tears in his eyes begged her to make the child right handed.
He said something like, "You will make her right handed, won't you? Promise
me you'll make her right handed!" The poor mother didn't know what to think,
though I learned during the visit that she was a Theosophist and had
attended a Theosophical high school in California, so Waldorf was probably a
very good fit for her family. Here are a couple clues to this hand mystery:
1). Steiner: "The limbs are the part of the human body which more than any
other part passes over into the life of the next incarnation. They are the
part which points to the future, to what comes after death" (Steiner, R.
(1970). Art in the light of mystery wisdom. Lectures from 1914-1923. [J.
Collis, Trans.]. London: Rudolf Steiner Press, p. 70).
2). Steiner's "head, heart and hands" are a reference to his meditative
path, and within those words lies all sorts of deep and hidden mysteries. In
Anthro speak, Head = Imagination = awareness of subjectivity, gaining
psychic/spiritual sight.
Heart = Inspiration = revelation as to what happens between death and
rebirth, spiritual hearing.
Hands/limbs = Intuition = one is able to see spiritual hierarchies and
karma. Union with spirit within and beyond the body. Body is transformed
into higher evolutionary form (spirit-man). Man is aware of himself as being
one with the macrocosm. His "I" is fully developed. Man recognizes the
mystery of Christ--the Greater Guardian of the thresh hold. Physical body is
informed by spirit, man's physical body is no longer important, it becomes
foreign to him, the spirit carries the physical body through the world, "as
if it were a foreign object, a table for instance". "Hand" is a reference to
the highest spiritual achievement an Anthroposophist can reach.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 09:08:37 -0500
From: Al's stuff (alice.javanet rcn.com)
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
on 4/6/03 8:39 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
) Willow, you wrote at great length (please!), including,
)
)) But since she's been raised in a household where certain principles
)) (like the energetic flow within the body, pretty obvious when
)) Mommy's going from grey to pink thanks to microcurrent treatment)
)) are just as much an obvious fact of life as the fact that we put on
)) a sweater when we are cold and don't want to be,
)
) There's no such thing as "energetic flow within the body," Willow,
) however obvious it may seem to you.
)
)) The existence of Atlantis is a matter of debate,
)
) Not among historians or archeologists. I read a good book on it
) recently, *Imagining Atlantis*.
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 09:14:04 -0500
From: Al's stuff (alice.javanet rcn.com)
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
on 4/6/03 8:39 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
) Willow, you wrote at great length (please!), including,
)
)) But since she's been raised in a household where certain principles
)) (like the energetic flow within the body, pretty obvious when
)) Mommy's going from grey to pink thanks to microcurrent treatment)
)) are just as much an obvious fact of life as the fact that we put on
)) a sweater when we are cold and don't want to be,
)
) There's no such thing as "energetic flow within the body," Willow,
) however obvious it may seem to you.
) -Dan Dugan
Alice here:
sorry - I think I sent a blank replay initially...
From what I understand, recent PET scan studies show "energetic" flow with
the body. One can call it something scientific and specific - like
synaptical nerve stimulation or biochemical activation or something like
that.
I just started taking yoga.. tell practitioners of this - one of the most
popular movement/exercise techniques (with a relatively long tradition) that
there is no "prana".
And you could explain it to the many practitioners of the many thousand year
old tradition of acupuncture that there is no "energy flow within the body".
I guess it's how one defines "energy" isn't it?
I appreciate your practical, conventionally scientific mind, Dan.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 17:38:46 -0600
From: "Dave Kimble" (dkimble mystrotv.com)
Subject: RE: simple example
-----Original Message-----
From: walden [mailto:awaldenpond shaw.ca]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 11:08 PM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: simple example
[stuff deleted]
Enough. Sorry for the ramble. Off to bed with Deepak's new book, Golf
for
Enlightenment - Seven Lessons for the Game of Life. Anyone hear his
ideas
for avoiding war - Disney Theme Park in the Middle East. I wish I were
kidding... (sigh)
-Walden
Dave: Sometimes a good ramble is the only way to try to articulate the
unbelievable world around us.
The Disney thing was so outrageous that I had to research it myself (not
to impugn you as a source, Walden, I just have trust issues...).
It was, in fact, number 10 of DeepPockets (as my son calls him) "10 Ways
to Avoid War".
Number 5 was equally amazing:
Offer MTV, CNN, and Nickelodeon free to any Iraq household with a TV.
But then, he's on the beach in Southern CA, so he must have figured
something out that still eludes me,
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:41:50 +0930
From: Willow Firesong (Willow.Firesong creative-interweb.com)
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
At 06-04-03 06:39 PM Sunday, Dan wrote:
)Willow, you wrote at great length (please!), including,
)
))But since she's been raised in a household where certain principles (like
))the energetic flow within the body, pretty obvious when Mommy's going
))from grey to pink thanks to microcurrent treatment) are just as much an
))obvious fact of life as the fact that we put on a sweater when we are
))cold and don't want to be,
)
)There's no such thing as "energetic flow within the body," Willow, however
)obvious it may seem to you.
Were it on-topic to the list, I would ask you to explain, without reference
to energy of ANY kind the operation of nerves and pacemakers, or try
replacing that flat statement with one asking me what *I* had meant, if
what you read made no sense to you. However, I see no point in doing so.
))The existence of Atlantis is a matter of debate,
)
)Not among historians or archeologists. I read a good book on it recently,
)*Imagining Atlantis*.
Oh? So, have they settled on the volcanic destruction of the isle of Thera
as the origin of the legend then? The likelihood of an event which became
known to history as "the sinking of Atlantis" IS not a matter of historical
debate, you are right - they just don't know WHICH of the sites it is,
which of the "Pillars of Hercules" (there's a set on each side of the
Mediterranean) it lay beyond, etc. As I told the folks at the
Waldorf/Steiner school when interviewing there, I'm aware that there are
varied theories - I favour the Thera one, myself. However, as I told them
then, too, I expect my child(ren) to be exposed to all and ONLY theories
which are not disproven by known facts, and shown the arguments for and
against each theory/hypothesis which they ARE taught - I don't expect that
which is not proven, including mystical or religious belief, to be taught
as fact.
Willow Firesong
---
A belief is a conclusion to which one subscribes strongly: "Our belief in
any particular natural law cannot have a safer basis than our unsuccessful
critical attempts to refute it" (Karl Popper).
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1013
-- Topica Digest --
Re: simple example
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: simple example
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
Re: simple example
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
By dan dandugan.com
Re: simple example
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration wit
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By dan dandugan.com
Re: intro + waldorf & gifted kids
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 07:46:50 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: simple example
Speaking of MTV ... did anyone read the reports on how American soldiers on
the front lines in Iraq were so eager to talk to reporters from MTV? So much
so that reporters from the bigshot networks -- ABC, NBC, CBS -- all
expressed envy at the things the soldiers told the MTV reporters.
I read this in several publications, including the Washington Post and the
New York Times.
I realize this is a big off topic and not what your guy's thread was getting
at, but could not resist mentioning this.
Lisa
)
) -----Original Message-----
) From: walden [mailto:awaldenpond shaw.ca]
) Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 11:08 PM
) To: waldorf-critics topica.com
) Subject: Re: simple example
)
) [stuff deleted]
)
) Enough. Sorry for the ramble. Off to bed with Deepak's new book, Golf
) for
) Enlightenment - Seven Lessons for the Game of Life. Anyone hear his
) ideas
) for avoiding war - Disney Theme Park in the Middle East. I wish I were
) kidding... (sigh)
)
) -Walden
)
) Dave: Sometimes a good ramble is the only way to try to articulate the
) unbelievable world around us.
)
) The Disney thing was so outrageous that I had to research it myself (not
) to impugn you as a source, Walden, I just have trust issues...).
)
) It was, in fact, number 10 of DeepPockets (as my son calls him) "10 Ways
) to Avoid War".
)
) Number 5 was equally amazing:
) Offer MTV, CNN, and Nickelodeon free to any Iraq household with a TV.
)
)
) But then, he's on the beach in Southern CA, so he must have figured
) something out that still eludes me,
)
) Dave
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
) New threads are always welcome.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:09:05 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Re: simple example
) Speaking of MTV ...
Well, that would be because most soldiers are like, 19/20 years old... of
course they're more excited about MTV!
And this is on-topic because...? ;-)
Sarina
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 23:43:37 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: simple example
)) Speaking of MTV ...
)
) Well, that would be because most soldiers are like, 19/20 years old... of
) course they're more excited about MTV!
)
) And this is on-topic because...? ;-)
)
) Sarina
)
Lisa here: I think I said in my post that it was not on topic, but that I
could not resist mentioning this because someone else mentioned MTV.
I hope all of you will forgive my transgression of the on-topic rule.
The list ain't exactly hoppin' these days!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:25:49 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
Alice, you wrote,
)From what I understand, recent PET scan studies show "energetic" flow with
)the body. One can call it something scientific and specific - like
)synaptical nerve stimulation or biochemical activation or something like
)that.
When you talk about the nervous system you're talking about reality.
When you talk about "energy flow," you're talking about holistic
fantasies.
)I just started taking yoga.. tell practitioners of this - one of the most
)popular movement/exercise techniques (with a relatively long tradition) that
)there is no "prana".
Prana is a pre-scientific explanation for how the body works. Neither
longevity nor popularity are good tests of the truth of a concept.
)And you could explain it to the many practitioners of the many thousand year
)old tradition of acupuncture that there is no "energy flow within the body".
I'll be happy to. Scientific knowledge replaces traditional knowledge.
)I guess it's how one defines "energy" isn't it?
It's a buzzword in holistic and new age circles, meaning just about
anything you want.
)I appreciate your practical, conventionally scientific mind, Dan.
Thank you. I practice scientific method in my electronic repair job:
intuit a hypothesis, devise a critical test, test, discard or confirm
the hypothesis.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:53:26 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: simple example
) ) Lisa: Perhaps exposing my ignorance here, but I would contend
that the term
)) "cult" and "cult like" are avoided these days because it is not Politically
)) Correct to "judge" another person's belief system. It sounds more
respectful
)) to say "new religious movement."
)
)Sharon: Well yes there's probably some truth in that Lisa, but the real
)reason is because scholars who study religion understand that all religions
)are human inventions. Religious beliefs are simply human constructions. It
)is therefore pointless to consider one group of believers false and another
)true. Over the years, "cult" has become a loaded term which is why scholars
)of religion prefer not to use it.
Missing the point. Anti-cult organizations like American Family
Foundation aren't concerned with the group's belief system, they're
concerned with abusive practices. Deceptive and/or abusive religious
groups are properly labeled cults.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:49:30 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Enforcing one's own beliefs on others - contains some
frustration with
))Willow, you wrote at great length (please!), including,
))
)))But since she's been raised in a household where certain
)))principles (like the energetic flow within the body, pretty
)))obvious when Mommy's going from grey to pink thanks to
)))microcurrent treatment) are just as much an obvious fact of life
)))as the fact that we put on a sweater when we are cold and don't
)))want to be,
))
))There's no such thing as "energetic flow within the body," Willow,
))however obvious it may seem to you.
)
)Were it on-topic to the list, I would ask you to explain, without
)reference to energy of ANY kind the operation of nerves and
)pacemakers, or try replacing that flat statement with one asking me
)what *I* had meant, if what you read made no sense to you. However,
)I see no point in doing so.
Anthroposophy includes a system of quack medicine, so pseudoscience
does come within the topics discussed here, but we should stick to
those issues specifically related to Anthroposophy. Sorry, you pushed
my pseudoscience button when you talked about "energetic flow within
the body." That's holistic nonsense.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 11:37:25 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol, you wrote,
)Your method, that is science, has failed.
You wish! Please tell me what areas of human endeavor have moved on
beyond scientific knowledge.
)It should have realized that
)what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
)Now,
)people stick to science that as the highest achievement, but it's a
)failure. It's the new religion.
I think I'd call ethics humanity's highest achievement, but science
is certainly up there. You misunderstand science if you call it a
religion. I don't know of any religion where all knowledge is
tentative and people work to falsify fundamental ideas.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 11:14:46 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: hagenaar wxs.nl
Subject: Re: intro + waldorf & gifted kids
Edith Hagenaar, you wrote:
)First I would like to say I won't be on this list long, since I have
)only one question to which I could not find an answer on your great
)PLANS site (thanks for all the info, very enlightening). (also not
)on list archives)
)
)We're from The Netherlands. My son is in a Waldorf school now and it
)appears to me that (although I do not like labels) he is gifted. He
)just turned 5.
)
)I asked in school what they do with gifted kids and they said
)nothing, especially not at that age. When he is 7 they will assign
)someone who will make a personal plan for him. They said the school
)didn't have a special policy.
I think they're covering up what their policy is, because they know
you won't like it. They want to save your child from you, and they'll
work behind your back to do it.
)But he still has to spend a year and a half in kindergarten and even
)after that I wonder whether his intellectual abilities will be
)stimulated (enough).
)
)Now, my first question is this: what is the Waldorf policy on
)(academically) gifted kids and kindergarteners?
The policy is to try to suppress their "too-early" intellectual
development, which they consider to be bad, and a cause of ill-health
later in life. They don't want kids to reason before puberty. Your
son's "why" questions will be answered with
)The second is: do any of you have experiences with gifted kids in
)Waldorf schools?
)
)I feel a little weird since I haven't told you the whole story so I
)will. We have decided to homeschool our kids but the laws in Holland
)are very strict. We had had to make that decision before we enrolled
)our son in school, but unfortunately we didn't. This means we will
)probably have to go to court to fight our right to homeschool and
)defend 'why we changed our minds' on the Waldorf school. Therefore I
)am looking at every argument which will show why the Waldorf school
)is not a good option for my gifted and
)intellectual-challenges-craving son.
I think Waldorf will drive your smart kid crazy, get him out of there
as quickly as you can. Point the authorities to the PLANS web site
and http://www.openwaldorf.com, and tell them you found out about it
after you enrolled.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 05:34:34 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Percedol, you wrote,
)
) )Your method, that is science, has failed.
)
) You wish! Please tell me what areas of human endeavor have moved on
) beyond scientific knowledge.
P:
I would not wish it failed. It is now very successful, but at a level
that will bring to anything except serve better and better instincts and
our digestive system. It has become an indefinite series of findings at
an horizontal level. More and more data, in a neverending race. But it's
all number, measure and weight.
Yet, the method of observation applied to thought could lead the
investigator to find the actual subject of scientific research. Thinking
is used to analyze everything, but it is never turned to itself, except
for sterile philosophical speculation. Instead, thought should be
experienced in itself, before it determines itself as a form (image or
mental thought). But this experience is not speculation, it requires
inner work.
)
) )It should have realized that
) )what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
)
) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
P:
If I think 'triangle', my thought is not different from yours. But the
goal is to experience thinking before it becomes determined for an
object of thought. Before it takes any form. Therefore, it requires to
exercise the concentration. (This was not possible with any older
techniques, because they preceded the human experience of the concept
that was first experienced by Greek philosophers. It is quite the
opposite of the goal of ancient paths like Yoga, etc. that tried to
eliminate the mental substance, not to experience it, to avoid it, not
to possess it.) Until we can experience thought before it becomes
dialectics, mental thought, mental image, abstract thought.
)
) )Now,
) )people stick to science that as the highest achievement, but it's a
) )failure. It's the new religion.
)
) I think I'd call ethics humanity's highest achievement, but science
) is certainly up there. You misunderstand science if you call it a
) religion. I don't know of any religion where all knowledge is
) tentative and people work to falsify fundamental ideas.
)
P:
Science is an important achievement, and without it there would be no
possibility to have a spiritual science. But it would have been
important if scientists had experienced the act of consciousness that
allows them to understand everything, that allows them or us to accept
or refuse any idea or fact. Anything we decide is before all thought.
But we do not experience it. And this is what is missing.
The whole PoF focuses on this point: the experience of thinking. And
this is what RS has been proposing as the central theme of the spiritual
science from 1894 (and even before) to 1924 (see the last address) and
1925. For over 30 years (starting with PoF) he always pushed people to
achieve that. And that is always been the central message of the
spiritual science. Often misunderstood even by those who follow it.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1014
-- Topica Digest --
Re: intro + waldorf & gifted kids
By dan dandugan.com
Edith
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
Re: simple example
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Astral bodies
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Theosophy of the R
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 21:54:10 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: hagenaar wxs.nl
Subject: Re: intro + waldorf & gifted kids
Sorry, I didn't complete this paragraph
)The policy is to try to suppress their "too-early" intellectual
)development, which they consider to be bad, and a cause of
)ill-health later in life. They don't want kids to reason before
)puberty. Your son's "why" questions will be answered with
made-up fantasies intended to preserve his infantile world-view.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 11:15:31 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: Edith
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C2FE89.5883EA10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Edith wrote:
today I have my meeting with the civil servant of our city who will
decide whether he will tolerate us taking our child out of school or
prosecute us.
Edith, if you're still with us, I hope you'll let us know what happened.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 12:49:23 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: simple example
on 4/8/03 1:53 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
))) Lisa: Perhaps exposing my ignorance here, but I would contend that the term
))) "cult" and "cult like" are avoided these days because it is not Politically
))) Correct to "judge" another person's belief system. It sounds more
respectful
))) to say "new religious movement."
))
)) Sharon: Well yes there's probably some truth in that Lisa, but the real
)) reason is because scholars who study religion understand that all religions
)) are human inventions. Religious beliefs are simply human constructions. It
)) is therefore pointless to consider one group of believers false and another
)) true. Over the years, "cult" has become a loaded term which is why scholars
)) of religion prefer not to use it.
)
)Dan: Missing the point. Anti-cult organizations like American Family
) Foundation aren't concerned with the group's belief system, they're
) concerned with abusive practices. Deceptive and/or abusive religious
) groups are properly labeled cults.
Sharon: No I'm not missing the point. Belief systems cause abuse, people
studying cults *are* interested in belief systems, that is what they study.
The term "cult" has come to assume that one particular group's beliefs are
false, and that the group is "evil" or violent. Within AFF there are varying
perspectives, it's not so clear cut. I would call AFF a "cutic-studies"
org., rather than an "anti-cult" org. I say *all* religious groups are
deceptive and abusive because they promulgate *beliefs* as "truth" and
manipulate people, but these deceptions and abuses vary in degree from group
to group. Many people who study cults have found that *extremely* abusive
cults usually become that way because of an unstable leader, like Jim Jones,
but that there aren't many of these groups. There really haven't been that
many examples of extremely abusive/violent cults in history. There are far
more examples of violent groups within the realm of political groups (which
can also be religious). *All* societal groups are susceptible to this
phenomenon, as bad leaders and bad ideology crop up in all human groups. A
group can act more excessively than it's members might act as individuals,
and this is what can be lethal. All human groups have a worldview, a
perspective of reality, and the core ideology and leadership usually
determines whether that group is "orderly" or not.
The word "cult" has a history. It has became a loaded term and many
religious scholars, even within AFF, argue that the word is not useful any
longer. The information about cults gathered by cultic-studies scholars over
the past 20+ years often contradicts anti-cult movement claims. Read
Jenkin's "Mystics and Messiahs, Cults and New Religions in American
History." And for a variety of other perspectives on cults and the term
"cult" see "Cults in Context" edited by Lorne Dawson. Some scholars involved
in AFF think it's religious bigotry to differentiate between group's
beliefs, some not. Some AFF participants operate from a Christian anti-cult
perspective, others not. Certainly some cultic studies experts think there
is a need to monitor new religious groups. I think all religious groups
should be monitored because even today's accepted groups can stray off
course, (as the recent Catholic scandal demonstrated). As an infidel, I
don't accept any religious group, I would avoid the Catholic church as I
would the Scientologists. Now that I know what Anthropspophy is, I'll be
sure to keep my distance from that as well.
Most religious groups/cults have more in common with each other than not.
Most do not foster mass suicides or eat babies. I haven't found one
religious group, new or old, that isn't deceptive, because religion by
nature is deceptive. Usually established religious groups are open about
their deception/beliefs and mission, unlike Anthroposophy. Besides being
esoteric by nature, I think Anthroposophists remain secretive because they
are trying to establish themselves as a credible religion. Few people would
take them seriously if they were to be open and frank about their beliefs. I
would have avoided Waldorf if their brochures talked openly about
reincarnation and the Sixth epoch etc. Unfortunately for them, their refusal
to be straightforward about their religious nature has caused an anti-cult
backlash which could end up harming them more, than if they were frank and
open. Sure I'm fed up with Anthroposophists because they tricked me, and I
oppose Steiner's racist doctrine, but I don't think Anthroposophists are
"evil" or extremely abusive. Misguided, yes.
Some AFF scholars avoid the term "cult", some not. Your interpretation /
definition of "cult" is not accepted by all, it's not that cut and dry.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:27:25 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol wrote:
)I would not wish it failed. It is now very successful, but at a level
)that will bring to anything except serve better and better instincts and
)our digestive system. It has become an indefinite series of findings at
)an horizontal level. More and more data, in a neverending race. But it's
)all number, measure and weight.
)Yet, the method of observation applied to thought could lead the
)investigator to find the actual subject of scientific research. Thinking
)is used to analyze everything, but it is never turned to itself, except
)for sterile philosophical speculation. Instead, thought should be
)experienced in itself, before it determines itself as a form (image or
)mental thought). But this experience is not speculation, it requires
)inner work.
Peter F responds:
This is all pure assertion without an ounce of evidence to support it. How
about supplying some of that evidence.
)
) ) )It should have realized that
) ) )what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
) )
) ) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
) ) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
)
Peter F:
Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
Percedol:
)If I think 'triangle', my thought is not different from yours.
Peter F:Maybe this is true, maybe it is not. I think it might well depend on
whether you are a mathematician or an architect, or a graphic designer. All
of these carry very different images around triangles.
Percedol continues:
)But the
)goal is to experience thinking before it becomes determined for an
)object of thought. Before it takes any form. Therefore, it requires to
)exercise the concentration. (This was not possible with any older
)techniques, because they preceded the human experience of the concept
)that was first experienced by Greek philosophers. It is quite the
)opposite of the goal of ancient paths like Yoga, etc. that tried to
)eliminate the mental substance, not to experience it, to avoid it, not
)to possess it.) Until we can experience thought before it becomes
)dialectics, mental thought, mental image, abstract thought.
)
Peter responds:
This seems to me to be a worthy exercise if it is possible. What evidence
might you bring that would lead me to believe it is possible. If you say
Steiner, I say poppycock, for all the reasons I have stated numerous times.
Percedol continues quoting Dan:
) )
) ) )Now,
) ) )people stick to science that as the highest achievement, but it's a
) ) )failure. It's the new religion.
) )
) ) I think I'd call ethics humanity's highest achievement, but science
) ) is certainly up there. You misunderstand science if you call it a
) ) religion. I don't know of any religion where all knowledge is
) ) tentative and people work to falsify fundamental ideas.
) )
)
)P:
)Science is an important achievement, and without it there would be no
)possibility to have a spiritual science. But it would have been
)important if scientists had experienced the act of consciousness that
)allows them to understand everything, that allows them or us to accept
)or refuse any idea or fact. Anything we decide is before all thought.
)But we do not experience it. And this is what is missing.
)The whole PoF focuses on this point: the experience of thinking. And
)this is what RS has been proposing as the central theme of the spiritual
)science from 1894 (and even before) to 1924 (see the last address) and
)1925. For over 30 years (starting with PoF) he always pushed people to
)achieve that. And that is always been the central message of the
)spiritual science. Often misunderstood even by those who follow it.
)
Peter F responds:
And I said before it seems absolutely clear from the available evidence that
he found little or nothing of value through this exercise except to build
for himself a lucrative career as guru.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:51:56 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Astral bodies
)(Steiner,"Genesis, Secrets of the Bible Story of Creation", 104-105).
Sharon, may I have the year of the original lectures, the publisher,
city, and year of publication?
thanks, Dan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:36:56 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Peter Farrell wrote:
) Percedol wrote:
) )I would not wish it failed. It is now very successful, but at a level
) )that will bring to anything except serve better and better instincts and
) )our digestive system. It has become an indefinite series of findings at
) )an horizontal level. More and more data, in a neverending race. But it's
) )all number, measure and weight.
) )Yet, the method of observation applied to thought could lead the
) )investigator to find the actual subject of scientific research. Thinking
) )is used to analyze everything, but it is never turned to itself, except
) )for sterile philosophical speculation. Instead, thought should be
) )experienced in itself, before it determines itself as a form (image or
) )mental thought). But this experience is not speculation, it requires
) )inner work.
)
) Peter F responds:
) This is all pure assertion without an ounce of evidence to support it.
) How
) about supplying some of that evidence.
)
P:
This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
You are not interested, you don't do it. Simple.
) ) ) )It should have realized that
) ) ) )what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
) ) )
) ) ) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
) ) ) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
) )
)
) Peter F:
) Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
P:
Now, you are replying to Dan dugan.
)
) Percedol:
) )If I think 'triangle', my thought is not different from yours.
)
) Peter F:Maybe this is true, maybe it is not. I think it might well
) depend on
) whether you are a mathematician or an architect, or a graphic designer.
) All
) of these carry very different images around triangles.
P:
The concept is the same for everybody. By image I suppose you mean
'representation' that is the result of concept and perception. That may
differ. But the concept is the same.
)
) Percedol continues:
) )But the
) )goal is to experience thinking before it becomes determined for an
) )object of thought. Before it takes any form. Therefore, it requires to
) )exercise the concentration. (This was not possible with any older
) )techniques, because they preceded the human experience of the concept
) )that was first experienced by Greek philosophers. It is quite the
) )opposite of the goal of ancient paths like Yoga, etc. that tried to
) )eliminate the mental substance, not to experience it, to avoid it, not
) )to possess it.) Until we can experience thought before it becomes
) )dialectics, mental thought, mental image, abstract thought.
) )
)
) Peter responds:
) This seems to me to be a worthy exercise if it is possible.
P:
The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the practice.
What evidence
) might you bring that would lead me to believe it is possible. If you say
)
) Steiner, I say poppycock, for all the reasons I have stated numerous
) times.
P:
I would not appeal to the principal of authority.
One need to practice it and see what happens. There is no authority, or
anything to believe, because is a technical thing, an inner practice. An
exercise.
)
) Percedol continues quoting Dan:
) ) )
) ) ) )Now,
) ) ) )people stick to science that as the highest achievement, but it's a
) ) ) )failure. It's the new religion.
) ) )
) ) ) I think I'd call ethics humanity's highest achievement, but science
) ) ) is certainly up there. You misunderstand science if you call it a
) ) ) religion. I don't know of any religion where all knowledge is
) ) ) tentative and people work to falsify fundamental ideas.
) ) )
) )
) )P:
) )Science is an important achievement, and without it there would be no
) )possibility to have a spiritual science. But it would have been
) )important if scientists had experienced the act of consciousness that
) )allows them to understand everything, that allows them or us to accept
) )or refuse any idea or fact. Anything we decide is before all thought.
) )But we do not experience it. And this is what is missing.
) )The whole PoF focuses on this point: the experience of thinking. And
) )this is what RS has been proposing as the central theme of the spiritual
) )science from 1894 (and even before) to 1924 (see the last address) and
) )1925. For over 30 years (starting with PoF) he always pushed people to
) )achieve that. And that is always been the central message of the
) )spiritual science. Often misunderstood even by those who follow it.
) )
)
) Peter F responds:
) And I said before it seems absolutely clear from the available evidence
) that
) he found little or nothing of value through this exercise except to
) build
) for himself a lucrative career as guru.
P:
It is very easy to reject anything that involves to change something
within ourselves. And I don't mean 'to believe in something', but to
change our little selfish, instinctive being by means of exercises. Our
being does not want to change, it is comfortable as is, and therefore is
afraid of anything that tries to change its condition.
You write 'lucrative career'. Was RS rich? What makes you thing that he
made money out of it. It looks like it was a great sacrifice for him to
do all he did. Quite different for many gurus today that have millions
of dollars, cars and more.
Why don't you try some Chopra list?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 05:24:41 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
)Percedol wrote:
)This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
)calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
)You are not interested, you don't do it. Simple.
)
Peter F responds yet again:
Percedol, these statements of yours are demonstrably false. It is exactly
the same nonsense that Joel Wendt put forward, that is that it is a method
without content. This is false. I gave an analogy to this earlier. Let me
try again. Let's say a meathematician writes a computer program that
generates mathematical theorems with their proofs. Let's also say the
mathematician claims the program only generates theorems and proofs which
are correct. I do not have to look at the details of the computer program to
verify or falsify its operation. I only need to check the theorems and
proofs. If I find one that is incorrect, the mathemiticians claim is wrong.
If I check a large number (say one thousand) theorems finding none with
errors, I might start to believe the program actually worked.
I do not have to do the things Steiner said to know that many of the things
he claimed to be true as a result of this method are false, and so I can
discount the method.
)
)
)
) ) ) ) )It should have realized that
) ) ) ) )what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
) ) ) ) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F:
) ) Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
)
)P:
)Now, you are replying to Dan dugan.
)
) )
) ) Percedol:
) ) )If I think 'triangle', my thought is not different from yours.
) )
) ) Peter F:Maybe this is true, maybe it is not. I think it might well
) ) depend on
) ) whether you are a mathematician or an architect, or a graphic designer.
) ) All
) ) of these carry very different images around triangles.
)
)P:
)The concept is the same for everybody. By image I suppose you mean
)'representation' that is the result of concept and perception. That may
)differ. But the concept is the same.
Peter F:
No I don't think the concept is the same. If you mean something like a
Platonic ideal even that is not simple because there are several varieties
of triangle.
)
) )
) ) Percedol continues:
) ) )But the
) ) )goal is to experience thinking before it becomes determined for an
) ) )object of thought. Before it takes any form. Therefore, it requires to
) ) )exercise the concentration. (This was not possible with any older
) ) )techniques, because they preceded the human experience of the concept
) ) )that was first experienced by Greek philosophers. It is quite the
) ) )opposite of the goal of ancient paths like Yoga, etc. that tried to
) ) )eliminate the mental substance, not to experience it, to avoid it, not
) ) )to possess it.) Until we can experience thought before it becomes
) ) )dialectics, mental thought, mental image, abstract thought.
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter responds:
) ) This seems to me to be a worthy exercise if it is possible.
)
)P:
)The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the practice.
)
Peter F:
It is not obvious to me that it is possible. The claimed results suggest
that it is not.
)
)What evidence
) ) might you bring that would lead me to believe it is possible. If you say
) )
) ) Steiner, I say poppycock, for all the reasons I have stated numerous
) ) times.
)
)P:
)I would not appeal to the principal of authority.
)One need to practice it and see what happens. There is no authority, or
)anything to believe, because is a technical thing, an inner practice. An
)exercise.
Peter F:
I have argued that this is incorrect above.
)
) )
) ) Percedol continues quoting Dan:
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) )Now,
) ) ) ) )people stick to science that as the highest achievement, but it's a
) ) ) ) )failure. It's the new religion.
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) I think I'd call ethics humanity's highest achievement, but science
) ) ) ) is certainly up there. You misunderstand science if you call it a
) ) ) ) religion. I don't know of any religion where all knowledge is
) ) ) ) tentative and people work to falsify fundamental ideas.
) ) ) )
) ) )
) ) )P:
) ) )Science is an important achievement, and without it there would be no
) ) )possibility to have a spiritual science. But it would have been
) ) )important if scientists had experienced the act of consciousness that
) ) )allows them to understand everything, that allows them or us to accept
) ) )or refuse any idea or fact. Anything we decide is before all thought.
) ) )But we do not experience it. And this is what is missing.
) ) )The whole PoF focuses on this point: the experience of thinking. And
) ) )this is what RS has been proposing as the central theme of the
)spiritual
) ) )science from 1894 (and even before) to 1924 (see the last address) and
) ) )1925. For over 30 years (starting with PoF) he always pushed people to
) ) )achieve that. And that is always been the central message of the
) ) )spiritual science. Often misunderstood even by those who follow it.
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) And I said before it seems absolutely clear from the available evidence
) ) that
) ) he found little or nothing of value through this exercise except to
) ) build
) ) for himself a lucrative career as guru.
)
)P:
)It is very easy to reject anything that involves to change something
)within ourselves. And I don't mean 'to believe in something', but to
)change our little selfish, instinctive being by means of exercises. Our
)being does not want to change, it is comfortable as is, and therefore is
)afraid of anything that tries to change its condition.
)You write 'lucrative career'. Was RS rich? What makes you thing that he
)made money out of it. It looks like it was a great sacrifice for him to
)do all he did. Quite different for many gurus today that have millions
)of dollars, cars and more.
)Why don't you try some Chopra list?
)
Peter F reponds:
People who know me well would be surprised to hear anyone suggest I was not
open to change. Deepak Chopra is not sonmeone I would look to for valuable
insight.
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:51:26 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
) P:
) This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
) calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
Walden:
There is no evidence. Agreed. Why Spiritual "Science?" Inner action a la
Steiner's religion seems more apt. I am not here to dump on your faith but
I find it curious that you are not calling it a religious movement. Are you
uncomfortable with religion?
P:) You are not interested, you don't do it. Simple.
Walden:
See - there is the problem. When children are in Waldorf schools they are
"doing it" day in day out. If the parents were aware of the "inner action"
and soul work and mysterious ways in which teachers work the magic there
might not be such a problem. So it really is not "simple." But even
adults, it seems, are easily deceived by terms like "spiritual science" or
Anthroposophy as "the knowledge of Man." At least if a person asks me to
attend their local Catholic Church on Sunday I would have a pretty good idea
of what to expect.
If you believe it works for you and helps make sense of life I am happy for
you. But let's call a spade a spade.
-Walden
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point
than the fact than a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
- George Bernard Shaw
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:22:23 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
)Percedol:
)It is very easy to reject anything that involves to change something
)within ourselves. And I don't mean 'to believe in something', but to
)change our little selfish, instinctive being by means of exercises. Our
)being does not want to change, it is comfortable as is, and therefore is
)afraid of anything that tries to change its condition.
)You write 'lucrative career'. Was RS rich? What makes you thing that he
)made money out of it. It looks like it was a great sacrifice for him to
)do all he did. Quite different for many gurus today that have millions
)of dollars, cars and more.
)Why don't you try some Chopra list?
Peter F responds again:
Did Steiner have a day job? Did he wash up in restaurants? Perhaps he was a
bank clerk during the day. As far as I am aware his full time work at least
later in his life was Anthroposophy. He might have not been wealthy in some
absolute sense, but this still might have been a good career for him. Of
course money is not the only attractant. Steiner acheived a certain fame
which was no doubt pleasing. It is not at all clear there was any sacrifice
made by Steiner as a result of this choice of career.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1015
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Astral bodies
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By spectmore yahoo.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
test
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:07:59 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Astral bodies
on 4/9/03 1:51 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
)) (Steiner,"Genesis, Secrets of the Bible Story of Creation", 104-105).
)
) Sharon, may I have the year of the original lectures, the publisher,
) city, and year of publication?
Sharon: (G) That was quite a read! I should quote some more from it (G).
Ten lectures given in Munich 17-26 August 1910.
Anthroposophical Publishing Company, London.
Revised translation 1959.
Translation by Dorothy Lenn with assistance of Owen Barfield from the
revised 3rd edition of the German text--"Die Geheimnisse der biblischen
Schopfungsgeschichte."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 09:03:27 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/10/03 4:22 AM, Peter Farrell at feetapparel hotmail.com wrote:
)
) Peter F responds again:
) Did Steiner have a day job? Did he wash up in restaurants? Perhaps he was a
) bank clerk during the day. As far as I am aware his full time work at least
) later in his life was Anthroposophy. He might have not been wealthy in some
) absolute sense, but this still might have been a good career for him. Of
) course money is not the only attractant. Steiner acheived a certain fame
) which was no doubt pleasing. It is not at all clear there was any sacrifice
) made by Steiner as a result of this choice of career.
) Peter F.
Sharon: I happen to have a letter from him to his dear Marie (G)...I'll try
to find it. He was traveling, and in the letter he complains about his digs
which were not quite up to snuff, he asks Marie to organize an upgrade (G).
The book "Correspondence and Documents 1901-1925" gives the reader a sense
of his life through Marie and Rudolf's letters to each other. Steiner
certainly had his physical and spiritual needs met, traveled a lot, had
prestige and cash to buy rituals from people like Reuss (G). Both
Goetheanums were very costly to build, and expensive to run. He could
afford to practice any of his whims, his "art," (ie: produce mystery plays,
dabble in architecture, give thousands of sermons, copy Eliphas Levi's
apocalyptic seals and get them produced to adorn the walls of one of his
Rosicrucian temples, time to channel Zarathustra, dress up in special
costumes and hand out esoteric advice, perform rituals for followers, carve
an enormous sculpture of Ahriman, Christ and Lucifer, organize his angelic
communication that he called Eurythmy,....I could go on all day (G)), he
even had all sorts of people, mostly ladies, at his beck and call.
Volunteerism from his followers helped keep his costs down. I think he had a
rather nice life, although he did endure some humiliations. I heard that a
parent at the very first Waldorf school overturned desks in a classroom (G).
Some things don't really change do they?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 09:33:57 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/10/03 1:51 AM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
)) P:
)) This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
)) calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
)
) Walden:
Why Spiritual "Science?" Inner action a la
) Steiner's religion seems more apt. I am not here to dump on your faith but
) I find it curious that you are not calling it a religious movement. Are you
) uncomfortable with religion?
Sharon: Here's religion scholar Robert Galbreath:
"Although criticism of what is perceived as narrow-mindedness among
professional scientists is widespread in modern occultism, much of the
occult also expresses itself in scientific or quasi-scientific terminology
and addresses itself to those who have been at least somewhat influenced by
the modern emphasis on scientific analysis...One of the most characteristic
forms of modern occultism is the intellectualized, systematic synthesis
aimed at the educated reader and intended to adapt occult practices and
knowledge, Eastern and Western, to needs of urban, industrial society.
Andrew Jackson Davis, Eliphas Levi, Mme. Blavatsky, Mary Baker Eddy, Papus,
Annie Besant, Aleister Crowley, Charles Leadbeater, Rudolf Steiner, Alice A.
Bailey, and others published massive treatises and systematic investigations
on the occult, most of them containing evidence for the reality of occult
claims and methods for personally verifying them. In this connection, one
source of appeal of these teachings to the educated reader was their claim
that they overcame the split between science and religion." (The Occult in
America, New Historical Perspectives. Edited by Howard Kerr and Charles
Crow. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:33:47 +0000
From: (spectmore yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
mysplum wrote:
(G)), he
) even had all sorts of people, mostly ladies, at his beck and call.
) Volunteerism from his followers helped keep his costs down
I have often wondered how new a pheno. the "Brides of Steiner" is. Do
you have any links for biographical info on this? (Or even *real books*
too)
J.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:36:15 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
walden wrote:
) ) P:
) ) This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
) ) calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
)
) Walden:
) There is no evidence. Agreed. Why Spiritual "Science?" Inner action a
) la
) Steiner's religion seems more apt. I am not here to dump on your faith
) but
) I find it curious that you are not calling it a religious movement. Are
) you
) uncomfortable with religion?
P:
Yes. Religion implies faith and believing. It's over. It survives as an
impulse of the past. Its success show that people are regressing into
religions. It's a regression into the group, instead of progressing
towards the individual.
) P:) You are not interested, you don't do it. Simple.
)
) Walden:
) See - there is the problem. When children are in Waldorf schools they
) are
) "doing it" day in day out. If the parents were aware of the "inner
) action"
) and soul work and mysterious ways in which teachers work the magic there
) might not be such a problem. So it really is not "simple." But even
) adults, it seems, are easily deceived by terms like "spiritual science"
) or
) Anthroposophy as "the knowledge of Man." At least if a person asks me
) to
) attend their local Catholic Church on Sunday I would have a pretty good
) idea
) of what to expect.
)
) If you believe it works for you and helps make sense of life I am happy
) for
) you. But let's call a spade a spade.
P:
Children cannot follow the discipline. It's for adults, not for
children.
It is very difficult to follow it, I am trying not to give up every day.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:41:08 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
) Sharon: Here's religion scholar Robert Galbreath:
(The Occult in
) America, New Historical Perspectives. Edited by Howard Kerr and Charles
) Crow. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986).
P:
Who is this idiot?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:49:51 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Sharon quoted Robert Galbreath:
"Andrew Jackson Davis, Eliphas Levi, Mme. Blavatsky, Mary Baker Eddy,
Papus,
Annie Besant, Aleister Crowley, Charles Leadbeater, Rudolf Steiner,
Alice A.
Bailey, and others published massive treatises and systematic
investigations
on the occult, most of them containing evidence for the reality of
occult
claims and methods for personally verifying them. (snip)(The Occult in
America, New Historical Perspectives. Edited by Howard Kerr and Charles
Crow. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986).
The above passage is ambiguous as to whether the author himself is
claiming straightforwardly "the reality of occult claims and methods for
personally verifying them" or means that the occultists listed were
claiming this. Sharon, is he an "apologist" for occultism or is that
just a badly worded sentence?
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:22:11 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Peter Farrell wrote:
) )Percedol wrote:
) )This is a technique, not a proof. There is no evidence about it, it
) )calls for inner action. It's about doing, not about discussing about it.
) )You are not interested, you don't do it. Simple.
) )
)
) Peter F responds yet again:
) Percedol, these statements of yours are demonstrably false. It is
) exactly
) the same nonsense that Joel Wendt put forward, that is that it is a
) method
) without content.
P:
The content is 'thought'. You could not start without a content. You
have to start from what you have, i.e. thought. You take a thought to
start with.
This is false. I gave an analogy to this earlier. Let me
) try again. Let's say a meathematician writes a computer program that
) generates mathematical theorems with their proofs. Let's also say the
) mathematician claims the program only generates theorems and proofs
) which
) are correct. I do not have to look at the details of the computer
) program to
) verify or falsify its operation. I only need to check the theorems and
) proofs. If I find one that is incorrect, the mathemiticians claim is
) wrong.
) If I check a large number (say one thousand) theorems finding none with
) errors, I might start to believe the program actually worked.
) I do not have to do the things Steiner said to know that many of the
) things
) he claimed to be true as a result of this method are false, and so I can
)
) discount the method.
P:
To write a theorema you already need to think. You use thinking as a
mean to convey mathematics. Here you have to use thinking as an end, not
as a mean. Thought is always used as a tool to express concepts, without
having the experience of the concept in se.
You may say that you don't believe that concepts exist per se.
But then yours would be a philosophical position, not an experience.
) )P:
) )The concept is the same for everybody. By image I suppose you mean
) )'representation' that is the result of concept and perception. That may
) )differ. But the concept is the same.
)
) Peter F:
) No I don't think the concept is the same. If you mean something like a
) Platonic ideal even that is not simple because there are several
) varieties
) of triangle.
P:
You cannot really be so naive. There is a concept of triangle. And of
particular triangles. No matter what size has a determined triangle (60
degrees for each angle) the concept for that triangle is the same for
everybody. The same for the concept of a general triangle (sum of angles
is 180 degrees, three angles).
) )P:
) )The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the practice.
) )
)
) Peter F:
) It is not obvious to me that it is possible. The claimed results suggest
)
) that it is not.
P:
The expected result is the experience of concept in se. To reply you
have to think. Thinking is your immediate relationship with the world.
But you don't know what is thought. You use it for everything, to accept
or deny anything, but without knowing the movement that allows you to
accept or deny anything. Since thought is the immediate relationship
with the world the most important act would be to experience this
immediate act of consciousness. This was missed by scientists. So far.
They were to busy to use thought to analyze everything except thought
itself in itself.
)
) )
) ) )
) )Why don't you try some Chopra list?
) )
)
) Peter F reponds:
) People who know me well would be surprised to hear anyone suggest I was
) not
) open to change.
P:
Then what is your path/method to change yourself? (And what do expect to
change).
Deepak Chopra is not sonmeone I would look to for valuable
) insight.
P:
I hope so.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:17:19 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: test
G'day all,
Isent a message a while ago and it doesn't seem to have arrived. I
apologise for the waste of bandwidth but resending would be a larger waste.
See you, Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:59:36 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Since my test message arrived and my response to this did not I will resend.
)Percedol:
)The content is 'thought'. You could not start without a content. You
)have to start from what you have, i.e. thought. You take a thought to
)start with.
)
Peter F responds:
This is not the only content. Other content includes the teaching method,
the agricultural method, and the medical method. All of these can be judged
independently of the method which produced them.
)Percedol:
)To write a theorema you already need to think. You use thinking as a
)mean to convey mathematics. Here you have to use thinking as an end, not
)as a mean. Thought is always used as a tool to express concepts, without
)having the experience of the concept in se.
)You may say that you don't believe that concepts exist per se.
)But then yours would be a philosophical position, not an experience.
Peter F responds:
I do not have to think to produce a theorem and a proof. This can be an
entirely mechanical process based on a formalism which can be found in
Whitehead and Russel and in a lot of mathematical texts although the most
accessible version is probably in Hofstatder's "Godel Escher and Bach". This
completely formal method has been programmed into computers which have then
produced theorems and proofs. An electronic computer is not necessary. A
purely mechanical device could do this although it would probably be
prohibitively expensive to construct.
Experience is not necessarily a reliable means to find truth. Plenty of
people recall experiences which are not real.
)Percedol:
)You cannot really be so naive. There is a concept of triangle. And of
)particular triangles. No matter what size has a determined triangle (60
)degrees for each angle) the concept for that triangle is the same for
)everybody. The same for the concept of a general triangle (sum of angles
)is 180 degrees, three angles).
)
Peter F responds:
I can be so naive. Mathematicians have a much broader concept of a triangle
than that which you have described. For example, you have limited the
concept to a flat Euclidean space. A triangle on the surface of a sphere has
angles whose sum is greater than 180 degrees. In other spaces the opposite
happens.
)
) ) )P:
) ) )The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the practice.
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F:
) ) It is not obvious to me that it is possible. The claimed results suggest
) )
) ) that it is not.
)
)P:
)The expected result is the experience of concept in se. To reply you
)have to think. Thinking is your immediate relationship with the world.
)But you don't know what is thought. You use it for everything, to accept
)or deny anything, but without knowing the movement that allows you to
)accept or deny anything. Since thought is the immediate relationship
)with the world the most important act would be to experience this
)immediate act of consciousness. This was missed by scientists. So far.
)They were to busy to use thought to analyze everything except thought
)itself in itself.
)
Peter F responds:
There is no independent evidence to suggest that the method you speak of
leads to any understanding which is better than that obtained from
mainstream science. I assert to the contrary that there is evidence that
mainstream science has done better than the method you propose.
)Percedol:
)Then what is your path/method to change yourself? (And what do expect to
)change).
)
)
Peter F reponds:
I do not limit myself to any single path or method.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 03:31:12 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Peter Farrell wrote:
) Since my test message arrived and my response to this did not I will
) resend.
)
) )Percedol:
) )The content is 'thought'. You could not start without a content. You
) )have to start from what you have, i.e. thought. You take a thought to
) )start with.
) )
) Peter F responds:
) This is not the only content. Other content includes the teaching
) method,
) the agricultural method, and the medical method. All of these can be
) judged
) independently of the method which produced them.
P:
The inner method of the spiritual science has thought at its center.
Teaching, agriculture, medicine require thinking. They are not immediate
acts of consciousness. They are all mediated by thought. Thought
precedes them. And judgement is already thinking about something, like
this or that method.
) )Percedol:
) )To write a theorema you already need to think. You use thinking as a
) )mean to convey mathematics. Here you have to use thinking as an end, not
) )as a mean. Thought is always used as a tool to express concepts, without
) )having the experience of the concept in se.
) )You may say that you don't believe that concepts exist per se.
) )But then yours would be a philosophical position, not an experience.
)
) Peter F responds:
) I do not have to think to produce a theorem and a proof.
P:
Because someone else did it by thinking. And you have to think about it
in order to understanding it.
This can be an
) entirely mechanical process based on a formalism which can be found in
) Whitehead and Russel and in a lot of mathematical texts although the
) most
) accessible version is probably in Hofstatder's "Godel Escher and Bach".
) This
) completely formal method has been programmed into computers which have
) then
) produced theorems and proofs.
P:
To programme a computer one has to think first.
An electronic computer is not necessary. A
) purely mechanical device could do this although it would probably be
) prohibitively expensive to construct.
P:
A mechanical device is the product of someone's thinking. You cannot
build a mechanical device without thinking.
) Experience is not necessarily a reliable means to find truth. Plenty of
) people recall experiences which are not real.
P:
But if you experience yourself drinking a glass of water you know it's
real, while unreal experiences leave you thirsty.
)
) )Percedol:
) )You cannot really be so naive. There is a concept of triangle. And of
) )particular triangles. No matter what size has a determined triangle (60
) )degrees for each angle) the concept for that triangle is the same for
) )everybody. The same for the concept of a general triangle (sum of angles
) )is 180 degrees, three angles).
) )
)
) Peter F responds:
) I can be so naive. Mathematicians have a much broader concept of a
) triangle
) than that which you have described. For example, you have limited the
) concept to a flat Euclidean space. A triangle on the surface of a sphere
) has
) angles whose sum is greater than 180 degrees. In other spaces the
) opposite
) happens.
P:
Then you ahve to apply a different concept, because a triangle o a
sphere is not a triangle in Euclidean geometry. But again once you get
the concept it's the same for everybody.
) )
) ) ) )P:
) ) ) )The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the practice.
) ) ) )
) ) )
) ) ) Peter F:
) ) ) It is not obvious to me that it is possible. The claimed results suggest
) ) )
) ) ) that it is not.
) )
) )P:
) )The expected result is the experience of concept in se. To reply you
) )have to think. Thinking is your immediate relationship with the world.
) )But you don't know what is thought. You use it for everything, to accept
) )or deny anything, but without knowing the movement that allows you to
) )accept or deny anything. Since thought is the immediate relationship
) )with the world the most important act would be to experience this
) )immediate act of consciousness. This was missed by scientists. So far.
) )They were to busy to use thought to analyze everything except thought
) )itself in itself.
) )
)
) Peter F responds:
) There is no independent evidence to suggest that the method you speak of
)
) leads to any understanding which is better than that obtained from
) mainstream science. I assert to the contrary that there is evidence that
)
) mainstream science has done better than the method you propose.
P:
Which is again a statement done using your thinking that decides whether
to accept or refuse what I say. And still you don't know thinking.
)
) )Percedol:
) )Then what is your path/method to change yourself? (And what do expect to
) )change).
) )
) )
)
) Peter F reponds:
) I do not limit myself to any single path or method.
P:
Either you follow more paths/methods or you don't do anything at all.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 04:30:14 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
) ) )
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) This is not the only content. Other content includes the teaching
) ) method,
) ) the agricultural method, and the medical method. All of these can be
) ) judged
) ) independently of the method which produced them.
)
)Percedol:
)The inner method of the spiritual science has thought at its center.
)Teaching, agriculture, medicine require thinking. They are not immediate
)acts of consciousness. They are all mediated by thought. Thought
)precedes them. And judgement is already thinking about something, like
)this or that method.
Peter F responds:
So what? I did not argue that these were equal or more central, nor that
they required thinking or not. I only argued that they were content.
)
)
) ) )Percedol:
) ) )To write a theorema you already need to think. You use thinking as a
) ) )mean to convey mathematics. Here you have to use thinking as an end,
)not
) ) )as a mean. Thought is always used as a tool to express concepts,
)without
) ) )having the experience of the concept in se.
) ) )You may say that you don't believe that concepts exist per se.
) ) )But then yours would be a philosophical position, not an experience.
) )
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) I do not have to think to produce a theorem and a proof.
)
)Percedol:
)Because someone else did it by thinking. And you have to think about it
)in order to understanding it.
Peter F responds:
So what? You said I couldn't write a theorem without thinking about the the
theorem, but I can cause a theorem to be written without thinking about it.
I do have to think to verify that I have a proof theorem pair.
)
)This can be an
) ) entirely mechanical process based on a formalism which can be found in
) ) Whitehead and Russel and in a lot of mathematical texts although the
) ) most
) ) accessible version is probably in Hofstatder's "Godel Escher and Bach".
) ) This
) ) completely formal method has been programmed into computers which have
) ) then
) ) produced theorems and proofs.
)
)Percedol:
)To programme a computer one has to think first.
Peter F. responds:
Yes. One has to think about the program. But one does not have to understand
the algorithm or its consqequences if it is sufficiently clearly spelled
out.
)
)
) An electronic computer is not necessary. A
) ) purely mechanical device could do this although it would probably be
) ) prohibitively expensive to construct.
)
)P:
)A mechanical device is the product of someone's thinking. You cannot
)build a mechanical device without thinking.
)
Peter F responds:
My initial answer to this is that I agree with you, but one might cause a
mechanical object to be constructed without thinking about that mechanical
object through appropriate computer control and automation.
)
) ) Experience is not necessarily a reliable means to find truth. Plenty of
) ) people recall experiences which are not real.
)
)
)Percedol:
)But if you experience yourself drinking a glass of water you know it's
)real, while unreal experiences leave you thirsty.
)
Peter F responds:
This is too simplistic an example. Even so, people's experience of thirst
has been turned off via methods such as hypnosis.
)
) )
) ) )Percedol:
) ) )You cannot really be so naive. There is a concept of triangle. And of
) ) )particular triangles. No matter what size has a determined triangle (60
) ) )degrees for each angle) the concept for that triangle is the same for
) ) )everybody. The same for the concept of a general triangle (sum of
)angles
) ) )is 180 degrees, three angles).
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) I can be so naive. Mathematicians have a much broader concept of a
) ) triangle
) ) than that which you have described. For example, you have limited the
) ) concept to a flat Euclidean space. A triangle on the surface of a sphere
) ) has
) ) angles whose sum is greater than 180 degrees. In other spaces the
) ) opposite
) ) happens.
)
)Percedol:
)Then you ahve to apply a different concept, because a triangle o a
)sphere is not a triangle in Euclidean geometry. But again once you get
)the concept it's the same for everybody.
)
Peter F responds:
The point I was making is that you thought you already had a sufficiently
simple concept and you were wrong. Accepting the complication I introduced
doesn't help because it can just keep going. The generalisations of
triangles in geometry and topolgy are diverse.How about the generalisation
of triangles in higher dimensioned space. And I still say that graphic
designers and architects carry different concepts as do children. And then
there are purely abstract versions realised in electronic circuits. An
example of this might be the two halves of a Wheatstone bridge.
) ) )
) ) ) ) )P:
) ) ) ) )The exercise is obviously possible. The result depends on the
)practice.
) ) ) ) )
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) Peter F:
) ) ) ) It is not obvious to me that it is possible. The claimed results
)suggest
) ) ) )
) ) ) ) that it is not.
) ) )
) ) )P:
) ) )The expected result is the experience of concept in se. To reply you
) ) )have to think. Thinking is your immediate relationship with the world.
) ) )But you don't know what is thought. You use it for everything, to
)accept
) ) )or deny anything, but without knowing the movement that allows you to
) ) )accept or deny anything. Since thought is the immediate relationship
) ) )with the world the most important act would be to experience this
) ) )immediate act of consciousness. This was missed by scientists. So far.
) ) )They were to busy to use thought to analyze everything except thought
) ) )itself in itself.
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) There is no independent evidence to suggest that the method you speak of
) )
) ) leads to any understanding which is better than that obtained from
) ) mainstream science. I assert to the contrary that there is evidence that
) )
) ) mainstream science has done better than the method you propose.
)
)P:
)Which is again a statement done using your thinking that decides whether
)to accept or refuse what I say. And still you don't know thinking.
)
Peter reponds:
It is just as easy for me to say that neither do you know thinking. I see no
evidence that you know any more about thinking than anyone else and some
evidence that you know less. In particular it seems to me that you have
swallowed Steiner's propoganda hook line and sinker, and that despite your
claims to the contrary you have no personal verification of this worth
anything. I am not the one here making outlandish claims.
)
) )
) ) )Percedol:
) ) )Then what is your path/method to change yourself? (And what do expect
)to
) ) )change).
) ) )
) ) )
) )
) ) Peter F reponds:
) ) I do not limit myself to any single path or method.
)
)P:
)Either you follow more paths/methods or you don't do anything at all.
Peter F reponds:
I change.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1016
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Thoughts /was Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 12:10:16 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/10/03 11:33 AM, spectmore yahoo.com at spectmore yahoo.com wrote:
) mysplum wrote:
) (G)), he
)) even had all sorts of people, mostly ladies, at his beck and call.
)) Volunteerism from his followers helped keep his costs down
)
) I have often wondered how new a pheno. the "Brides of Steiner" is. Do
) you have any links for biographical info on this? (Or even *real books*
) too)
Sharon: Definitely not new (g). There actually is a book about the brides of
Steiner, but I don't think it's available in English. It caused a bit of a
stir in the Anthro. community because it mentioned that Steiner might have
used cocaine.
http://www.athena-verlag.de/025.htm
Here is machine translation of the page:
Juliane Weibring
Women(Wives) around Rudolf Steiner
In the centre of his(its) life - in the shade of his(its) work
( Woman's mode of thought, Vol. 1)
1. Edition in 1997, 196 sides(pages), format 21 x 13,8 cm
ISBN 3-932740-02-5, Broschur, 15,00 EUR
Ord. no 02-5
The author wants to contribute from patriarchatskritischer
perspective to the demythologization of the sacrosanct founder's figure of
the anthroposophy, Rudolf Steiner. It is about the proof that women(wives)
were involved authoritatively in the reason of the anthroposophic movement.
And much more centrally and more largely, than the myth of Steiner as the "
big creator "and" world renovator ? it to us believe wants to do. The
present book offers a cut(part) of Steiners to feminine surrounding field
and presents the anthroposophy to the non-insiders among other things point
of view as that of the master-centred stone cult. However, it is also
directed at open, unfossilized anthroposophists, whale village educationists
and parents who are ready for the critical discussion with a freer woman's
spirit than from " Meistern " directed.
? Indeed, such a demythologization was late, and she succeeds in
convincing way. [...] arises a patriarchal general view under whose
impression one can only agree to the author if she states: nevertheless, )Es
speaks also for himself that anthroposophists are not interested in feminism
and feminists to themselves not for the anthroposophy. However, both
sides(pages) should be interested in this book. ?
Friedwart m. Herd, taz, 9/4/98
? An exciting and important book - not only for this which are
interested in anthroposophy and whale village education, but also for
women(wives) to whom the history(story) of own gender is a request. ?
Christa Mulack, on 99, 3/1998
Don't miss this! A wonderful paper that I think you'll enjoy entitled "Work
on What Has Been Spoiled" *A MUST READ* for anyone interested in Steiner:
http://members.aol.com/kitmac/workon.htm
This paper talks about the Alice Sprengel scandal. Alice was in love with
Steiner who told her that they had been Enkidu and Gilgamesh in a past life.
He also made her "keeper of the seals", so Alice thought she had a future
with Rudolf. He had to marry Marie in order to get rid of her, and Alice
then turned her affections to Reuss out of spite. There is marvelous reading
on all this, great fun, search "Alice Sprengel", but read the link above
first, so you get the picture (G).
Steiner left his first wife Anna Eunicke, and moved into the Theosophical
Headquarters where his devoted disciple Marie von Sievers lived (G). Years
later he married her to get Alice off his back. Another woman of interest to
me is Edith Marion, who left the magical order of the Golden Dawn in
England, to help Steiner in Dornach with developing his "art." She
contributed quite a bit to Eurythmy and helped Steiner carve the statue of
Ahriman, Lucifer and Christ. Elizabeth Vreede is another important disciple,
the list, as you can imagine, is long.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:15:37 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Thoughts /was Theosophy of the R
on 4/11/03 11:36 AM, mysplum at mysplum earthlink.net wrote:
)
) I'll try to dig up some of Steiner's thoughtform teachings, (just as quaint)
) and post in the next few days. I remember him saying that you can send
) thoughts out to act as a shield of protection...
Sharon: Here we go, found one quote from 1907. Here Steiner describes the
appearance of a loving thought and its cosmic assignment:
Steiner: "When you send out a loving thought to someone the seer perceives a
form shaped like a sort of flower-calyx, playing around his etheric and
astral bodies, thereby contributing something to his vitality and happiness.
On the other hand a thought of hatred bores its way into the etheric and
astral bodies like a wounding arrow...
Every event that happens causes an effect in the higher worlds. If someone
relates this event truly, an astral form rays out from the teller, unites
with the form emanating from the event itself, and both are strengthened.
These strengthened forms help to make our spiritual world richer and more
full of content - which is necessary if humanity is to make progress. But if
the event is related untruthfully, in a way that does not coincide with the
facts, then the thought-form of the teller comes up against the thought-form
that has proceeded from the event; the two thoughtforms collide, causing
mutual destruction. These destructive "explosions" caused by lies work on
the body like a tumour which destroys the organism. Thus do lies kill the
astral forms which have arisen and must arise, and in this way they obstruct
or paralyse a part of evolution. Everyone who tells the truth actually
promotes the evolution of humanity and everyone who lies, obstructs it?
(Steiner, ?Theosophy of the Rosicrucian? Rudolf Steiner press, London pp.
60-61).
Sharon: Annie Besant said that "every man who thinks along high lines is
doing missionary work, even though he may be entirely unconscious of it" (G)
(Thoughtforms, p. 24).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:00:46 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/10/03 1:41 PM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
)) Sharon: Here's religion scholar Robert Galbreath:
) (The Occult in
)) America, New Historical Perspectives. Edited by Howard Kerr and Charles
)) Crow. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986).
)
) P:
) Who is this idiot?
Sharon: (Clicking her tonge). Galbreath is not an idiot Percedol, for crying
in a bucket! He is a very knowledgeable man who happens to know a lot about
occultism. He wrote a very informative essay entitled "Explaining Modern
Occultism" which was published in the book "The Occult in America: New
Historical Perspectives." You are just mad because he put Steiner and
Alister Crowley in the same sentence. Why don't you read the book and learn
something about your religion?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 11:36:08 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/10/03 12:36 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
))))) It should have realized that
))))) what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
))))
Dan:
)))) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
)))) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
)))
))
)) Peter F:
)) Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
Sharon: Let me help clear this up! (G) I'll cut to the quick. Steiner taught
that thoughts actually exist as entities and that clairvoyants can see them.
When I first started my Anthro. studies I kept coming across references to a
book entitled "Thoughtforms" which was published by Annie Besant and Charles
Leadbeater in 1901, a year before Steiner joined them. I tracked down a copy
of this book and quite frankly couldn't believe my eyes!!! I became soooo
disappointed in Besant because I actually admire some of her pre-Theosophy
writings, I liked some of what she wrote before she wigged out. Charles and
Annie claimed to see thoughts, and hired an artist to paint their
descriptions of them. The book is a compilation of their thoughts made
visible for the rest of us who can't see them, in full color, with
accompanying explanations. You have to see the book to believe it! Steiner
got a hold of these ideas and also preached similar sermons about thoughts.
The "abstractions" depicted in the book resemble some Waldorf wet-on-wet
paintings (blobs) and obviously were an aesthetic influence on Steiner.
Here's a little sample from the howler (G). (First I'll describe an
illustration before giving you its explanation...) Next to page 56, you see
a blobby looking thing with 4 hook-like protrusions on the right side of it.
It is a brownish, reddish, pinky color and is very lumpy and bumpy. Now the
explanation of what it is, written by Annie:
"Greed for Drink. --...This specimen was taken from the astral body of a man
just as he entered at the door of a drinking-shop; the expectation of and
keen desire for the liquor which he was about to absorb showed itself in the
projection in front of him of this very unpleasant appearance. Once more the
hooked protrusions show the craving, while the colour and coarse mottled
texture show the low and sensual nature of the appetite. Sexual desires
frequently show themselves in an exactly similar manner. Men who give birth
to forms such as this are as yet but little removed from the animal; as they
rise in the scale of evolution the place of this form will gradually be
taken by something resembling that shown in Fig. 13, and very slowly, as
development advances, that in turn will pass through the stages indicated in
Figs. 9 and 8,... [Sharon: It goes on like this for a while, until]... we
arrive at the splendid results shown in Figs. 11 and 10" (p. 57).
Sharon: The book is full of this sort of thing, it's absolutely priceless
and I splurged so that I could actually own this 7th wonder of the world
(G). One of my favorites is a Freemason's beautiful devotional thought
which looks like a pentagram and another highlight, which caused me tears of
laughter, is a very colorful, hat-like thingy which is the thought of a
Theosophist at a funeral, this thought of "one who knows" is juxtaposed with
a rather dismal gray thingy, (resembling the greed thoughtform described
above) belonging to a non-Theosophist at the same funeral...
Annie says on p. 37: "With our curiously inverted conceptions of reality it
is hard for us to understand that these mental images actually exist, and
are so entirely objective that they may readily be seen by the clairvoyant,
and can even be rearranged by some one other than their creator. Some
novelists have been dimly aware of such a process, and have testified that
their characters when once created developed a will of their own, and
insisted on carrying the plot of the story along lines quite different from
those originally intended by the author. This has actually happened,
sometimes because the thought-forms were ensouled by playful nature-spirits,
or more often because some 'dead' novelist, watching on the astral plane the
development of the plan of his fellow-author, thought that he could improve
upon it, and chose this method of putting forward his suggestions."
(Thoughtforms, Bessant & Leadbeater, Theosophical Publishing House LTD,
London. 1901).
I'll try to dig up some of Steiner's thoughtform teachings, (just as quaint)
and post in the next few days. I remember him saying that you can send
thoughts out to act as a shield of protection...
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 04:55:16 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
mysplum wrote:
) Sharon: (Clicking her tonge). Galbreath is not an idiot Percedol, for
) crying
) in a bucket! He is a very knowledgeable man who happens to know a lot
) about
) occultism. He wrote a very informative essay entitled "Explaining Modern
) Occultism" which was published in the book "The Occult in America: New
) Historical Perspectives." You are just mad because he put Steiner and
) Alister Crowley in the same sentence. Why don't you read the book and
) learn
) something about your religion?
)
P:
I have read Crowley, also his novel Moonchild, and a bio on him and
other books by other OTO members. I don't recall that he tried to
present his method as scientific. He mixed yoga, golden dawn, tantrism,
kabbalah, and more. Nothing new.
He was expelled from many countries. Bad guy.
The sentence is badly written and unclear in its meaning.
What you posted makes it clear that he did not get much. After all he is
an outsider.
My religion is Catholicism (whether I like it or not). I don't think I
can learn from him what Catholicism is.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 05:03:19 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
P:
It would be nice if you did not go off-topic or if you changed the
subject when you do it.
What you are presenting here is totally unrelated with the subject I am
discussing with Peter F.
If you disagree, you haven't understood a thing of what I wrote.
mysplum wrote:
) on 4/10/03 12:36 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
) )
) ))))) It should have realized that
) ))))) what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
) ))))
) Dan:
) )))) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
) )))) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
) )))
) ))
) )) Peter F:
) )) Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
)
) Sharon: Let me help clear this up! (G) I'll cut to the quick. Steiner
) taught
) that thoughts actually exist as entities and that clairvoyants can see
) them.
) When I first started my Anthro. studies I kept coming across references
) to a
) book entitled "Thoughtforms" which was published by Annie Besant and
) Charles
) Leadbeater in 1901, a year before Steiner joined them. I tracked down a
) copy
) of this book and quite frankly couldn't believe my eyes!!! I became
) soooo
) disappointed in Besant because I actually admire some of her
) pre-Theosophy
) writings, I liked some of what she wrote before she wigged out. Charles
) and
) Annie claimed to see thoughts, and hired an artist to paint their
) descriptions of them. The book is a compilation of their thoughts made
) visible for the rest of us who can't see them, in full color, with
) accompanying explanations. You have to see the book to believe it!
) Steiner
) got a hold of these ideas and also preached similar sermons about
) thoughts.
) The "abstractions" depicted in the book resemble some Waldorf wet-on-wet
) paintings (blobs) and obviously were an aesthetic influence on Steiner.
) Here's a little sample from the howler (G). (First I'll describe an
) illustration before giving you its explanation...) Next to page 56, you
) see
) a blobby looking thing with 4 hook-like protrusions on the right side of
) it.
) It is a brownish, reddish, pinky color and is very lumpy and bumpy. Now
) the
) explanation of what it is, written by Annie:
)
) "Greed for Drink. --...This specimen was taken from the astral body of a
) man
) just as he entered at the door of a drinking-shop; the expectation of
) and
) keen desire for the liquor which he was about to absorb showed itself in
) the
) projection in front of him of this very unpleasant appearance. Once more
) the
) hooked protrusions show the craving, while the colour and coarse mottled
) texture show the low and sensual nature of the appetite. Sexual desires
) frequently show themselves in an exactly similar manner. Men who give
) birth
) to forms such as this are as yet but little removed from the animal; as
) they
) rise in the scale of evolution the place of this form will gradually be
) taken by something resembling that shown in Fig. 13, and very slowly, as
) development advances, that in turn will pass through the stages
) indicated in
) Figs. 9 and 8,... [Sharon: It goes on like this for a while, until]...
) we
) arrive at the splendid results shown in Figs. 11 and 10" (p. 57).
)
) Sharon: The book is full of this sort of thing, it's absolutely
) priceless
) and I splurged so that I could actually own this 7th wonder of the world
) (G). One of my favorites is a Freemason's beautiful devotional thought
) which looks like a pentagram and another highlight, which caused me
) tears of
) laughter, is a very colorful, hat-like thingy which is the thought of a
) Theosophist at a funeral, this thought of "one who knows" is juxtaposed
) with
) a rather dismal gray thingy, (resembling the greed thoughtform described
) above) belonging to a non-Theosophist at the same funeral...
)
) Annie says on p. 37: "With our curiously inverted conceptions of reality
) it
) is hard for us to understand that these mental images actually exist,
) and
) are so entirely objective that they may readily be seen by the
) clairvoyant,
) and can even be rearranged by some one other than their creator. Some
) novelists have been dimly aware of such a process, and have testified
) that
) their characters when once created developed a will of their own, and
) insisted on carrying the plot of the story along lines quite different
) from
) those originally intended by the author. This has actually happened,
) sometimes because the thought-forms were ensouled by playful
) nature-spirits,
) or more often because some 'dead' novelist, watching on the astral plane
) the
) development of the plan of his fellow-author, thought that he could
) improve
) upon it, and chose this method of putting forward his suggestions."
) (Thoughtforms, Bessant & Leadbeater, Theosophical Publishing House LTD,
) London. 1901).
)
) I'll try to dig up some of Steiner's thoughtform teachings, (just as
) quaint)
) and post in the next few days. I remember him saying that you can send
) thoughts out to act as a shield of protection...
)
)
)
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1017
-- Topica Digest --
Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
By mysplum earthlink.net
Theosophy of the Rosicrucian
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 11:03:35 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
Sharon: I already sent this info. which was returned to me. Sorry if you did
actually receive this....
on 4/10/03 12:36 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote that science:
))))should have realized that
))))) what it missed it's most important element, which is thinking.
Dan:
)))) This makes sense only if you know that "thinking" in Anthroposophy
)))) doesn't mean the same thing as it does in ordinary language.
)) Peter F:
)) Well tell me what it does mean. Then it might make sense to me.
Sharon: Let me help clear this up! (G) I'll cut to the quick. Steiner taught
that thoughts actually exist as entities and that clairvoyants can see them.
When I first started my Anthro. studies I kept coming across references to a
book entitled "Thoughtforms" which was published by Annie Besant and Charles
Leadbeater in 1901, a year before Steiner joined them. I tracked down a copy
of this book and quite frankly couldn't believe my eyes!!! I became soooo
disappointed in Besant because I actually admire some of her pre-Theosophy
writings, I liked some of what she wrote before she wigged out. Charles and
Annie claimed to see thoughts, and hired an artist to paint their
descriptions of them. The book is a compilation of thoughts made
visible for the rest of us who can't see them, in full color, with
accompanying explanations. You have to see the book to believe it! Steiner
got a hold of these ideas and also preached similar sermons about thoughts.
(See Steiner quote below). The "abstractions" depicted in the book resemble
some Waldorf wet-on-wet paintings (blobs) and obviously were an aesthetic
influence on Steiner.
Here's a little sample from the howler "Thoughtforms" (G). (First I'll
describe an illustration before giving you its explanation...) Next to page
56, you see a blobby looking thing with 4 hook-like protrusions on the right
side of it. It is a brownish, reddish, pinky color and is very lumpy and
bumpy. Now the explanation of what it is, written by Annie:
"Greed for Drink. --...This specimen was taken from the astral body of a man
just as he entered at the door of a drinking-shop; the expectation of and
keen desire for the liquor which he was about to absorb showed itself in the
projection in front of him of this very unpleasant appearance. Once more the
hooked protrusions show the craving, while the colour and coarse mottled
texture show the low and sensual nature of the appetite. Sexual desires
frequently show themselves in an exactly similar manner. Men who give birth
to forms such as this are as yet but little removed from the animal; as they
rise in the scale of evolution the place of this form will gradually be
taken by something resembling that shown in Fig. 13, and very slowly, as
development advances, that in turn will pass through the stages indicated in
Figs. 9 and 8,... [Sharon: It goes on like this for a while, until]... we
arrive at the splendid results shown in Figs. 11 and 10" (p. 57).
Sharon: The book is full of this sort of thing, it's absolutely priceless
and I splurged so that I could actually own this 7th wonder of the world
(G). One of my favorite "thoughts" is a Freemason's beautiful devotional
thought which looks like a pentagram and another highlight, which caused me
tears of laughter, is a very colorful, hat-like thingy which is the thought
of a Theosophist at a funeral, this thought of "one who knows" is juxtaposed
with a rather dismal gray thingy, (resembling the greed-for-drink
thoughtform described above) belonging to a non-Theosophist who was at the
same funeral...(LOL)
Annie says on p. 37: "With our curiously inverted conceptions of reality it
is hard for us to understand that these mental images actually exist, and
are so entirely objective that they may readily be seen by the clairvoyant,
and can even be rearranged by some one other than their creator. Some
novelists have been dimly aware of such a process, and have testified that
their characters when once created developed a will of their own, and
insisted on carrying the plot of the story along lines quite different from
those originally intended by the author. This has actually happened,
sometimes because the thought-forms were ensouled by playful nature-spirits,
or more often because some 'dead' novelist, watching on the astral plane the
development of the plan of his fellow-author, thought that he could improve
upon it, and chose this method of putting forward his suggestions."
(Thoughtforms, Bessant & Leadbeater, Theosophical Publishing House LTD,
London. 1901).
Sharon: Here's a quote from Steiner, 1907. He describes the
appearance of a loving thought which looks like a flower-calyx and its
cosmic assignment:
Steiner: "When you send out a loving thought to someone the seer perceives a
form shaped like a sort of flower-calyx, playing around his etheric and
astral bodies, thereby contributing something to his vitality and
happiness..
On the other hand a thought of hatred bores its way into the etheric and
astral bodies like a wounding arrow...
Every event that happens causes an effect in the higher worlds. If someone
relates this event truly, an astral form rays out from the teller, unites
with the form emanating from the event itself, and both are strengthened.
These strengthened forms help to make our spiritual world richer and more
full of content - which is necessary if humanity is to make progress. But if
the event is related untruthfully, in a way that does not coincide with the
facts, then the thought-form of the teller comes up against the thought-form
that has proceeded from the event; the two thoughtforms collide, causing
mutual destruction. These destructive "explosions" caused by lies work on
the body like a tumour which destroys the organism. Thus do lies kill the
astral forms which have arisen and must arise, and in this way they obstruct
or paralyse a part of evolution. Everyone who tells the truth actually
promotes the evolution of humanity and everyone who lies, obstructs it?
(Steiner, ?Theosophy of the Rosicrucian? Rudolf Steiner press, London pp.
60-61).
Sharon: Annie Besant said that "every man who thinks along high lines is
doing missionary work, even though he may be entirely unconscious of it" (G)
(Thoughtforms, p. 24).
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 11:18:45 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Theosophy of the Rosicrucian
Sharon: This message in part was returned as undelivered, sorry if this
re-send is redundant.
on 4/10/03 1:41 PM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
)) Sharon: Here's religion scholar Robert Galbreath:
) (The Occult in
)) America, New Historical Perspectives. Edited by Howard Kerr and Charles
)) Crow. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986).
)
) P:
) Who is this idiot?
Sharon: (Clicking her tongue). Galbreath is not an idiot Percedol, for
crying in a bucket! You'll call someone an idiot when you don't even know
anything about him? He is a very knowledgeable man who happens to know a lot
about modern occultism. He wrote a very informative essay entitled
"Explaining Modern Occultism" which was published in the book "The Occult in
America: New Historical Perspectives." You are just mad because he put
Steiner and Alister Crowley in the same sentence. Why don't you read the
book and learn something about your religion?
PS: What he says about occultism matches some of Waldorf-critics' findings.
Steiner mocked and put down science often, yet he and his followers felt the
need to present their religion as science. They need to verify Anthro. as
scientific when in fact, science is not relevant to the Anthro. reality.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 11:26:30 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/12/03 1:03 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
) P:
) It would be nice if you did not go off-topic or if you changed the
) subject when you do it.
) What you are presenting here is totally unrelated with the subject I am
) discussing with Peter F.
) If you disagree, you haven't understood a thing of what I wrote.
Sharon: Nonsense! I'm not off topic in the least. You are discussing
"thinking", I am shedding light on "thoughts" from an occult perspective.
Steiner, Besant, Leadbeater et. al believed that thoughts exist as entities
and that clairvoyants can see them. Steiner said a loving thought looks like
a flower calyx. I have understood exactly what you are discussing and more!!
I am merely providing a few details about "thinking" from an
Anthro/Theosophical perspective.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 12:05:09 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/12/03 12:55 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
) P:
) I have read Crowley, also his novel Moonchild, and a bio on him and
) other books by other OTO members. I don't recall that he tried to
) present his method as scientific. He mixed yoga, golden dawn, tantrism,
) kabbalah, and more. Nothing new.
) He was expelled from many countries. Bad guy.
Sharon: He did. It's debatable that he was a "bad guy". Some scholars feel
he was treated unfairly. Some say he was just a modern Gnostic. I think
people didn't like him because he was "over the top" and challenged the
status quo. He also was very free about sex.
)
) The sentence is badly written and unclear in its meaning.
Sharon: Perhaps I should quote more from the essay, my apologies. I think
it's a very good essay that raises a number of good questions still to be
answered by historians about occultism. I've tried to find the essay on line
to post but haven't had any luck. I recommend you find the book.
)
) What you posted makes it clear that he did not get much. After all he is
) an outsider.
Sharon: Who knows what he is. Outsiders often have very accurate
perspectives. Read the essay before you make such pronouncements. I'll try
to quote more, I think you'd agree with a lot of what he says.
)
) My religion is Catholicism (whether I like it or not). I don't think I
) can learn from him what Catholicism is.
Sharon: What do you mean "whether you like it or not?" Are you saying you
were christened and now you are stuck? You could try to get excommunicated
couldn't you? I know an ex-Catholic Freethinker who did this to free
himself. (I also know about some Jews who sued the Mormon church to stop
them baptizing dead holocaust victims). Galbreath knows a lot about
occultism, not sure if he's well read in Catholicism. I bet he probably
knows a thing or two.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 13:17:26 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol:
)My religion is Catholicism (whether I like it or not). I don't think I
)can learn from him what Catholicism is.
Sharon:
)What do you mean "whether you like it or not?" Are you saying you
)were christened and now you are stuck? You could try to get
excommunicated
)couldn't you? I know an ex-Catholic Freethinker who did this to free
)himself.
You gotta free your mind instead . . .
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:33:09 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1018
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:53:48 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Sharon joined in with a description of a book of thought forms and of
Steiner's ability to "see" thoughts. This is interesting because it provides
yet another method for independent, objective testing of these claims. If
you had people who made the same claims today, that is that they could see
thoughts, you could use their decriptions or drawings as a test of whether
they saw the same things or not in reponse to the same thoughts in others.
This is very like some of the testing which has been done for clairvoyance
in the ESP community. I think one of the problems that folllowers of Stener
have is that Steiner predated modern statistics, so he had no idea (he could
not see into the future) of the power of modern statistical techniques to
test hypotheses.
Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 17:48:01 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
Sharon tells of the importance of "truth" according to Steiner. The word
"truth" means different things to different people - especially to those on
a spiritual mission. From Sharon's post:
These destructive "explosions" caused by lies work on
the body like a tumour which destroys the organism. Thus do lies kill the
astral forms which have arisen and must arise, and in this way they obstruct
or paralyse a part of evolution. Everyone who tells the truth actually
promotes the evolution of humanity and everyone who lies, obstructs it."
(Steiner, Theosophy of the Rosicrucian, Rudolf Steiner press, London pp.
60-61).
Then another Steiner quote - an important one, IMO:
Steiner: "We will also talk about a prayer. But there is just one thing
I should like to ask you. You know, with these things the outer form is of
the utmost importance. Never call the verse a 'prayer' but a 'school opening
verse'. Do see to it that people do not hear the expression 'prayer' used by
a teacher. This will go a long way towards overcoming the prejudice that
this is an anthroposophical school."
Steiner, Rudolf. Conferences with the Teachers of the Waldorf School
in Stuttgart 1919 to 1920: Volume One: The First and Second Years of
the Waldorf School, Stuttgart. (1920) Forest Row, U.K.: Steiner
Schools Fellowship Publications, 1986, p. 45
It seems that while perhaps not a blatant "lie" Steiner seems, at best...
disingenuous. Why not simply state that these schools are Anthroposophy
Seminaries or Religious Schools? What was/is the problem with taking a more
truthful path? Smaller enrolment, perhaps, but it would be *real.* Then
again - I would not be doing this now and I'd miss out on this learning
experience. I am trying to be honest as I would not want to be the one to
obstruct the evolution of humanity....
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 02:40:17 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
mysplum wrote:
) on 4/12/03 12:55 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
)
) )
) ) P:
) ) I have read Crowley, Bad guy.
)
) Sharon: He did. It's debatable that he was a "bad guy". Some scholars
) feel
) he was treated unfairly. Some say he was just a modern Gnostic. I think
) people didn't like him because he was "over the top" and challenged the
) status quo. He also was very free about sex.
) )
P:
Debatable?
Check this:
VALLUM ABIEGNI
SUB FIGURA CLVI.
1. This is the secret of the Holy Graal, that is the sacred vessel of
our Lady, the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, the
Bride of Chaos, that rideth upon our Lord the Beast.
2. Thou shalt drain out thy blood that is thy life into the golden cup
of her fornication.
3. Thou shalt mingle thy life with the universal life. Thou shalt keep
not back one drop.
4. Then shall thy brain be dumb, and thy heart beat no more, and all thy
life shall go from thee; and thou shalt be cast out upon the midden, and
the birds of the air shall feast upon thy flesh, and thy bones shall
whiten in the sun.
5. Then shall the winds gather themselves together and bear thee up as
it were a little heap of dust in a sheet that hath four corners, and
they shall give it unto the guardian() of the Abyss.
6. And because there is no life therein, the guardian() of the Abyss
shall bid the angels of the winds pass by. And the angels thereof shall
be no more.()
7. Now therefore that thou mayest achieve this ritual of the Holy Graal,
do thou divest thyself of all thy goods.
8. Thou hast wealth; give it unto them that have need thereof, yet no
desire toward it.
9. Thou hast health; slay thyself in the fervour of thine abandonment
unto Our Lady. Let thy flesh hang loose upon thy bones, and thine eyes
glare with thy quenchless lust unto the Infinite, with thy passion for
the Unknown, for Her that is beyond Knowledge the accursed one.
10. Thou hast love; tear thy mother from thine heart and spit in the
face of thy father. Let thy foot trample the belly of thy wife, and let
the babe at her breast be the prey of dogs and vultures.
11. For if thou dost not this with thy will, then shall We do {430} this
despite thy will. So that thou attain to the Sacrament of the Graal in
the Chapel of Abominations.
12. And behold! if by stealth thou keep unto thyself one thought of
thine, then shalt thou be cast out into the abyss for ever; and thou
shalt be the lonely one, the eater of dung, the afflicted in the Day of
Be-With-Us.
13. Yea! verily this is the Truth, this is the Truth, this is the Truth.
Unto thee shall be granted joy and health and wealth and wisdom when
thou art no longer thou.
14. Then shall every gain be a new sacrament, and it shall not defile
thee; thou shalt revel with the wantons() in the market place, and the
virgins shall fling roses upon thee, and the merchants bend their knees
and bring thee gold and spices. Also young boys shall pour wonderful
wines for thee, and the singers and the dancers shall sing and dance for
thee.
15. Yet shalt thou not be therein, for thou shalt be forgotten, dust
lost in dust.
16. Nor shall the aeon itself avail thee in this; for from the dust
shall a white ash be prepared by Hermes the Invisible.
17. And this is the wrath of God, that these things should be thus.
18. And this is the grace of God, that these things should be thus.
19. Wherefore I charge you that ye come unto me in the Beginning; for if
ye take but one step in this Path, ye must arrive inevitably at the end
thereof.
20. This Path is beyond Life and Death; it is also beyond Love, but that
ye know not, for ye know not Love.
21. And the end thereof is known not even unto Our Lady, nor to the
Beast whereon She rideth, nor unto the Virgin her daughter, nor unto
Chaos her lawful Lord; but unto the Crowned Child is it known? It is not
known if it be known.
22. Therefore unto Hadit and unto Nuit be the glory in the End and the
Beginning; yea, in the End and the Beginning. {431}
A. Crowley [Magick in Theory and practice]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:49:35 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
Sharon quoted a machine translation,
)However, it is also
)directed at open, unfossilized anthroposophists, whale village educationists
)and parents who are ready for the critical discussion with a freer woman's
)spirit than from " Meistern " directed.
The machine translates "Waldorf" as "whale village." Another one that
pops up is "sparkling wines" for "Anthroposophists." I can't figure
out where that one comes from.
)This paper talks about the Alice Sprengel scandal. Alice was in love with
)Steiner who told her that they had been Enkidu and Gilgamesh in a past life.
)He also made her "keeper of the seals", so Alice thought she had a future
)with Rudolf. He had to marry Marie in order to get rid of her, and Alice
)then turned her affections to Reuss out of spite. There is marvelous reading
)on all this, great fun, search "Alice Sprengel", but read the link above
)first, so you get the picture (G).
Other juicy details: Steiner had a door cut through between his and
Marie's apartments in the Theosophical headquarters, so the
ostensably married man could consort without overt scandal. This was
the roaring 20's, but proper society was still proper. When Steiner's
wife died, there was talk in Theosophical circles that he had
strangled her psychicly.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 09:19:49 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
G'day Percedol,
I'll debate it. It isn't obvious to me that this is any worse (or any more
nonsense) than Steiner's writings.
You seem to think that it is obvious.
Peter F.
)From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
)Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 02:40:17 +0000
)
)mysplum wrote:
) ) on 4/12/03 12:55 AM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
) )
) ) )
) ) ) P:
) ) ) I have read Crowley, Bad guy.
) )
) ) Sharon: He did. It's debatable that he was a "bad guy". Some scholars
) ) feel
) ) he was treated unfairly. Some say he was just a modern Gnostic. I think
) ) people didn't like him because he was "over the top" and challenged the
) ) status quo. He also was very free about sex.
) ) )
)
)P:
)Debatable?
)Check this:
)
)VALLUM ABIEGNI
)
)
)SUB FIGURA CLVI.
)
)1. This is the secret of the Holy Graal, that is the sacred vessel of
)our Lady, the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, the
)Bride of Chaos, that rideth upon our Lord the Beast.
)
)
)2. Thou shalt drain out thy blood that is thy life into the golden cup
)of her fornication.
)
)3. Thou shalt mingle thy life with the universal life. Thou shalt keep
)not back one drop.
)
)
)4. Then shall thy brain be dumb, and thy heart beat no more, and all thy
)life shall go from thee; and thou shalt be cast out upon the midden, and
)the birds of the air shall feast upon thy flesh, and thy bones shall
)whiten in the sun.
)
)5. Then shall the winds gather themselves together and bear thee up as
)it were a little heap of dust in a sheet that hath four corners, and
)they shall give it unto the guardian() of the Abyss.
)
)6. And because there is no life therein, the guardian() of the Abyss
)shall bid the angels of the winds pass by. And the angels thereof shall
)be no more.()
)
)7. Now therefore that thou mayest achieve this ritual of the Holy Graal,
)do thou divest thyself of all thy goods.
)
)
)8. Thou hast wealth; give it unto them that have need thereof, yet no
)desire toward it.
)
)
)9. Thou hast health; slay thyself in the fervour of thine abandonment
)unto Our Lady. Let thy flesh hang loose upon thy bones, and thine eyes
)glare with thy quenchless lust unto the Infinite, with thy passion for
)the Unknown, for Her that is beyond Knowledge the accursed one.
)
)10. Thou hast love; tear thy mother from thine heart and spit in the
)face of thy father. Let thy foot trample the belly of thy wife, and let
)the babe at her breast be the prey of dogs and vultures.
)
)11. For if thou dost not this with thy will, then shall We do {430} this
)despite thy will. So that thou attain to the Sacrament of the Graal in
)the Chapel of Abominations.
)
)12. And behold! if by stealth thou keep unto thyself one thought of
)thine, then shalt thou be cast out into the abyss for ever; and thou
)shalt be the lonely one, the eater of dung, the afflicted in the Day of
)Be-With-Us.
)
)13. Yea! verily this is the Truth, this is the Truth, this is the Truth.
)Unto thee shall be granted joy and health and wealth and wisdom when
)thou art no longer thou.
)
)14. Then shall every gain be a new sacrament, and it shall not defile
)thee; thou shalt revel with the wantons() in the market place, and the
)virgins shall fling roses upon thee, and the merchants bend their knees
)and bring thee gold and spices. Also young boys shall pour wonderful
)wines for thee, and the singers and the dancers shall sing and dance for
)thee.
)
)15. Yet shalt thou not be therein, for thou shalt be forgotten, dust
)lost in dust.
)
)16. Nor shall the aeon itself avail thee in this; for from the dust
)shall a white ash be prepared by Hermes the Invisible.
)
)17. And this is the wrath of God, that these things should be thus.
)
)18. And this is the grace of God, that these things should be thus.
)
)19. Wherefore I charge you that ye come unto me in the Beginning; for if
)ye take but one step in this Path, ye must arrive inevitably at the end
)thereof.
)
)20. This Path is beyond Life and Death; it is also beyond Love, but that
)ye know not, for ye know not Love.
)
)21. And the end thereof is known not even unto Our Lady, nor to the
)Beast whereon She rideth, nor unto the Virgin her daughter, nor unto
)Chaos her lawful Lord; but unto the Crowned Child is it known? It is not
)known if it be known.
)
)22. Therefore unto Hadit and unto Nuit be the glory in the End and the
)Beginning; yea, in the End and the Beginning. {431}
)
)A. Crowley [Magick in Theory and practice]
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1019
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:15:08 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/14/03 5:19 AM, Peter Farrell at feetapparel hotmail.com wrote:
) G'day Percedol,
) I'll debate it. It isn't obvious to me that this is any worse (or any more
) nonsense) than Steiner's writings.
) You seem to think that it is obvious.
) Peter F.
Sharon: Exactly my point. When I first started to study Anthro, I came
across many references linking Steiner not only to Reuss, but also to
Crowley which is why I even bothered to investigate both men and the OTO.
(There's a great big biography on Crowley which was quite an interesting
read). Also, in my cult class, we learned a little about Crowley so I do
know a tiny bit about the guy and don't think he was any more harmful than
Steiner was. In fact, Crowley did say one thing that I do agree 100% with,
and that is-- "Steiner let a lot of drivel out." (G) As Percedol stated,
Crowley dabbled in the same things Steiner was drawn to, but Crowley was
much more open about all his nonsense than Steiner was. Steiner tried to
make his nonsense respectable and acceptable. Crowley just wallowed in being
as ridiculous and irrational as possible and didn't seem to care what people
thought. He seemed to want to outrage people and push the envelope. From
what I've read about him, he didn't harm followers, enjoyed sex magic and
worshipped Satan. There are many references linking Steiner to sex magic,
but I think Steiner was too much of a prude to probably enjoy physical sex.
I think he did practice white sex magic. But who knows? That's the trouble
with secret societies, you never really know everything that goes on in
them. Steiner may not have worshipped Satan, but he did believe in
"Ahrimanic" beings, and worshipped Michael and "Christ the Sun being." I
personally feel that Steiner and Crowley can be put in the same category,
"occult believers."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:26:43 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/13/03 10:40 PM, Percedol at Percedol netscape.net wrote:
))
)) Sharon: He did. It's debatable that he was a "bad guy". Some scholars
)) feel
)) he was treated unfairly. Some say he was just a modern Gnostic. I think
)) people didn't like him because he was "over the top" and challenged the
)) status quo. He also was very free about sex.
)))
)
) P:
) Debatable?
) Check this:
)
) VALLUM ABIEGNI
)
)
) SUB FIGURA CLVI.
)
) 1. This is the secret of the Holy Graal, that is the sacred vessel of
) our Lady, the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, the
) Bride of Chaos, that rideth upon our Lord the Beast.
)
)
) 2. Thou shalt drain out thy blood that is thy life into the golden cup
) of her fornication.
)
) 3. Thou shalt mingle thy life with the universal life. Thou shalt keep
) not back one drop.
)
Sharon: I read through Crowley's list and my mind automatically made
Biblical and Anthro comparisons. What makes you think that one lot of
nonsense, over another lot of nonsense might make me think Crowley was a
very "bad" guy?. From what you posted, I deduce that Steiner and Crowley
were two peas in a pod.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:34:01 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/13/03 7:53 PM, Peter Farrell at feetapparel hotmail.com wrote:
) Sharon joined in with a description of a book of thought forms and of
) Steiner's ability to "see" thoughts. This is interesting because it provides
) yet another method for independent, objective testing of these claims. If
) you had people who made the same claims today, that is that they could see
) thoughts, you could use their decriptions or drawings as a test of whether
) they saw the same things or not in reponse to the same thoughts in others.
Sharon: A couple days ago I stumbled across a biography of Blavatsky which
stated that the spiritual world is as diverse as the physical world, which
is why there is so much variety in "seers'" perceptions. I suspect that if
you tested claims about thoughts or seeing beings, you would get varying
results, and believers would explain this as "diversity in the spiritual
world."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:57:55 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
on 4/13/03 8:48 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
)
)
) It seems that while perhaps not a blatant "lie" Steiner seems, at best...
) disingenuous. Why not simply state that these schools are Anthroposophy
) Seminaries or Religious Schools? What was/is the problem with taking a more
) truthful path? Smaller enrolment, perhaps, but it would be *real.* Then
) again - I would not be doing this now and I'd miss out on this learning
) experience. I am trying to be honest as I would not want to be the one to
) obstruct the evolution of humanity....
Sharon: He does seem quite confused about telling the truth doesn't he? I
think it's OK to lie in Anthroposophy if Beings in the cosmos give you
permission to do this. Steiner did say that occult forces standing behind
him told him to present his occultism in the "guise of idealistic
philosophy". This was because occultism could not go public at that time.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 09:15:03 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/was Theosophy of the R.
) Sharon: He does seem quite confused about telling the truth doesn't he? I
) think it's OK to lie in Anthroposophy if Beings in the cosmos give you
) permission to do this. Steiner did say that occult forces standing behind
) him told him to present his occultism in the "guise of idealistic
) philosophy". This was because occultism could not go public at that time.
Do you have a reference for this quote? Fascinating. Thanks.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 23:12:38 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
)Sharon: A couple days ago I stumbled across a biography of Blavatsky which
)stated that the spiritual world is as diverse as the physical world, which
)is why there is so much variety in "seers'" perceptions. I suspect that if
)you tested claims about thoughts or seeing beings, you would get varying
)results, and believers would explain this as "diversity in the spiritual
)world."
)
Peter F responds:
The interesting thing about scientific explorations of the physical world is
that despite the enormous diversity apparent in the physical world, we find
so much that is experimentally repeatable and verifiable. The claim in
Blavatsky's biography sounds like a cop out to me.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1020
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Thoughts/
By mysplum earthlink.net
[from Debra] Not Fan Mail
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Thoughts
By feetapparel hotmail.com
"Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By pstaud hotmail.com
ignorance is bliss
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: Thoughts
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:25:21 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/
on 4/14/03 12:15 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
)
)) Sharon: He does seem quite confused about telling the truth doesn't he? I
)) think it's OK to lie in Anthroposophy if Beings in the cosmos give you
)) permission to do this. Steiner did say that occult forces standing behind
)) him told him to present his occultism in the "guise of idealistic
)) philosophy". This was because occultism could not go public at that time.
)
) Do you have a reference for this quote? Fascinating. Thanks.
Sharon: Yes, it's from Steiner's notes written for occultist Edouard Schure
in 1907, published in Correspondence and Documents 1901-1925, Rudolf Steiner
and Marie von Sievers. Rudolf Steiner Press London & Anthroposophic Press,
New York 1988. What a devious character our prophet had! I'd forgotten that
he'd cut a door through to Marie's bedroom from his bed room. Sneaky! (G)
Here's some more context from the trickster's quote...
Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche Wochenschrift'
for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of the
folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
spiritual cultural policy had to be found.
In all this, the public display of esoteric ideas was out of the question.
And the spiritual forces standing behind me gave me only one piece of
advice: 'Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy'.
Running concurrently with all this were my activities as an educator and
private tutor of more than fifteen years" (p. 11).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 00:11:06 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [from Debra] Not Fan Mail
[Debra has a problem posting (we're working on it), so I'm posting
this for her -Dan]
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003
To: "L. Kate Anthony" (transformationkate hotmail.com)
From: Debra Snell (snell gv.net)
Subject: Re:
)I am amazed that you have a website dedicated to
)stopping/condemning Waldorf Education. I think you all should get
)a life.
)
)And, I have read a lot about cults. It's hilarious (and awful)
)that you think Rudolf Steiner has a cult. He is dead!!!!
Hi Kate,
Thanks for taking the time to write. I am sorry you have bought into
the negative definition of cult. All religions began as cults. We
say Anthroposophy is a cult who is in the process of becomming a
religion. . .
)I cannot believe that you are getting away with calling Waldorf
)Education a cult. You have every right to dislike it, speak out
)against it, etc. But to call it a cult is liable. I am not an
)attorney but I am going to check into this and attempt to stop you
)from saying this.
Debra:
Please do. We would welcome the publicity.
)Your website has only made me more interested in sending my
)daughter to the Waldorf School. I was a nanny for 2 incredible
)children for a few years. They have attended the school in Denver
)since kindegarten and they are now 14 and 12. They win
)scholarships in cello and violin. They write, they are
)self-expressed, they love people and learning.
Debra:
That is great. We aren't interested in keeping people like you out
of Waldorf. We are interested in allowing parents the opportunity to
make fully informed decisions about their children's education.
)I am even Jewish and I think it's silly to base your entire opinion
)of Waldorf (or much of it) on some weird things Steiner said. You
)and I both know anything can be used to prove any point.
Debra:
Are you aware of what makes Waldorf teacher's "Waldorf?" Do you know
anything about their studies? Do you know what books they must read
in order to become certified? You can find this information on our
web site ( http://www.waldorfcritics.org ). The mandatory book list
for the Waldorf teacher (two year) training program can be found
under the 'Articles' section.
Also on our web site is an article written by a Jewish mother, who
wrote about the appropriateness of Waldorf for Jewish children. Are
you a practicing Jew or merely raised Jewish?
)Why don't you get on with your lives? You don't have to send your
)kids to Waldorf. Why do you care that other people do? You really
)think it's so terrible? Give me a break.
Debra:
Until Waldorf proponents get honest about their true mission, we
will be here. I don't think Waldorf is so terrible, especially for
children of Anthroposophists. Does the Denver school allow the
children to use black crayons? Do the teachers hold state teaching
credentials as well as Waldorf certifications? For an excellent
school check list, written by a Waldorf parent, please see:
http://www.openwaldorf.com . This is an excellent and neutral web
site.
)I cannot wait to see if you actually address this email. Do you
)have the courage?
Debra:
Excuse me, but your lack of research is showing. Good luck with
Waldorf. I sincerely hope it works out well for your family. If not,
we'll reserve a place on Waldorf Survivors for you.
Just remember this: Don't *ever* turn over your parenting reins to
*anyone*. Ask questions and remember that they are *your*
responsibility, *not* Waldorf teachers. . .
-Debra Snell
President, PLANS, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:43:39 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Thoughts
Sharon quoted Steiner:
Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche Wochenschrift'
for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of the
folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
spiritual cultural policy had to be found.
In all this, the public display of esoteric ideas was out of the question.
And the spiritual forces standing behind me gave me only one piece of
advice: 'Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy'.
Running concurrently with all this were my activities as an educator and
private tutor of more than fifteen years" (p. 11).
Peter asks:
My memory is that Steiner only had only one pupil or tutoring role. Is that
correct? What is he counting as 15 years as educator and tutor? Is it
accurate?
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:54:51 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Hello critics,
so much I want to catch up on... For now I'd like to toss in my opinion on
this quote from Steiner that Sharon shared:
"Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche Wochenschrift'
for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of the
folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
spiritual cultural policy had to be found. In all this, the public display
of esoteric ideas was out of the question. And the spiritual forces standing
behind me gave me only one piece of advice: 'Everything in the guise of
Idealistic philosophy'."
I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is simply
the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier career. The
young Steiner was not in fact propagating a spiritual doctrine under the
guise of Idealist philosophy, he was simply propagating Idealist philosophy
with a strong German nationalist bent. There is nothing 'spiritual', much
less esoteric, in his writings for the Deutsche Wochenschrift. These
writings are straightforwardly political and cultural in nature; they make
no reference, implied or otherwise, to any of the supernatural phenomena
that later became the core of his worldview.
After his turn to Theosophy around the turn of the century, Steiner
systematically re-interpreted and re-cast his own earlier work to make it
seem compatible with his new occult orientation. In other words, in my view
Steiner wasn't being devious or deceptive in the 1880's by hiding his real
message behind a philosophical veneer; instead he was deceptive later, in
the early 1900's, when he misrepresented his own prior activities. I think
that makes a difference in how we understand the relationship between his
earlier and later phases; the standard anthroposophist position is that
Steiner followed a specific 'spiritual' path all along, but that stance is
flatly incompatible with his published writings from the 1880's and 1890's.
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:24:33 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: ignorance is bliss
Sharon shared a quote from Robert Galbreath on the predilection of modern
occultists to adopt scientific pretensions, and Percedol eloquently
responded "Who is this idiot?", dismissing Galbreath's argument because he
is, after all, an "outsider" rather than a believing occultist. This
attitude is perfectly consistent with Percedol's broader approach to
scholarship, but I nevertheless got a particular kick out of this exchange.
Among scholars of esoteric religion and historians of the occult, Galbreath
is undoubtedly one of the most sympathetic to people like Percedol and their
arcane belief systems. The article Sharon quoted is, among other things, a
criticism of other scholars for adopting too harsh and antagonistic an
analysis of modern occult trends. Percedol has no idea what he is missing,
content to keep his head firmly in the sand.
Diana asked a good question about the passage from Galbreath: does he really
take the occultists' claims at face value? Galbreath is deliberately
agnostic on this score, but he is not, by my reading, an apologist for
occultism. His goal is "understanding the occult in its own terms", not
defending it or justifying it. There is much in his article "Explaining
Modern Occultism" that I disagree with -- he is too severe in his complaints
about other scholars of the occult, and he gets a number of points about
anthroposophy only half right -- but I nonetheless second Sharon's
recommendation of the article. It raises important issues about scholarly
analyses of esoteric beliefs, and makes a valiant effort at clarifying some
of the confusions that are rampant in this area. Galbreath is (or was; I'm
not sure if he's still around) the kind of scholar who would go to great
lengths to understand the Percedols of this world, and then do his best to
share that understanding with other "outsiders". If only anthroposophists
could do the same for the rest of us...
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 00:40:34 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Thoughts
)Sharon quoted Steiner:
)Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche Wochenschrift'
)for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of the
)folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
)spiritual cultural policy had to be found.
)In all this, the public display of esoteric ideas was out of the question.
)And the spiritual forces standing behind me gave me only one piece of
)advice: 'Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy'.
)Running concurrently with all this were my activities as an educator and
)private tutor of more than fifteen years" (p. 11).
)
)Peter asks:
)My memory is that Steiner only had only one pupil or tutoring role.
)Is that correct? What is he counting as 15 years as educator and
)tutor? Is it accurate?
He was live-in tutor for four boys of the Specht family, three who
went to school and one who was taught only by Steiner. (Barnes, p.
35) Barnes also says he had been tutoring classmates and younger
students from the age of 15. While he was with the Spechts he
gradually eliminated other tutoring work. This was in the late 1880s.
At the turn of the century he lectured and taught science and history
to adults at the Berlin Workers School and other labor groups. He was
kicked out for not being Marxist enough, and turned to occultism
full-time soon after.
-Dan
Barnes, Henry. A Life for the Spirit: Rudolf Steiner in the
Crosscurrents of Our Time. Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1997.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1021
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Thoughts
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: [from Debra] Not Fan Mail
By mysplum earthlink.net
apologies and update
By hagenaar wxs.nl
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: apologies and update
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By dkimble mystrotv.com
New to Waldorf
By cat.morris juno.com
RE: New to Waldorf
By dkimble mystrotv.com
Question from the far south
By antigonabaires hotmail.com
Re: Question from the far south
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Is Waldorf a good business?
By bus98 hotmail.com
Re: Question from the far south
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: Is Waldorf a good business?
By antigonabaires hotmail.com
RE: Is Waldorf a good business?
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: Is Waldorf a good business?
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
Re: Question from the far south
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Question from the far south
By munichflowerfairy yahoo.com
RE: ignorance is bliss
By Percedol netscape.net
Admin: Upcoming Downtime Saturday evening-Sunday morning
By dan dandugan.com
RE: ignorance is bliss
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 07:38:13 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Thoughts
on 4/16/03 3:40 AM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
)
) He was live-in tutor for four boys of the Specht family, three who
) went to school and one who was taught only by Steiner.
Sharon: Steiner worked for the Spechts for 6 years.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 09:04:36 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: [from Debra] Not Fan Mail
)
) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003
) To: "L. Kate Anthony" (transformationkate hotmail.com)
) From: Debra Snell (snell gv.net)
) Subject: Re:
)
)) I am amazed that you have a website dedicated to
)) stopping/condemning Waldorf Education. I think you all should get
)) a life.
Sharon: Come on Kate we aren't trying to stop Waldorf, we're trying to get
it out of the public system! We're trying to protect the First Amendment
because it protects us and you.
))
)) And, I have read a lot about cults. It's hilarious (and awful)
)) that you think Rudolf Steiner has a cult. He is dead!!!!
Sharon: I'm afraid you are showing your ignorance here. Are you sure
Steiner is dead? Some Waldorfers think he's alive. Some are waiting for his
return to a green hilly place in North America where he will attend a
Waldorf school. Waldorf "pedagogy" is based on Steiner's doctrine of
reincarnation, a detail I would like to see expressed in Waldorf brochures.
)) I cannot believe that you are getting away with calling Waldorf
)) Education a cult. You have every right to dislike it, speak out
)) against it, etc. But to call it a cult is liable. I am not an
)) attorney but I am going to check into this and attempt to stop you
)) from saying this.
Sharon: I'd think you'd have a very difficult time proving that Waldorf
isn't a cult. Waldorf schools are mystery schools, providing occult
initiation for pupils. Waldorf is inextricably entwined with Steiner's
religion Anthroposophy. Truth is a defense against liable.
)
)) Your website has only made me more interested in sending my
)) daughter to the Waldorf School.
Sharon: Because you are an occultist? (G)
I was a nanny for 2 incredible
)) children for a few years. They have attended the school in Denver
)) since kindegarten and they are now 14 and 12. They win
)) scholarships in cello and violin. They write, they are
)) self-expressed, they love people and learning.
Sharon: Yes, achievers attend parochial and secular schools. My daughter is
an achiever as well. She attended a Waldorf school for a number of years
until we twigged on to the esoteric subtext. Your description of the Waldorf
pupils you know could almost fit my daughter. She is doing very well at a
nonsectarian school. You seem to be missing the point of PLANS which is to
get Waldorf out of the public sector because it's a religious school. In our
democracy, we are supposed to have church and state separation. Catholic
schools, Mormon schools, Scientology schools, Methodist schools, etc. also
have achievers attend.
)
)) I am even Jewish and I think it's silly to base your entire opinion
)) of Waldorf (or much of it) on some weird things Steiner said. You
)) and I both know anything can be used to prove any point.
Sharon: I'm afraid you show a distinct lack of knowledge here. I am an
infidel, and it matters a great deal to me what Steiner said because it
quietly seeps out into Waldorf classrooms all day. Had I known that Waldorf
was a religious school I would not have chosen it for my daughter. They
pretended to be an art-based, nonsectarian school, but the reality was
otherwise.
)
)) Why don't you get on with your lives? You don't have to send your
)) kids to Waldorf. Why do you care that other people do? You really
)) think it's so terrible? Give me a break.
Sharon: Yes it is terrible that we were tricked, and true, we don't have to
send our kids to Waldorf and don't now. Here's the problem...we'd like to
get on with our lives but we can't because Waldorf is duping people and has
entered the public system. You don't even know our stories or much about
WALDORF and you are condemning us! Dan's family was kicked out of his
Waldorf school because he challenged the school for selling racist Steiner
books. Do you think the public should be forced to pay for such
discrimination? In our case, my family left on our own accord after a
compilation of peculiarities--the final straw being a really wacky
prescription doled out by an Anthroposophic doctor who makes his rounds in
Waldorf schools. Should the state defy the First amendment and establish and
advance religious doctrine and pseudo-science? If the state funds Waldorf,
shouldn't they also fund Scientology schools and fundamentalist Christian
schools, etc? Waldorf screws up some people's lives because they are not
straight-forward and honest to prospective parents about their sectarian
base. We are trying to right a wrong. We are trying to foster a pluralistic
society in which schools are straight-forward and honest about their
sectarian pedagogy and occult classroom activity. We care that Waldorfers
hurt some people with deception. We also care that Waldorf thumbs its nose
at the First Amendment. The lesson you need to learn is that things are not
always what they seem. Take a closer look at Waldorf, read the teacher
training book-list and you will find that Waldorf teacher training is in
reality, an Anthroposophic seminary school training Anthroposophic
missionaries / hierophants to initiate children in mystery schools. I needed
to know this detail before we enrolled our child. The schools are not
presenting themselves responsibly. Consumer fraud is not permitted in our in
our society, and church and state separation is required by the
Constitution.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 14:39:33 +0200
From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
Subject: apologies and update
Hello everyone, first of all my apologies for not reacting sooner. I
have not been feeling well plus I had to prepare everything for
taking the kids out of school. Today was their last day.
The meeting last week went ok, in that the civil servant was helpful,
but still he said he would take it to the District Attorney. So now
I'm slowly preparing for a court case. I'm getting clearer on the
differences between Antr. and holism.
In the meantime, I'll be on lurking mode on your list. Whenever I
need specific info I hope I can present my questions here, and I'll
keep you up to date on what's happening for us.
On behalf of our Waldorf school, I would like to say that they have
always made it clear that Antr. is the basis of their schoolsystem
and also promote parents reading Steiner. Further, they are less
dogmatic than what I gather from US schools (for example: black is
allowed for crayons and they do have special programs for gifted
children, I found out, they do let gifted children skip classes).
Good luck and bye for now (I will be lurking though, because the
discussions interest me),
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 10:39:38 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Peter:
"Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche
Wochenschrift'
for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of
the
folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
spiritual cultural policy had to be found. In all this, the public
display
of esoteric ideas was out of the question. And the spiritual forces
standing
behind me gave me only one piece of advice: 'Everything in the guise of
Idealistic philosophy'."
I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is
simply
the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier
career.(snip)
Diana:
Fascinating! You're saying he wasn't sitting around back in the 1880's
figuring out how he could put his spiritual program out there in the
guise of idealistic philosophy - but rather 20 years later he's trying
to make it appear he had been putting a spiritual program out there all
along? He's trying to shore up his credentials among other occultists,
in other words, who might notice that he didn't start out using all this
occult terminology? He's cluing them in, or pretending to, to an earlier
subtext that didn't really exist at the time.
Of course if this is correct, it is rather damning to be seen boosting
your occultist credentials by bragging that you had been lying about
your true motives earlier. What does it say that this is how he would
win points in occult circles? It seems to be taken for granted that
saying "Oh I was of course hiding all my occult intentions" will be seen
as a positive thing.
And I think it is fair to assume that many later interpreters don't pick
up on the fact that it is an ex post facto justification, and will feel
free, based on the guru's example, to pursue occult/spiritual programs
which "spiritual forces standing behind them" advise, in whispers,
should all be done "in the guise" of various more socially acceptable,
mainstream philosophies (I'm referring to running schools, of course).
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 10:50:25 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: apologies and update
Thanks for the update, Edith. I don't know if you have time but it would
be interesting, and might help us give you any additional info, if we
had an idea how this court case works. What exactly do you have to show?
What sorts of materials can you present? Can you get people to testify
for you, like a psychologist or educational consultant? If they do have
a gifted program at the Waldorf school, what does it consist of, and
will this complicate things for you? I am not clear on what kind of
information you will be presenting on anthroposophy vs. holism, and if
you'd like any more input here we might all be more helpful if we knew
the answers to some of these questions. In any case, best of luck!
Diana
Edith:
Hello everyone, first of all my apologies for not reacting sooner. I
have not been feeling well plus I had to prepare everything for taking
the kids out of school. Today was their last day.
The meeting last week went ok, in that the civil servant was helpful,
but still he said he would take it to the District Attorney. So now I'm
slowly preparing for a court case. I'm getting clearer on the
differences between Antr. and holism.
In the meantime, I'll be on lurking mode on your list. Whenever I need
specific info I hope I can present my questions here, and I'll keep you
up to date on what's happening for us.
On behalf of our Waldorf school, I would like to say that they have
always made it clear that Antr. is the basis of their schoolsystem and
also promote parents reading Steiner. Further, they are less dogmatic
than what I gather from US schools (for example: black is allowed for
crayons and they do have special programs for gifted children, I found
out, they do let gifted children skip classes).
Good luck and bye for now (I will be lurking though, because the
discussions interest me),
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 10:44:38 -0600
From: "Dave Kimble" (dkimble mystrotv.com)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C30405.2E5AB530
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It reminds me of the quote attributed to Churchill, "History shall be
kind to me, for I shall write it."
The revisionism you refer to strikes me as quite common among these
kinds of groups. When the group leader purports to be transcendent (as
distinct from being an ordinary human who as attained exceptional
insights or skills), there is a disconnect with reality.
At some point, this discrepancy (or outright contradiction) between
reality and the world view based on fantasy becomes clear.
When that happens, and the options are few:
1) revise the fantasy world-view to obscure this particular
manifestation of the discrepancy, necessitating a constant rewriting of
history, or
2) self-destruct (Kool-aid or automatic weapons seem to get involved
with this option)
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Diana Winters [mailto:Diana.Winters verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 8:40 AM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Peter:
"Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche
Wochenschrift'
for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of
the
folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
spiritual cultural policy had to be found. In all this, the public
display
of esoteric ideas was out of the question. And the spiritual forces
standing
behind me gave me only one piece of advice: 'Everything in the guise of
Idealistic philosophy'."
I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is
simply
the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier
career.(snip)
Diana:
Fascinating! You're saying he wasn't sitting around back in the 1880's
figuring out how he could put his spiritual program out there in the
guise of idealistic philosophy - but rather 20 years later he's trying
to make it appear he had been putting a spiritual program out there all
along? He's trying to shore up his credentials among other occultists,
in other words, who might notice that he didn't start out using all this
occult terminology? He's cluing them in, or pretending to, to an earlier
subtext that didn't really exist at the time.
Of course if this is correct, it is rather damning to be seen boosting
your occultist credentials by bragging that you had been lying about
your true motives earlier. What does it say that this is how he would
win points in occult circles? It seems to be taken for granted that
saying "Oh I was of course hiding all my occult intentions" will be seen
as a positive thing.
And I think it is fair to assume that many later interpreters don't pick
up on the fact that it is an ex post facto justification, and will feel
free, based on the guru's example, to pursue occult/spiritual programs
which "spiritual forces standing behind them" advise, in whispers,
should all be done "in the guise" of various more socially acceptable,
mainstream philosophies (I'm referring to running schools, of course).
Diana
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: dkimble mystrotv.com
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1dkiG.b3j7tF.ZGtpbWJs
Or send an email to: waldorf-critics-unsubscribe topica.com
TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
==^================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 10:58:03 -0600
From: cat.morris juno.com
Cc: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: New to Waldorf
Hello,
I applied to Waldorf a few months ago with the anticipation that this
would be THE school for us. I proceeded to gather more information and do
some research (many hours at the PLANS and OpenWaldorf sites, plus a
classroom observation, two visitors mornings, an all-school assembly, and
the Christmas festival). I realized early on that this was not a
relatively new, artsy approach to learning as I had thought, but a very
old learning model and curriculum. Still, I was/am intrigued.
I recently interviewed with a kindergarten teacher at the school in
Denver. I had lots of questions, and thought I'd share what I heard:
I asked the teacher what she tells children who ask if gnomes are real.
She said they've never asked, but if they did she'd have to say they ARE
real because she believes in them. I couldn't believe it. Then she
chuckled and said that of course, she was anthropomorphising the
processes of nature. She said it really is delightful to her to imagine
gnomes down in the soil, preparing for the miraculous birth of life in
spring.
I asked a general question about Anthroposophy. She described
Anthroposophy as Christianity in its broadest form. She described a few
of the festivals they celebrate, says they don't "do" Jesus but do
mention God. She described the snack prayer, in which they express thanks
to the earth for the food they are eating. When asked, she said there are
several Jewish students in her classroom and the rest of the school. She
says she particularly enjoys when students share their cultural heritage
with the class. Some parents, she says, come in to help their child share
a festival or observance with their peers. She says that learning about
diverse cultural and religious backgrounds enriches the classroom.
I asked if parents were welcome to help in the classroom and she said
yes, any time, and that she appreciates and needs the help.
I asked how many kids watch television despite the school's
protestations. She said she knows several of the children watch
television, and wishes they wouldn't, but only asks parents (via a memo)
to remember that the last thing their children are exposed to at night
will inform their dreams. She also asks parents to refrain from tv before
school in the morning.
She then told me that when her children were older (I don't know how old)
she and her husband bought a tv. They placed hard chairs in front of it,
and did not heat the room. She said that looking back with the
perspective of so many years, she questions why they felt they had to
make their children so uncomfortable. She offered that it was rather
unecessary and perhaps even cruel. She said that some schools ask parents
to sign a contract agreeing not to watch tv, but thinks the only thing it
guarantees is untruthful behavior.
I asked about books in the classroom, and how she handles children who
are wanting to read and write. She says she does not teach reading and
writing, but that some of the older kids are doing both on their own, so
she offers books (there were a slew on a shelf) for kids to look at if
they want to. Some will use their drawing implements to draw letters
instead of drawing, and often will ask her how to spell things. She helps
them spell words, and thinks that's just fine. She also said she reads a
lot about brain development, and knows that a lot of the Waldorf approach
to reading is outdated. (I am severely paraphrasing here! She did use the
word "outdated." We spent a lot of time talking. . . )
I saw a copy of the school newsletter with line drawings (using black) of
cars, a human/angel with a face, and more. To see for yourself, go to
www.denverwaldorf.org and click on Lunchbox Express for April 10 (look at
page 3).
On a visitors morning I discovered that they have recently formed a
school policy with procedures for handling discipline, because what they
were doing was not satisfactory. They also employ a non-Waldorf reading
specialist (formerly with the public school system) who works with
teachers to identify signs of learning disabilities in pre-readers to
help catch problems early and start addressing them.
I could go on. This school sounds somewhat flexible, which I like. I
would be interested in input from experienced "Waldorfers" re: what else
to look at. FYI, I may be naiive, but I am not very concerned about
Anthroposophy at this point. I am okay with there being a "mythological"
or "spiritual" component to my child's experience in the classroom. For
example, I am not offended by thanking the earth for food, or by
festivals that celebrate, in essence, the solstice, the seasons of the
earth, etc. Mythological stories are fine by me. I do believe in creating
magical experiences for children (and adults). That is why, on our daily
walks, my children search the "hiding rock" near our home to see if the
fairy has left a surprise for them, which may be a penny or a dandelion.
That is why the Easter bunny is leaving seeds, pansies, new little garden
gloves, and colored eggs in a basket this coming Sunday.
What I do NOT want is a curriculum that fosters hatred and intolerance in
my children; which does not challenge them to think critically, and which
stifles their creative impulses.
I now wish to observe an older class, as a friend of mine visited
classrooms for five hours one day, and observed a condescension toward
the children from some teachers, and an alarming lack of basic awareness
of other learning models. Also, about half the teachers (in her
estimation) were raised in Waldorf, trained in Waldorf, and now teaching
Waldorf without so much as a college education to help inform their
perspective. She thought that her own child would be bored stiff, and
buck against having to do things "just so."
Comments, anyone?
Thanks very much.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:33:11 -0600
From: "Dave Kimble" (dkimble mystrotv.com)
Subject: RE: New to Waldorf
Dave: Sounds like you've done a good deal of research and are going in
with your eyes open. That's a good approach.
Cat wrote: "That is why, on our daily walks, my children search the
"hiding rock" near our home to see if the fairy has left a surprise for
them, which may be a penny or a dandelion. That is why the Easter bunny
is leaving seeds, pansies, new little garden gloves, and colored eggs in
a basket this coming Sunday."
Dave: Cat, this is not meant to pick on you (especially on what looks
like your first post to this list), but your paragraph brings up an
issue I've thought about for a long time (I'm relatively new to the list
as well).
My wife and I chose early on to discuss the fellowship of childhood
"magic beings" (e.g. Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, and their
ilk) as being symbols or metaphors (cue audio of my four-year-old asking
"What's a metaphor?). We would talk about the positive values
associated with each (owning flying reindeer, the importance of
fertility celebrations, and dental health respectively...). We tried to
answer any questions by explaining our beliefs, without absolutes, but
without any intimations that we believed these magic beings actually do
exist.
It's similar to the sleight-of-hand I've done with all my children
(pulling all sorts of interesting things out of their young ears):
There's a stage where they just ask me to do it again, and then there's
a stage where they ask about it and I show them how it's done (my
six-year-old now practices regularly).
Any good science teacher talks about their subject with the same sense
of mystery and awe as someone who's just seen a good magic show.
I wonder if our acceptance of and emphasis on these sorts of
supernatural entities induce our children to direct their natural wonder
of magic towards them, at the expense of appreciating the magic in the
natural world around us.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: cat.morris juno.com [mailto:cat.morris juno.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 10:58 AM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Cc: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: New to Waldorf
Hello,
I applied to Waldorf a few months ago with the anticipation that this
would be THE school for us. I proceeded to gather more information and
do
some research (many hours at the PLANS and OpenWaldorf sites, plus a
classroom observation, two visitors mornings, an all-school assembly,
and
the Christmas festival). I realized early on that this was not a
relatively new, artsy approach to learning as I had thought, but a very
old learning model and curriculum. Still, I was/am intrigued.
I recently interviewed with a kindergarten teacher at the school in
Denver. I had lots of questions, and thought I'd share what I heard:
I asked the teacher what she tells children who ask if gnomes are real.
She said they've never asked, but if they did she'd have to say they ARE
real because she believes in them. I couldn't believe it. Then she
chuckled and said that of course, she was anthropomorphising the
processes of nature. She said it really is delightful to her to imagine
gnomes down in the soil, preparing for the miraculous birth of life in
spring.
I asked a general question about Anthroposophy. She described
Anthroposophy as Christianity in its broadest form. She described a few
of the festivals they celebrate, says they don't "do" Jesus but do
mention God. She described the snack prayer, in which they express
thanks
to the earth for the food they are eating. When asked, she said there
are
several Jewish students in her classroom and the rest of the school. She
says she particularly enjoys when students share their cultural heritage
with the class. Some parents, she says, come in to help their child
share
a festival or observance with their peers. She says that learning about
diverse cultural and religious backgrounds enriches the classroom.
I asked if parents were welcome to help in the classroom and she said
yes, any time, and that she appreciates and needs the help.
I asked how many kids watch television despite the school's
protestations. She said she knows several of the children watch
television, and wishes they wouldn't, but only asks parents (via a memo)
to remember that the last thing their children are exposed to at night
will inform their dreams. She also asks parents to refrain from tv
before
school in the morning.
She then told me that when her children were older (I don't know how
old)
she and her husband bought a tv. They placed hard chairs in front of it,
and did not heat the room. She said that looking back with the
perspective of so many years, she questions why they felt they had to
make their children so uncomfortable. She offered that it was rather
unecessary and perhaps even cruel. She said that some schools ask
parents
to sign a contract agreeing not to watch tv, but thinks the only thing
it
guarantees is untruthful behavior.
I asked about books in the classroom, and how she handles children who
are wanting to read and write. She says she does not teach reading and
writing, but that some of the older kids are doing both on their own, so
she offers books (there were a slew on a shelf) for kids to look at if
they want to. Some will use their drawing implements to draw letters
instead of drawing, and often will ask her how to spell things. She
helps
them spell words, and thinks that's just fine. She also said she reads a
lot about brain development, and knows that a lot of the Waldorf
approach
to reading is outdated. (I am severely paraphrasing here! She did use
the
word "outdated." We spent a lot of time talking. . . )
I saw a copy of the school newsletter with line drawings (using black)
of
cars, a human/angel with a face, and more. To see for yourself, go to
www.denverwaldorf.org and click on Lunchbox Express for April 10 (look
at
page 3).
On a visitors morning I discovered that they have recently formed a
school policy with procedures for handling discipline, because what they
were doing was not satisfactory. They also employ a non-Waldorf reading
specialist (formerly with the public school system) who works with
teachers to identify signs of learning disabilities in pre-readers to
help catch problems early and start addressing them.
I could go on. This school sounds somewhat flexible, which I like. I
would be interested in input from experienced "Waldorfers" re: what else
to look at. FYI, I may be naiive, but I am not very concerned about
Anthroposophy at this point. I am okay with there being a "mythological"
or "spiritual" component to my child's experience in the classroom. For
example, I am not offended by thanking the earth for food, or by
festivals that celebrate, in essence, the solstice, the seasons of the
earth, etc. Mythological stories are fine by me. I do believe in
creating
magical experiences for children (and adults). That is why, on our daily
walks, my children search the "hiding rock" near our home to see if the
fairy has left a surprise for them, which may be a penny or a dandelion.
That is why the Easter bunny is leaving seeds, pansies, new little
garden
gloves, and colored eggs in a basket this coming Sunday.
What I do NOT want is a curriculum that fosters hatred and intolerance
in
my children; which does not challenge them to think critically, and
which
stifles their creative impulses.
I now wish to observe an older class, as a friend of mine visited
classrooms for five hours one day, and observed a condescension toward
the children from some teachers, and an alarming lack of basic awareness
of other learning models. Also, about half the teachers (in her
estimation) were raised in Waldorf, trained in Waldorf, and now teaching
Waldorf without so much as a college education to help inform their
perspective. She thought that her own child would be bored stiff, and
buck against having to do things "just so."
Comments, anyone?
Thanks very much.
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 14:27:19 -0300
From: (antigonabaires hotmail.com)
Cc: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Subject: Question from the far south
Hi y'all.
I'm writing from Buenos Aires, Argentina, and I would like to ask you: what
do your children call their Waldorf teachers? My daughter started
kindergarten at a Waldorf school last year, and I was very surprised to
hear, after classes had started, that teachers are called "Tante". Is this
universal? When I asked the teacher she said that they wanted school, and
especially kindergarten, to be an extension of the family and, anyway, since
most families don't understand German, it doesn't really matter. Although it
may sound reasonable (the last part certainly doesn't) I wish I had been
told about this before. I found it quite shocking and confusing for my
child, who happens to understand some German.
Greetings from Argentina,
Agustina Eiff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:55:10 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
Hi Agustina,
I have never heard of the children referring to their Waldorf teacher as
"Aunt So-and-So." Any German/Austrian/Swiss list members here? If this
were my child it would not only surprise me - it would give me the creeps.
This should have been explained to you before enrolling. Perhaps now is the
time to arrive at school with a list of questions for the teachers. My
experience tells me this might be the first of many "confusing" incidents
for your child. Children come first. Honesty and integrity must supersede
any perceived mission by any member of any school. You are the parent of
your child and the teacher is not an "aunt."
-Walden
) Hi y'all.
) I'm writing from Buenos Aires, Argentina, and I would like to ask you:
what
) do your children call their Waldorf teachers? My daughter started
) kindergarten at a Waldorf school last year, and I was very surprised to
) hear, after classes had started, that teachers are called "Tante". Is this
) universal? When I asked the teacher she said that they wanted school, and
) especially kindergarten, to be an extension of the family and, anyway,
since
) most families don't understand German, it doesn't really matter. Although
it
) may sound reasonable (the last part certainly doesn't) I wish I had been
) told about this before. I found it quite shocking and confusing for my
) child, who happens to understand some German.
) Greetings from Argentina,
) Agustina Eiff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:07:30 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Is Waldorf a good business?
This is unrelated to anything that has been posted recently, but is
something I have wondered about, and so am posting to see what
others think.
I have not seen this possibility addressed anywhere, but I wonder if
anyone has considered whether a primary motivation behind Waldorf and it's
attempt to spread itself (and according to PLANS, to do so deviously or
dishonestly) is simply financial? I have seen postings that speculate on
what Steiner's or Waldorf's motivation was/is as being religous,
spiritual, etc., but I wonder if it's just a good business?
An attorney friend of mine once said, "When anybody says, 'It's not the
money,' it's always the money." Or to paraphrase a bit more loosely,
though people do have idealistic or philosophical reasons that drive them
and their causes, despite all of this "stuff," at bottom one often finds
that money is the most basic factor when everything is stripped away -
especially when there is a drive expand something, to prosletyze, etc.
While Waldorf doesn't look on the surface like this is a motivation or
that it is immensely profitable - the teacher salaries start around
$35,000 and the tuition is about $7,000-9,000, the bigwigs haven't (that I
know of) started flying around in helicopters or Lear jets that are
"donated" to them by their grateful followers or holding conferences or
retreats in fancy spa type locations like Maharishi and TM, or
Scientology, or the Moonies, or Baba-Ji, etc. - nevertheless, think about
the economics for a minute.
Even at $7,000-9,000, if a school can get 30-35 kids per class, keep it's
teacher ratio (and thus labor costs) down to one teacher per class, that's
$210,000+ per class/grade x 8 grades = approx. $1.6 million per year,
minus costs. With an opposition to computers and technology, the costs of
all that computer equipment and educational technology are largely
eliminated. Similarly, the educational materials and environments that
are used are fairly low-tech (crayons, chalk, writing in student "study
books" (so no cost also for textbooks). The schools often start, I think,
in a church or left-over empty school, or some similar building - probably
for low cost start-up (and maybe there are non-profit foundations set up
to reduce and tax-protext these costs; at the least they are probably
charitable or non-profit orgs for tax purposes, like other private
schools) - and the schools start often one grade at a time, adding on
grades as the kids grow up; so the school doesn't have large, all-at-once
start-up costs. They grow kind of like chain letters
(and that might be a good analogy).
With the expansion of these schools, and the push to expand them further
by capitalizing on the poor record of and parent antipathy toward public
education, plus the worldwide distribution of Waldorf schools, this would
seem to be possibly quite a lucrative business.
(The worldwide reach not only draws on the school population and income of
communities in countries all over the world, but the standardization of
approach offers the attraction of being able to move one's child from one
Waldorf school to another should one have to relocate - and this could be
a particular attraction to business people and others who move all over
the world these days.)
This idea - of profit motive behind the Waldorf movement - may be
off-the-mark and the analysis here may be wrong, but it seems like an idea
that ought to be considered and examined more closely. Over and over, the
other cults that come along, or the nutraceuticals business, etc. often
boil down to someone making a substantial amount of money, or gaining
power and connections to facilitate their doing this, when all is said and
done. The drive to expand things often has a dollar sign behind it.
That's not per se a bad thing to me; it's the American way.
But if it is the real "occult" agenda here, it ought to be seen for what
it is.
On the other hand, this may be completely wrong. Waldorf may indeed be
what it aspires to be (even at an occult or disguised level that PLANs
doesn't like for church/state reasons) - an idealistic or spiritually
oriented education that it's adherents feel really is a good education.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:56:10 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
A quick update:
A German friend just called - I asked about the Tante thing for
kindergarten. I was told that in Germany kindergarten kids often call the
teacher "Auntie" as a bridge between the school world and home. This does
not appear to be a "Waldorf" phenomenon. It's a German thing. I still
don't like it but that's me.
-Walden
----- Original Message -----
From: "walden" (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
) Hi Agustina,
)
) I have never heard of the children referring to their Waldorf teacher as
) "Aunt So-and-So." Any German/Austrian/Swiss list members here? If this
) were my child it would not only surprise me - it would give me the creeps.
) This should have been explained to you before enrolling. Perhaps now is
the
) time to arrive at school with a list of questions for the teachers. My
) experience tells me this might be the first of many "confusing" incidents
) for your child. Children come first. Honesty and integrity must
supersede
) any perceived mission by any member of any school. You are the parent of
) your child and the teacher is not an "aunt."
)
) -Walden
)
)
) ) Hi y'all.
) ) I'm writing from Buenos Aires, Argentina, and I would like to ask you:
) what
) ) do your children call their Waldorf teachers? My daughter started
) ) kindergarten at a Waldorf school last year, and I was very surprised to
) ) hear, after classes had started, that teachers are called "Tante". Is
this
) ) universal? When I asked the teacher she said that they wanted school,
and
) ) especially kindergarten, to be an extension of the family and, anyway,
) since
) ) most families don't understand German, it doesn't really matter.
Although
) it
) ) may sound reasonable (the last part certainly doesn't) I wish I had been
) ) told about this before. I found it quite shocking and confusing for my
) ) child, who happens to understand some German.
) ) Greetings from Argentina,
) ) Agustina Eiff
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:52:39 -0300
From: (antigonabaires hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf a good business?
Profit is certainly not a reason in Argentina. The school my daughter
attends has very few children (only 5 in first grade), and every month
teachers and parents end up donating money to pay bills. Materials are much
more expensive, at least here. Five plastic chairs cost as much as a good
wooden chair; most coloring materials are imported; whole grain food is very
expensive and usually not available at supermarkets; teachers earn $600 a
month (about $200 US dollars) while the cleaning person will not do her job
for less than $450, and I could go on and on. And I think this is what makes
the whole thing even creepier: teachers do it for the cause, the ideal or
whatever you want to call it. They give up their own lives. They think they
have to do it no matter what it takes because it's their mission, and
parents should have a part in that enormous effort.
This time is not the money, I'm afraid. And sometimes I wish it was - it
would be so much easier for me to pull my child out of school!
Greetings from Argentina.
----- Original Message -----
From: "pecunia" (bus98 hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 4:07 PM
Subject: Is Waldorf a good business?
) This is unrelated to anything that has been posted recently, but is
) something I have wondered about, and so am posting to see what
) others think.
)
)
) I have not seen this possibility addressed anywhere, but I wonder if
) anyone has considered whether a primary motivation behind Waldorf and it's
) attempt to spread itself (and according to PLANS, to do so deviously or
) dishonestly) is simply financial? I have seen postings that speculate on
) what Steiner's or Waldorf's motivation was/is as being religous,
) spiritual, etc., but I wonder if it's just a good business?
)
) An attorney friend of mine once said, "When anybody says, 'It's not the
) money,' it's always the money." Or to paraphrase a bit more loosely,
) though people do have idealistic or philosophical reasons that drive them
) and their causes, despite all of this "stuff," at bottom one often finds
) that money is the most basic factor when everything is stripped away -
) especially when there is a drive expand something, to prosletyze, etc.
)
) While Waldorf doesn't look on the surface like this is a motivation or
) that it is immensely profitable - the teacher salaries start around
) $35,000 and the tuition is about $7,000-9,000, the bigwigs haven't (that I
) know of) started flying around in helicopters or Lear jets that are
) "donated" to them by their grateful followers or holding conferences or
) retreats in fancy spa type locations like Maharishi and TM, or
) Scientology, or the Moonies, or Baba-Ji, etc. - nevertheless, think about
) the economics for a minute.
)
) Even at $7,000-9,000, if a school can get 30-35 kids per class, keep it's
) teacher ratio (and thus labor costs) down to one teacher per class, that's
) $210,000+ per class/grade x 8 grades = approx. $1.6 million per year,
) minus costs. With an opposition to computers and technology, the costs of
) all that computer equipment and educational technology are largely
) eliminated. Similarly, the educational materials and environments that
) are used are fairly low-tech (crayons, chalk, writing in student "study
) books" (so no cost also for textbooks). The schools often start, I think,
) in a church or left-over empty school, or some similar building - probably
) for low cost start-up (and maybe there are non-profit foundations set up
) to reduce and tax-protext these costs; at the least they are probably
) charitable or non-profit orgs for tax purposes, like other private
) schools) - and the schools start often one grade at a time, adding on
) grades as the kids grow up; so the school doesn't have large, all-at-once
) start-up costs. They grow kind of like chain letters
) (and that might be a good analogy).
)
) With the expansion of these schools, and the push to expand them further
) by capitalizing on the poor record of and parent antipathy toward public
) education, plus the worldwide distribution of Waldorf schools, this would
) seem to be possibly quite a lucrative business.
) (The worldwide reach not only draws on the school population and income of
) communities in countries all over the world, but the standardization of
) approach offers the attraction of being able to move one's child from one
) Waldorf school to another should one have to relocate - and this could be
) a particular attraction to business people and others who move all over
) the world these days.)
)
) This idea - of profit motive behind the Waldorf movement - may be
) off-the-mark and the analysis here may be wrong, but it seems like an idea
) that ought to be considered and examined more closely. Over and over, the
) other cults that come along, or the nutraceuticals business, etc. often
) boil down to someone making a substantial amount of money, or gaining
) power and connections to facilitate their doing this, when all is said and
) done. The drive to expand things often has a dollar sign behind it.
) That's not per se a bad thing to me; it's the American way.
) But if it is the real "occult" agenda here, it ought to be seen for what
) it is.
)
) On the other hand, this may be completely wrong. Waldorf may indeed be
) what it aspires to be (even at an occult or disguised level that PLANs
) doesn't like for church/state reasons) - an idealistic or spiritually
) oriented education that it's adherents feel really is a good education.
)
) Pecunia
)
)
)
)
) _________________________________________________________________
) Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
) http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:00:17 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf a good business?
Pecunia wrote:
I have not seen this possibility addressed anywhere, but I wonder if
anyone has considered whether a primary motivation behind Waldorf and
it's
attempt to spread itself (and according to PLANS, to do so deviously or
dishonestly) is simply financial?
These are certainly fascinating questions.
I still think "it's not the money," but your questions deserve some
looking into. It has indeed occurred to me that these schools are not
expensive to run. They spend a lot on good art and craft supplies. All
that wool yarn is extremely expensive. Besides that - what is there?
Compared to other schools, that is - all the things that cost a lot
elsewhere are de-emphasized in Waldorf: Sports. Computers. Textbooks,
workbooks. Other high-tech equipment in classrooms. Up-to-date science
labs. Field trips. All unnecessary. The facilities are never very fancy
because as you say simpler is considered better so there is rarely a
drive to get a big new gymnasium or auditorium or swimming pool etc.
And the teachers - yes - I think money figures into the preference for
large classes. It would seem na?ve to think otherwise. It is simply
enormously cost-effective to give each teacher 35 instead of 25. System
wide, yes, this is money talking. Then if you expect this teacher to
work like a starving missionary out of love for the cause - in fact you
actually ask the parents to feed her sometimes - and exhort her that it
is unspiritual ever to think of financial reward . . . heck of a
cost-effective system. She accepts the low pay partly because out of
dedication . . . and partly because if she only has Waldorf training,
she can't get a teaching job elsewhere.
And money is certainly the answer behind the expansion into the public
sector in the US.
And adding to your analysis, Waldorf schools and Waldorf parents support
anthroposophic businesses which are pricey, pricey, pricey, if you've
checked out the contents of a Waldorf school store lately, or tried
dressing your child in the approved organic-only all-cotton-and-wool
fashion (nothing from the thrift store, please, as it will have Mickey
Mouse on it or an unacceptable percentage of polyester).
Is anyone getting rich out of the Waldorf movement? I doubt it. Or is it
just a very happy coincidence for them that their true spiritual mission
allows them to save money in such shrewd ways. Karma . . .
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:18:30 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf a good business?
Augustine wrote:
)whole grain food is very expensive and usually not available at
)supermarkets;
Yes, but where are they actually getting it? If they are associated with
a biodynamic farm nearby all of this is sort of "in the family" in the
larger anthroposophic community. Who works on the biodynamic farm? In
our area it is a Camphill setting, in other words some of the work is
done by disabled people in a sheltered workshop type setting.
Thinking more about the school store, consider too that many of the
items are made by Waldorf parents' donated labor. At our school parents
and teachers made virtually all the toys in the kindergartens. The
school paid for the materials but obviously thereby acquired the items
at a fraction of what it would have cost to buy them. This works so well
because you can tell parents exactly what to make and how to make it.
The other stuff in the store is acquired from anthroposophic businesses
- the books from the anthroposophic presses, art supplies from anthro.
suppliers etc. It's a sort of closed loop. Aside from rent and
janitorial services they paid few people outside an anthroposophic
community.
Parents made most of the classroom furniture, wove the rugs on the
floor, sewed curtains at the windows, donated dishes and glassware and
garden tools, did landscaping and gardening, planted trees, built wooden
play structures on the playground (again, keeping it in the community;
they would never pay for an ordinary swing set, for instance). Of course
when you are involved in this wonderful cause, you never for a minute
think over the economics of this system.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 17:39:09 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
)I'm writing from Buenos Aires, Argentina, and I would like to ask you: what
)do your children call their Waldorf teachers? My daughter started
)kindergarten at a Waldorf school last year, and I was very surprised to
)hear, after classes had started, that teachers are called "Tante". Is this
)universal? When I asked the teacher she said that they wanted school, and
)especially kindergarten, to be an extension of the family and, anyway, since
)most families don't understand German, it doesn't really matter. Although it
)may sound reasonable (the last part certainly doesn't) I wish I had been
)told about this before. I found it quite shocking and confusing for my
)child, who happens to understand some German.
)Greetings from Argentina,
)Agustina Eiff
When we were at the San Francisco Waldorf School, teachers were
addressed as Mr. or Mrs., whether they were married or not.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:41:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vee Falckenberg (munichflowerfairy yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
Hi everyone,
I am usually just following the discussions without
contributing. I am German and have been living in
Germany for 35 years (now we live in New Zealand).
I would like to contribute to this thread from a
German background. When I was going to kindergarten
(in Germany/non Waldorf),which is a little more than
30 years ago,there might have been many kindergarten
teachers who wanted to be addressed as "Tante". I
would estimate that this "habit" has been thrown out
20 years ago in most German kindergartens. It is very
very dated!
40 to 50 years ago you might have come across parents
who would introduce grown-ups not related to their
child as "Tante xyz" or "uncle abc". Nowadays, you
might have the odd grandparent who still does this.
It has been dropped for various reasons. For one
thing, it creates a familiarity between the child and
a stranger that is often deceiptful and can possibly
be used by certain people in a manipulative way (such
as paedophiles. And I do realize that often these
people ARE in fact the aunties or uncles). Another
thing is, it simply distorts reality and confuses
children.
Progressive and modern educators believe that this
form of address is condescending towards the child. It
contains a notion of "you can trust me, I am your
auntie, but I am also a person of authority, so don't
talk back". That's the way I perceive it, anyway.
So, yes it used to be a German thing but it is no
longer used. My daughter has attended three different
kindergartens due to frequent moves all over Germany
and has always addressed her teachers with their first
name. Not sure about what is the habit in Waldorf
kindergartens in Germany but it would surprise if they
still used the "Tante" address.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Verena
--- walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca) wrote:
) A quick update:
)
) A German friend just called - I asked about the
) Tante thing for
) kindergarten. I was told that in Germany
) kindergarten kids often call the
) teacher "Auntie" as a bridge between the school
) world and home. This does
) not appear to be a "Waldorf" phenomenon. It's a
) German thing. I still
) don't like it but that's me.
)
) -Walden
)
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "walden" (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:55 AM
) Subject: Re: Question from the far south
)
)
) ) Hi Agustina,
) )
) ) I have never heard of the children referring to
) their Waldorf teacher as
) ) "Aunt So-and-So." Any German/Austrian/Swiss list
) members here? If this
) ) were my child it would not only surprise me - it
) would give me the creeps.
) ) This should have been explained to you before
) enrolling. Perhaps now is
) the
) ) time to arrive at school with a list of questions
) for the teachers. My
) ) experience tells me this might be the first of
) many "confusing" incidents
) ) for your child. Children come first. Honesty and
) integrity must
) supersede
) ) any perceived mission by any member of any school.
) You are the parent of
) ) your child and the teacher is not an "aunt."
) )
) ) -Walden
) )
) )
) ) ) Hi y'all.
) ) ) I'm writing from Buenos Aires, Argentina, and I
) would like to ask you:
) ) what
) ) ) do your children call their Waldorf teachers? My
) daughter started
) ) ) kindergarten at a Waldorf school last year, and
) I was very surprised to
) ) ) hear, after classes had started, that teachers
) are called "Tante". Is
) this
) ) ) universal? When I asked the teacher she said
) that they wanted school,
) and
) ) ) especially kindergarten, to be an extension of
) the family and, anyway,
) ) since
) ) ) most families don't understand German, it
) doesn't really matter.
) Although
) ) it
) ) ) may sound reasonable (the last part certainly
) doesn't) I wish I had been
) ) ) told about this before. I found it quite
) shocking and confusing for my
) ) ) child, who happens to understand some German.
) ) ) Greetings from Argentina,
) ) ) Agustina Eiff
) )
) )
)
==^================================================================
) ) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like
) here, no matter how basic.
) New threads are always welcome.
) )
) )
) )
)
)
==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like
) here, no matter how basic. New threads are always
) welcome.
)
)
)
)
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 05:57:03 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: ignorance is bliss
Peter Staudenmaier wrote:
to
) share that understanding with other "outsiders". If only
) anthroposophists
) could do the same for the rest of us...
P:
Evola once wrote that it is up them (those who want to understand the
esoteric) who have to raise at the level of occult teachings, not the
opposite.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:39:09 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: Upcoming Downtime Saturday evening-Sunday morning
Hello,
We would like to let you as a Topica Exchange List Owner know that
the Topica Web site will be unavailable for approximately 12 hours
this Saturday, April 19, 2003 beginning at 9:00 am PDT (16:00 GMT).
During this time, we'll be making system improvements to ensure that
we continue to support your needs.
All functionality and data will be restored immediately after the
maintenance period.
Thank you for your patience as we make these improvements.
Sincerely,
Topica Support
support get.topica.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 06:48:11 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: ignorance is bliss
)
)Peter Staudenmaier wrote:
)to
) ) share that understanding with other "outsiders". If only
) ) anthroposophists
) ) could do the same for the rest of us...
)
)Percedol:
)Evola once wrote that it is up them (those who want to understand the
)esoteric) who have to raise at the level of occult teachings, not the
)opposite.
)
Peter F responds:
My problem with this is that I believe that I would need to lower myself to
the level of occult teachings.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 06:50:03 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
P:
Interestingly, Peter S. missed that not only Philosophy if freedom
contains the discipline that later will be published in HKHW in a
different form, but that already in 1886 (Grundlinien einer
Erkenntnitheorie der Goetheschen...) the discipline is already there. RS
did already publish the basic of the inner discipline since 1886. The
logic of thought is present there in the same way as it is valid today.
It was a progressive making things easier, although never too easy.
There is no deception or ex post facto justification.
If one wants to follow A. should understand what PoF asks to do. PoF
(1894) gives already the main directions for the inner discipline.
Peter Staudenmaier wrote:
) Hello critics,
)
) so much I want to catch up on... For now I'd like to toss in my opinion
) on
) this quote from Steiner that Sharon shared:
)
) "Steiner: In the late 1880s I became editor of the 'Deutsche
) Wochenschrift'
) for a short time. This gave me the opportunity for intensive study of
) the
) folk-souls of the various Austrian nationalities. The guidelines for a
) spiritual cultural policy had to be found. In all this, the public
) display
) of esoteric ideas was out of the question. And the spiritual forces
) standing
) behind me gave me only one piece of advice: 'Everything in the guise of
) Idealistic philosophy'."
)
) I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is
) simply
) the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier career.
) The
) young Steiner was not in fact propagating a spiritual doctrine under the
)
) guise of Idealist philosophy, he was simply propagating Idealist
) philosophy
) with a strong German nationalist bent. There is nothing 'spiritual',
) much
) less esoteric, in his writings for the Deutsche Wochenschrift. These
) writings are straightforwardly political and cultural in nature; they
) make
) no reference, implied or otherwise, to any of the supernatural phenomena
)
) that later became the core of his worldview.
)
) After his turn to Theosophy around the turn of the century, Steiner
) systematically re-interpreted and re-cast his own earlier work to make
) it
) seem compatible with his new occult orientation. In other words, in my
) view
) Steiner wasn't being devious or deceptive in the 1880's by hiding his
) real
) message behind a philosophical veneer; instead he was deceptive later,
) in
) the early 1900's, when he misrepresented his own prior activities. I
) think
) that makes a difference in how we understand the relationship between
) his
) earlier and later phases; the standard anthroposophist position is that
) Steiner followed a specific 'spiritual' path all along, but that stance
) is
) flatly incompatible with his published writings from the 1880's and
) 1890's.
)
) Peter Staudenmaier
)
) _________________________________________________________________
)
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:38:20 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
)Percedol:
)Interestingly, Peter S. missed that not only Philosophy if freedom
)contains the discipline that later will be published in HKHW in a
)different form, but that already in 1886 (Grundlinien einer
)Erkenntnitheorie der Goetheschen...) the discipline is already there. RS
)did already publish the basic of the inner discipline since 1886. The
)logic of thought is present there in the same way as it is valid today.
Peter F responds:
Sorry Percedol. You have to do a lot of work to convince me it is valid
today, or valid in 1886. I would say instead, Steiner was wrong then, he is
still wrong now, and so are you. The question being discussed is "was he
honest?" The evidence is leaning towards he was not.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1022
-- Topica Digest --
RE: New to Waldorf
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: Question from the far south
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
Re: New to Waldorf
By cat.morris juno.com
RE: New to Waldorf
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By pstaud hotmail.com
the early Steiner and the late Steiner
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: New to Waldorf
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Steiner's first book
By pstaud hotmail.com
Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By bus98 hotmail.com
RE: New to Waldorf
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Question from the far south
By Percedol netscape.net
RE: Steiner's first book
By Percedol netscape.net
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Question from the far south
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: New to Waldorf
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By Percedol netscape.net
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By dan dandugan.com
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By Percedol netscape.net
re: Not Fan Mail
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Question from the far south
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By feetapparel hotmail.com
re: Not Fan Mail
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Not Fan Mail
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:50:56 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: New to Waldorf
Hi Cat,
A couple of questions - I'm assuming "visitors mornings" were structured
for you, i.e, a tour of the school type thing? What did your "classroom
observation" consist of - i.e., how long did you observe? What was the
class doing at the time you observed? I would usually recommend that you
go in for the better part of a day or at least a morning, on a couple of
different occasions (and not "occasions" the school has spiffed up for,
like a puppet play or festival, because those are very structured and
pre-planned to impress parents). Just observe a couple of ordinary
mornings for the real flavor of the classroom, the teacher's way of
interacting with the kids, the kids' relationships to each other, how is
discipline handled, how often those books really do come down off the
shelf, etc.).
Quick question - the books on the shelf - can the kids *reach* the
shelf? Is there a period of the day where they can freely select a book
for themselves? That was our teacher's trick - sure we have books, on a
high shelf in a dark closet the kids aren't allowed to get into. That
way she completely controlled access, which was limited to 5 or 10
minutes on rainy days. And then she decided who got which book. And most
of the books had only pictures, no words.
Off the top of my head the teacher you describe does not sound like a
fanatic to me, she sounds kind and fairly flexible. Some Waldorf
teachers are. Helping kids spell words, if they ask, for me, goes a long
way to distinguish the anthroposophic zealots from the teachers with a
bit of common sense. (I disagree, personally, with the delayed reading
approach; however, here I am just commenting on this teacher's apparent
flexibility in implementing the approach.)
Her anecdote about reconsidering the hard chairs and the unheated room
for the TV would make me think well of her! That little piece of advice
- put your TV in the garage, for instance - turns up regularly in
Waldorf parenting advice, and I agree with the teacher who now believes
it is cruel. It is a good metaphor for what goes wrong in Waldorf -
something that starts with good intentions and a beautiful ideal (a
media-free childhood), and you realize only maybe years later that, in
fact, you've used it to justify unkindness, you've behaved very badly
toward your own child. Think about that . . . you turn off the heat in
one room in the house - the room where your kids are relaxing. Years of
therapy ahead . . .
Of course a kind kindergarten teacher does not answer whether Waldorf
education or this particular school is right for your child for their
entire educational career over many years. Meeting the class (grades)
teacher would be more helpful for determining that. Probably it is too
soon for that. However, I urge you to read a lot more Steiner to be
fully informed about the basis of this education, and also to keep in
mind that making the transition to another school, were you to switch
your child after kindergarten, can be very difficult after the slow,
non-academic start in Waldorf. Also the reports of the other mother who
did not like what she saw in the older grades would weigh heavily with
me. I think observing some older classes yourself as well would be a
very good next step. Condescension, lack of training, total absorption
in the Steiner model without awareness of others, sound pretty familiar
to us here.
I'd also suggest trying to talk to some current or former parents
directly. It's fine for the teacher to say, for instance, that you are
welcome to help in the classroom "any time"; present parents might give
you an idea how that actually works in practice. Let us know if you have
other questions.
Diana
Hello,
I applied to Waldorf a few months ago with the anticipation that this
would be THE school for us. I proceeded to gather more information and
do
some research
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:07:00 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Question from the far south
Verena wrote:
I would like to contribute to this thread from a
German background. When I was going to kindergarten
(in Germany/non Waldorf),which is a little more than
30 years ago,there might have been many kindergarten
teachers who wanted to be addressed as "Tante". I
would estimate that this "habit" has been thrown out
20 years ago in most German kindergartens. It is very
very dated!
40 to 50 years ago you might have come across parents
who would introduce grown-ups not related to their
child as "Tante xyz" or "uncle abc".
Diana: I called some of my parents' friends Aunt and Uncle growing up,
though it certainly wasn't done in school. It was a way of making them
more familiar, like honorary family, than "authority figures" such as
teachers or ministers. I would agree that addressing teachers as family
members is blurring a boundary that probably should not often be
blurred.
I think a lot of people of our generation felt it weird for our kids'
friends to call us "Mr." or "Mrs." and we started out with first names.
In Waldorf adults couldn't be called by their first names, and I
suddenly became Mrs. Winters to my son's friends. Post-Waldorf we slowly
shed that once again and I'm once again Diana. Now I hate it when a kid
calls me Mrs. Winters. At my son's present school, teachers are
addressed by their first names. This also was hard to get used to at
first, and I don't think it's done in many schools, but now, I really do
find it the best solution. It makes people just people - you call the
teacher "Anne" because her name is Anne - yet it doesn't encourage undue
familiarity the way a phony family relationship ("Aunt") would do. The
message is we can all respect each other even without titles or labels
that imply rank or social status.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:13:01 -0600
From: cat.morris juno.com
Cc: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
Thanks for the responses.
To answer your question, my class observation consisted of about 1 1/2
hours in one of the kindergartens. The books were on an easily accessible
shelf, and available at any time. I do need to visit some of the higher
grades; I told the admissions person that I could not make a decision
about attending until I do so.
But really. . .I guess at this point I have too many concerns about
Waldorf. I will finish my look-see and also speak to some parents, but I
suspect I would have to hear some amazing things to make me feel
comfortable sending my child there (and forking over so much $$!). Though
I was very impressed with the kindergarten teacher, I do have concerns
about the rigidity of the grades. I originally thought the program would
be good for my child because she craves structure and order, and I
thought she would find the "old style" program--even small things, like
the desks being in rows--somehow comforting. She is very bright and
curious, and now I'm starting to think that she will fold if someone
gives her a figurative thwak on the knuckles for overstepping her
"developmental bounds." She is teaching herself to read, at four (she
must be learning by osmosis, because I have not had anything to do with
this), and I can see her becoming bored and sad in the next two years if
her excitement over this is deemed inappropriate and not fed.
Perhaps the art and handwork will have to come from home. We are doing
art from morning till night, anyway. Sigh. I wish there were a school
that offered all the good things that Waldorf does, without the rigid,
out-dated developmental approach and without the Anthroposophy. Handwork,
music, art integrated into the curriculum.
Thanks, Cat
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:22:11 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: New to Waldorf
Cat wrote:
Sigh. I wish there were a school that offered all the good things that
Waldorf does, without the rigid, out-dated developmental approach and
without the Anthroposophy. Handwork, music, art integrated into the
curriculum.
You're singing our song, Cat. Good luck to you.
If you find all this stuff somewhere, spread the word . . .
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:17:32 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Percedol writes:
)Interestingly, Peter S. missed that not only Philosophy if freedom
)contains the discipline that later will be published in HKHW in a
)different form, but that already in 1886 (Grundlinien einer
)Erkenntnitheorie der Goetheschen...) the discipline is already there. RS
)did already publish the basic of the inner discipline since 1886. The
)logic of thought is present there in the same way as it is valid today.
)It was a progressive making things easier, although never too easy.
)There is no deception or ex post facto justification.
)If one wants to follow A. should understand what PoF asks to do. PoF
)(1894) gives already the main directions for the inner discipline.
Before I heap well-deserved scorn on Percedol's argument, I'd like to make
clear that I believe there is lots of room for legitimate disagreement about
what Steiner wrote at various points in his life. I've gotten so used to
countering the obvious misunderstandings of people like Percedol, who see
themselves as guardians of Steiner's legacy, that I sometimes probably sound
like only one interpretation is possible or reasonable. I don't in fact
think that; it's just that so many of the common anthroposophical
interpretations are painfully at odds with what Steiner actually wrote.
Percedol's latest is a fine example. An astonishingly high proportion of
anthroposophists believe what he wrote above: they think that the early
Steiner, a thoroughly pedestrian philosopher in the German Idealist
tradition, was actually preparing the way for his later occult teachings
when he wrote about epistemology and monism in the 1880's and 1890's. I'll
post more in a moment about why this is nonsense, but for now I want to note
how well this fits in with the general anthroposophical mindset. Aside from
their utter incomprehension of their own guru's works, anthroposophically
inclined enthusiasts of Steiner can't even get the most basic biographical
facts straight. It's as if the details of Steiner's career and his changing
beliefs are too much for his fans, because they show Steiner up to 1901 as a
normal human being searching, just like the rest of us, for a meaningful way
to make sense of the universe, rather than as a clairvoyant Initiate with
special access to The Truth about life, the cosmos, and everything.
The two early books by Steiner that Percedol mentions above do indeed share
a number of continuities with his later anthroposophical works, some of
which I'll address in my subsequent post. The problem is that precisely
those areas that Percedol (along with many other anthroposophists) points to
-- an "inner discipline" and a "logic of thought" -- are the areas in which
the early Steiner and the later Steiner most strikingly diverge.
Both Grundlinien einer Erkenntnistheorie der Goetheschen Weltanschauung and
Philosophie der Freiheit follow an entirely conventional philosophical
approach, exploring a number of issues in epistemology (the theory of
knowledge) through rational, if rather unpersuasive, arguments that appeal
to everyday thinking and standard intellectual activity. Neither book says
anything at all about any "higher worlds" or about special faculties of
insight; there is no mention of akashic records, successive incarnations, or
guardians of the threshhold etc etc. None of these things are remotely
hinted at in these early works, much less discussed at length.
That is, of course, exactly why Steiner felt compelled to forewarn readers
with his 1918 preface to the revised edition of The Philosophy of Freedom.
In that preface he anticipates that readers of this early book who are
familiar with his later anthroposophical work may well be "astonished at not
finding in this book any reference to that region of the world of spiritual
experience described in my later writings". This could only be astonishing
to those who believe that Steiner was really an anthroposophist all along.
It makes absolutely no sense to say that Philosophy of Freedom and Knowledge
of Higher Worlds contain the same "discipline" but merely "in a different
form". The earlier book is all about human experience of the existing world,
the mundane plane of reality that all of us share, while the later book is
all about higher realities, other realms of experience quite unlike the
commonplace world of our five senses. There is nothing even slightly
supernatural about the earlier works, while the later works all revolve
around the central notion that the mundane, commonplace world is merely an
epiphenomenon of the supernatural worlds, which direct not only human
affairs but indeed all life on earth and the rest of the cosmos as well.
As to whether either of these approaches is "valid", I'll leave that up to
readers of Steiner to decide. It would be nice, though, if
anthroposophically inclined readers could keep the historical context of
Steiner's texts in mind. In a following post I'll go into a bit more detail
on this theme.
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:58:24 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: the early Steiner and the late Steiner
This thread began with a quote from Steiner, after his theosophical turn,
about his earlier career as journalist in Vienna when he worked as editor of
the Deutsche Wochenschrift in the late 1880's. This newspaper was one of the
major organs of the Austrian pan-German movement, and Steiner's articles for
the paper are overflowing with aggressively chauvinistic nationalism. None
of this material has been translated into English, and even many German
anthroposophists have never read any of it (it is published in volumes 31
and 32 of the Gesamtausgabe, Steiner's Complete Works). I have read every
word Steiner wrote for the Deutsche Wochenschrift, and there is nothing in
there to support the idea that Steiner already held the occult cosmology he
developed after the turn of the century.
The same is true of the two books that Percedol invoked, written in 1886 and
1894 respectively. The more important of these two, The Philosophy of
Freedom, can be read online here:
http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA004/TPOF/
Anyone who would like to see for themselves what connections might exist
between this text and Steiner's later anthroposophical works can simply read
The Philosophy of Freedom. If you find hidden messages about higher worlds,
please reveal them to me.
The sometimes sharply contrasting worldviews espoused by the early and the
late Steiner aren't especially surprising. Many intellectuals go through
similar phases of avowal and disavowal, traversing quite a few incompatible
ideological territories in the course of their development. In Steiner's
case, this included an Idealist phase, a Romantic phase, an individualist
phase, an atheist phase, and a rationalist phase, all before he embraced
Theosophy after the turn of the century. Several of these phases overlapped
significantly, and the borders between them were often blurred. But none of
them can simply be assimilated to his mature doctrines, which were worked
out after 1900. In some crucial instances, Steiner's mature anthroposophical
doctrines represent a repudiation of his earlier stance. That he was never
forthright about these changes in his own views is simply to be expected in
light of the esoteric pretensions of his mature system.
In order to give a more complete picture of the continuities and
discontinuities between the early and the late Steiner, I'm going to re-post
below part of a post I wrote last year about Steiner's epistemology. This
was part of my one-sided exchange with the anthroposophist author Joel Wendt
(Joel never replied). I hope it helps to clarify the different trajectories
that Steiner pursued in his earlier and later periods.
Peter Staudenmaier
["Steiner's epistemology" Feb 9, 2002]:
Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that focuses on knowledge: What can
we know (about ourselves, about the world, about anything) and how can we
know it? Another term for this sub-discipline is theory of knowledge. One of
the basic epistemological questions that philosophers have wrestled with for
millennia is: Where does our knowledge of the external world come from? What
is the relationship between the objective characteristics of things outside
ourselves (or even inside ourselves) and our subjective knowledge of those
characteristics?
During the early part of his career, Steiner explored this problem
extensively, primarily through reviewing and commenting on the work of other
philosophers. Steiner's argument gives a central role to what he called the
"spiritual organization" of the human being, which structures an
individual's knowledge of the external world. He first divides cognition
into two basic functions, perception and thought, and emphasizes that the
objects themselves do not determine how people perceive them. After pointing
to the necessary role of the will in all acts of knowing, he then makes a
further distinction between perception and intuition, and says that objects
present themselves to our perception, whereas the concepts with which we
grasp those objects are the product of intuition. But we need both -- sense
impressions and concepts, perception and intuition -- to achieve the full
reality, to have actual knowledge. In the final analysis, says the early
Steiner, it is thinking that connects us to each other and to the universe
as a whole.
So far, so good; while we might find much to argue with in this epistemology
(which I of course have only outlined here), it is both cogent and
plausible. What anthroposophists make of this framework, on the other hand,
is highly questionable. Starting with Steiner himself after his theosophical
turn (the point at which he largely left philosophy behind, with a few
exceptions, at least as it is traditionally understood), anthroposophists
have generally emphasized one side of the complex interplay between knower
and known: the subjective, internal side that unfolds within a person's
consciousness, which Steiner held was itself both objective and universal.
Indeed anthroposophists for the most part focus on the process of intuition
and introspection rather than the products of this process, namely concepts.
For Steiner, the phrase "abstract concepts" became a favorite term of abuse
(alongside "materialism"), as if concepts had not played a crucial role in
his earlier theory of knowledge. He held modern science responsible for
separating the "I" or ego from reality, for excluding the "soul" from
research and investigation, thereby alienating self-consciousness from its
true role as an aspect of existence, an outgrowth of reality itself. To
counter these supposedly pernicious effects of the abstract, materialist,
scientific mindset, the later Steiner recommended that his followers turn
their attention toward "the interior of the soul" through a rigorous program
of self-observation, introspection, and reflection, in order to "get beyond
ordinary consciousness". Only in this way would one be able to get past the
"surface of the soul" and reach "the depths of the soul".
Even this approach isn't necessarily wrongheaded, epistemologically
speaking, although some of us may suspect it is of limited value. But
Steiner's concrete prescriptions are often profoundly misguided, both
epistemologically and ethically. He says that rather than paying attention
to whether our thoughts are coherent and meaningful, whether our knowledge
is accurate and reliable, whether our intentions are legitimate and genuine,
we should instead simply "experience the activity of thinking". According to
Steiner, "through working on our souls" we will "arrive at the inner
activity of thinking, feeling, and willing." In this way, "soul experiences"
will "reveal their inner essence, which ordinary consciousness cannot
perceive."
Steiner's prescribed "soul work" consists of "the unlimited intensification
of the capacities of the soul," particularly "the faculties of attentiveness
and of loving devotion to that which the soul experiences." This position
represents, in my view, an abdication of the basic responsibility for
critical judgement, as well as a thorough misunderstanding of the
relationship between internal experiences and the natural and social worlds.
To sum up: Much of Steiner's early philosophical work is diligent and
clearly argued, although I reject many of its premises and don't find his
epistemology especially insightful. Even in this early period there are many
elements of Steiner's philosophy that I consider elitist, backward, and
wrong, and there are undoubtedly terminological and conceptual continuities
between his early and later works (the central role of the "I" is a
prominent example). But it is only with Steiner's turn to theosophy that
these elements metastasize and combine with the postulate of a supernatural
world that is more real than this one. At that point, the birth of
anthroposophy as we know it today, Steiner's epistemology turns in upon
itself and becomes irremediably regressive. What anthroposophists are left
with is a method that misunderstands what knowledge is for and how it is
achieved.
_________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 10:36:21 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
Sigh. I wish there were a school
) that offered all the good things that Waldorf does, without the rigid,
) out-dated developmental approach and without the Anthroposophy. Handwork,
) music, art integrated into the curriculum.
)
) Thanks, Cat
Don't we all wish for such a school.... Waldorf tries to be all things to
all people. Those people either put up with the *weirdness* (for a while)
or they slowly find themselves slipping into it via meetings, meditations,
prayers, etc. If you can't beat them - join them. I have had these
conversations with many people - parents *and* Waldorf teachers. My wish?
Waldorf announces publicly that they are Anthroposophical Schools and they
tell the world EXACTLY what they are all about. No need for Waldorf
inspired schools, Waldorf Lite, etc. Tell it like it IS!
Then... let's see if the type of school you (and thousands like you)
envision springs up to fill the void. Families on a Spiritual Path
involving reincarnation, higher worlds and/or The World (Universe) According
the Steiner might be well served by Waldorf schools. The rest of us should
not have to be subjected to trickery, smoke and mirrors and deception -
albeit with the best of intentions: the Mission.
The type of school movement you are talking about could/should be a reality
right now, IMO. Problem: the energy, time and money needed to create such a
place - in my experience - is sucked into Waldorf first ... until parents
and teachers clue into the Anthro Mission. As we are spat out the revolving
door after a few months (years) we are tired, confused and not overly eager
to start again. Shame.
You are not alone, Cat. Here is to hoping and working to right some wrongs
and see a brighter future.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:37:15 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Steiner's first book
Since Percedol mentioned Steiner's first book, on Goethe's (supposed)
epistemology, I thought I'd share a few tidbits from it with the rest of
you. Up to now I've been emphasizing the differences between Steiner's early
works and his later anthroposophy, but the portions I'll quote here will
mostly show some of the ways that Steiner continued to promote similar ideas
throughout the several phases of his career.
The book in question was published in 1886, when Steiner was 25 years old.
The authorized English translation is titled A Theory of Knowledge Implicit
in Goethe's World Conception (Anthroposophic Press 1978). Last year I went
to the trouble of reading the original and the translation side by side, an
interesting exercise in itself. I'll quote from the authorized translation.
One of the oddest aspects of the book is how little it has to do with
Goethe's actual views. The key word here is "implicit"; the young Steiner
evidently felt that he had discovered a philosophical standpoint in Goethe's
works that Goethe himself never explicitly espoused. But Steiner rarely even
quotes Goethe in this book, and much of what he writes seems to me his own
early philosophical speculations, which by my reading have little in common
with Goethe.
Anyway, Steiner does say a number of things that will sound familiar to
those who have some experience with anthroposophy. His enthusiasm for things
German is on full display; he notes with pride that Goethe is recognized as
one of "the greatest poets of our nation" (p. 8), and he portrays Goethe as
representative of "the very highest form of the universally human" (p. 6).
This is an early example of how Steiner conceived of German high culture as
the model for the universal human.
Steiner reproaches other commentators on Goethe for daring to criticize some
of the poet's ideas, rather than passively accepting them: "Those who have
busied themselves with these opinions have seldom been students surrendering
themselves with unprejudiced minds to his ideas, but usually critics sitting
in judgement upon him." (p. 6) This anticipates the anthroposophical
rejection of critique as such.
Finally, Steiner's first book includes passages that remind us just how
deeply anchored was his conviction of the superiority of some ethnic groups
and cultures over others. He offers an analogy between Eskimos and snails,
on the one hand, versus Europeans and mammals, on the other, in order to
underline the crucial contrast of "higher" and "lower" forms. Here Steiner
compares the disparity between "the snail, which belongs to a lower stage in
organization" and "the most highly developed animal" to the disparity
between "the culture of the Eskimo and that of the educated European" (pp.
17-18).
Assumptions like that must have made it much easier for the later Steiner to
embrace Theosophy's baroque system of racial and ethnic hierarchies. It
would be most interesting to learn whether Percedol believes that the "logic
of thought" he thinks anthroposophy stands for inevitably yields this kind
of conclusion about "higher" and "lower" peoples.
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 19:33:36 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Thanks to those who responded to my question below, and especially Diana for
the
extension with further insights. With only two responses, I gather most
others don't
think this is an issue or factor.
Perhaps instead Waldorf really is just doing a good job of running a soundly
financially
managed, conservative school with a focus on keeping things simple and
focused on the
really important things in education - ideas and personal relationships -
and not on all the
frills and excessive "plant" (gymnasiums, swimming pools, top heavy
administrative bureaucracy,
runaway educational technology, etc.) that mark many private schools these
days as well as
public education. At the risk of simplistic and stereotypical
generalization, the school is derived
essentially from a Germanic and Northern European orientation (minus all the
Theosophical and
esoteric Indian/Zorastrian/etc. nonsense), and one might expect sound,
simple financial management
from this culture (Swiss and German bankers, etc.). Maybe there is no
hidden great scam or fleecing
going on or profit to be gained. Maybe they are really in it for the
philosophy, and the simplicity and
financial management just fits, as Diana says, as a happy coincidence with
their ideas.
I thought money might be the real motive; but maybe not.
***********************************
Original Message:
This is unrelated to anything that has been posted recently, but is
something I have wondered about, and so am posting to see what
others think.
I have not seen this possibility addressed anywhere, but I wonder if
anyone has considered whether a primary motivation behind Waldorf and it's
attempt to spread itself (and according to PLANS, to do so deviously or
dishonestly) is simply financial? I have seen postings that speculate on
what Steiner's or Waldorf's motivation was/is as being religous,
spiritual, etc., but I wonder if it's just a good business?
An attorney friend of mine once said, "When anybody says, 'It's not the
money,' it's always the money." Or to paraphrase a bit more loosely,
though people do have idealistic or philosophical reasons that drive them
and their causes, despite all of this "stuff," at bottom one often finds
that money is the most basic factor when everything is stripped away -
especially when there is a drive expand something, to prosletyze, etc.
While Waldorf doesn't look on the surface like this is a motivation or
that it is immensely profitable - the teacher salaries start around
$35,000 and the tuition is about $7,000-9,000, the bigwigs haven't (that I
know of) started flying around in helicopters or Lear jets that are
"donated" to them by their grateful followers or holding conferences or
retreats in fancy spa type locations like Maharishi and TM, or
Scientology, or the Moonies, or Baba-Ji, etc. - nevertheless, think about
the economics for a minute.
Even at $7,000-9,000, if a school can get 30-35 kids per class, keep it's
teacher ratio (and thus labor costs) down to one teacher per class, that's
$210,000+ per class/grade x 8 grades = approx. $1.6 million per year,
minus costs. With an opposition to computers and technology, the costs of
all that computer equipment and educational technology are largely
eliminated. Similarly, the educational materials and environments that
are used are fairly low-tech (crayons, chalk, writing in student "study
books" (so no cost also for textbooks). The schools often start, I think,
in a church or left-over empty school, or some similar building - probably
for low cost start-up (and maybe there are non-profit foundations set up
to reduce and tax-protext these costs; at the least they are probably
charitable or non-profit orgs for tax purposes, like other private
schools) - and the schools start often one grade at a time, adding on
grades as the kids grow up; so the school doesn't have large, all-at-once
start-up costs. They grow kind of like chain letters
(and that might be a good analogy).
With the expansion of these schools, and the push to expand them further
by capitalizing on the poor record of and parent antipathy toward public
education, plus the worldwide distribution of Waldorf schools, this would
seem to be possibly quite a lucrative business.
(The worldwide reach not only draws on the school population and income of
communities in countries all over the world, but the standardization of
approach offers the attraction of being able to move one's child from one
Waldorf school to another should one have to relocate - and this could be
a particular attraction to business people and others who move all over
the world these days.)
This idea - of profit motive behind the Waldorf movement - may be
off-the-mark and the analysis here may be wrong, but it seems like an idea
that ought to be considered and examined more closely. Over and over, the
other cults that come along, or the nutraceuticals business, etc. often
boil down to someone making a substantial amount of money, or gaining
power and connections to facilitate their doing this, when all is said and
done. The drive to expand things often has a dollar sign behind it.
That's not per se a bad thing to me; it's the American way.
But if it is the real "occult" agenda here, it ought to be seen for what
it is.
On the other hand, this may be completely wrong. Waldorf may indeed be
what it aspires to be (even at an occult or disguised level that PLANs
doesn't like for church/state reasons) - an idealistic or spiritually
oriented education that it's adherents feel really is a good education.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:05:10 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: New to Waldorf
walden wrote:
My wish?
) Waldorf announces publicly that they are Anthroposophical Schools and
) they
) tell the world EXACTLY what they are all about. No need for Waldorf
) inspired schools, Waldorf Lite, etc. Tell it like it IS!
P:
WS were not made to be A. schools.
)
) Then... let's see if the type of school you (and thousands like you)
) envision springs up to fill the void. Families on a Spiritual Path
) involving reincarnation, higher worlds and/or The World (Universe)
) According
) the Steiner might be well served by Waldorf schools. The rest of us
) should
) not have to be subjected to trickery, smoke and mirrors and deception -
) albeit with the best of intentions: the Mission.
) The type of school movement you are talking about could/should be a
) reality
) right now, IMO. Problem: the energy, time and money needed to create
) such a
) place - in my experience - is sucked into Waldorf first ... until
) parents
) and teachers clue into the Anthro Mission. As we are spat out the
) revolving
) door after a few months (years) we are tired, confused and not overly
) eager
) to start again. Shame.
P:
Is there an A. Mission involving WS?
It would be interesting to know how many students of WS become students
of RS (members of the AS or something analog to it).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:10:54 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Question from the far south
Diana Winters wrote:
At my son's present school, teachers are
) addressed by their first names. This also was hard to get used to at
) first, and I don't think it's done in many schools, but now, I really do
) find it the best solution. It makes people just people - you call the
) teacher "Anne" because her name is Anne - yet it doesn't encourage undue
) familiarity the way a phony family relationship ("Aunt") would do. The
) message is we can all respect each other even without titles or labels
) that imply rank or social status.
) Diana
P:
In Italy people are addressed by last name. It is very different in the
USA. I doubt it has to do with rank or social status, it's just a matter
of form. In italy we are very formal, the US is very informal.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:15:36 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's first book
Peter Staudenmaier wrote:
It
) would be most interesting to learn whether Percedol believes that the
) "logic
) of thought" he thinks anthroposophy stands for inevitably yields this
) kind
) of conclusion about "higher" and "lower" peoples.
)
) Peter Staudenmaier
P:
Higher and lower are thoughts. Thinking takes a form, for example as a
word: higher, lower. What matters is thinking before it takes any form.
Therefore the practice: to experience thought before it becomes formal,
before it determines for an object.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:42:25 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
on 4/16/03 10:39 AM, Diana Winters at Diana.Winters verizon.net wrote:
) Peter:
) I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is
) simply
) the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier
) career.(snip)
)
) Diana:
) Fascinating! You're saying he wasn't sitting around back in the 1880's
) figuring out how he could put his spiritual program out there in the
) guise of idealistic philosophy - but rather 20 years later he's trying
) to make it appear he had been putting a spiritual program out there all
) along? He's trying to shore up his credentials among other occultists,
) in other words, who might notice that he didn't start out using all this
) occult terminology? He's cluing them in, or pretending to, to an earlier
) subtext that didn't really exist at the time.
Sharon: If you were a true "master" you'd have to know this at birth, so
Steiner could not have been all that he claimed to be in the eyes of his
followers if he didn't claim to be an occultist from birth. Peter says
Steiner converted to occultism after an atheist phase which Anthroposophists
adamantly refute. I'd love to read some of his atheist writings, perhaps
Peter could tell me where to find them in English. Followers believe
Steiner's claims--that he became clairvoyant and saw spiritual beings as a
child after his suicidal aunt's ghost asked him to help her.
In accordance with his occult beliefs, he claimed he became a "Master" at
the age of 40 (meaning he could officially give esoteric advice to followers
only after that age). Anthroposophists say that Steiner's book, Philosophy
of Freedom (1894), is occult coded. Peter has said in past posts that this
book was written before Steiner went off the deep end. Steiner made other
claims like "carefully but clearly" guiding the Magazin fur literatur into
esoteric paths around 1897, (5 years before becoming general secretary of
the Theosophical Society). He said his task was to bring a spiritual
current to bear on literature. I personally think that Steiner was extremely
brilliant at plotting subtexts and presenting outer forms to dupes. Although
I think his doctrine is bunk, I do think he had a knack for layering,
coding, and hiding--he *was* clever at this. I'm still not sure if Peter is
right or Anthros. are right about Philosophy of Freedom. I'd like to know
for certain. Either way, both arguments support my argument that Steiner was
devious.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 18:09:43 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
on 4/16/03 2:55 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
Honesty and integrity must supersede
) any perceived mission by any member of any school. You are the parent of
) your child and the teacher is not an "aunt."
Sharon: It was normal for me growing up in South Africa to refer to close
family friends as aunts and uncles. It was a way to be respectful, yet not
so formal as to have to use "Mrs.", "Mr." or "Sir", which is how we
addressed our teachers and the adults we didn't know.
At our ex-Waldorf school, my daughter's main teacher was "Mrs. xxx". Some
teachers were on first name basis with kids. I prefer first name basis, I
can't stand to be called "Mrs". (G) It freaks me out when anyone calls me
"Mrs."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:07:08 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
) P:
) WS were not made to be A. schools.
Walden: Have you not previously claimed a lack of knowledge with regards to
Waldorf schools? Or are you stating here that according to Steiner Waldorf
schools were not *meant* to become A. schools?
) P:
) Is there an A. Mission involving WS?
Walden: Yes. Does the New Social Order mean nothing to you? Threefold
Social Order (Organism). Have you not understood Steiner's prophecies and
desires for humankind?
Steiner- "Rosicrucian training guides the pupil through a definitely
regulated breathing process to form that organ that can within himself
effect the transformation of carbon into oxygen. What is to-day done by the
plant externally, will later on, through a future organ which the pupil is
already developing through his training, be effected in man himself....This
is the Alchemy which leads man to build up his own body as does the plant
to-day. One calls this the preparation of the Philosopher's Stone and carbon
is its outer symbol. But it is not the Philosopher's Stone until the pupil
can create it himself through his regulated breathing process. The teaching
can only be given from teacher to pupil, it is wrapped in deep secrecy..."
(165 Theosophy of a Rosicrucian, Rudolf Steiner, Rudolf Steiner Press
London, reprint 1981).
"The teaching of eurythmy is unique to Steiner schools, and it is taught
only by specialist teachers who have undergone a comprehensive three- or
four-year training. The implications at both personal and social levels are
profound, and eurythmy is therapeutic in that the movements do much to
harmonize the coporeal and soul-spiritual natures, thereby strengthening
resistance to injurious influences regardless of their origin. The very
practice of eurythmy as "soul gymnastics" serves to emphasize the view
Rudolf Steiner took of the essential wholeness of Man: bodily practices have
their spiritual effects, and vice versa. Its importance may be judged from
the fact that eurythmy is the only compulsory subject in the Waldorf school
curriculum." Childs, Gilbert. Steiner Education: in theory and practice.
Edinburgh: Floris Books, 1991.[p.203]
"If we work creatively out of knowledge such as the spiritual science
of Anthroposophy, in which the direct object is to gain knowledge about the
spiritual world and to receive this spiritual world into ideas and thoughts,
into feelings, perceptions and the will, then we shall prepare the right
soil for an art which will be a sort of synthesis of experiences before
birth and after death. (...)
The limbs are the part of the human body which more than any other part
passes over into the life of the next incarnation. They are the part that
points to the future, to what comes after death. But how do we form the
movement of the limbs in eurythmy? In the realm of the senses and in the
supersensible realm we study how the larynx and all the organs connected
with speech have brought over from the previous life and formed through the
intellectual capacities of the head and through the feeling capacity of the
breast. We link directly that which precedes birth with that which follows
death. From earthly life we take in a certain sense only the physical
material, the human being himself, who is the tool, the instrument for
eurythmy. But we allow him to make manifest what we study inwardly, what is
already prepared in him as a result of previous lives; this is transferred
to his limbs, which are the part of him in which life after death is being
shaped in advance. In eurythmy we present in the form and movement of the
human organism a direct external proof of man's share in the life of the
supersensible world. In causing people to do eurythmy we link them directly
with the supersensible world"
Steiner, Rudolf. Art in the Light of Mystery Wisdom. Lectures from various
dates and cities. Trans. Gandell and H.B.M. Anthroposophic Press, 1935.
First English Edition.
From the Anthroposophical Society in Florida:
"Steiner (to the first Waldorf teachers) 'We shall only be able to achieve
our task if we see it as not only to do with the intellect and feeling-life,
but with the sphere of the moral and spiritual in the highest sense.' The
task was the following: to help the soul-and-spirit being of the child,
which has at birth descended to earth from a pre-earthly existence, to find
its place in the physical world and to make it competent for life . . . .
Rudolf Steiner shows how the developing human being on the long and arduous
path into the physical world passes through a series of clearly defined
stages, which make definite inner and outer demands. Both the curriculum and
the methods of teaching of the new school, as he now described them, were
designed to meet these demands as well as possible through the right
pedagogical measures . . . This was Waldorf pedagogy. The campaign for a new
social order had been especially well received in the big Waldorf Astoria
cigarette-factory at Stuttgart."
P: ) It would be interesting to know how many students of WS become students
) of RS (members of the AS or something analog to it).
It would be more interesting to know how many students stay in these
schools for any length of time. It would be interesting to know how ethnic
diversity is reflected and respected in these schools. It would be
interesting to know how many families (as well as teachers) leave these
schools feeling confused and frustrated. It would be interesting to know
how many families feel swindled when they understand the occult nature of
their children's education....
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 01:37:33 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
mysplum wrote:
) on 4/16/03 10:39 AM, Diana Winters at Diana.Winters verizon.net wrote:
)
) ) Peter:
) ) I agree that this passage is disingenuous, but by my reading it is
) ) simply
) ) the later Steiner's ex post facto justification of his earlier
) ) career.(snip)
) )
) ) Diana:
) ) Fascinating! You're saying he wasn't sitting around back in the 1880's
) ) figuring out how he could put his spiritual program out there in the
) ) guise of idealistic philosophy - but rather 20 years later he's trying
) ) to make it appear he had been putting a spiritual program out there all
) ) along? He's trying to shore up his credentials among other occultists,
) ) in other words, who might notice that he didn't start out using all this
) ) occult terminology? He's cluing them in, or pretending to, to an earlier
) ) subtext that didn't really exist at the time.
)
) Sharon: If you were a true "master" you'd have to know this at birth, so
) Steiner could not have been all that he claimed to be in the eyes of his
) followers if he didn't claim to be an occultist from birth. Peter says
) Steiner converted to occultism after an atheist phase which
) Anthroposophists
) adamantly refute. I'd love to read some of his atheist writings, perhaps
) Peter could tell me where to find them in English. Followers believe
) Steiner's claims--that he became clairvoyant and saw spiritual beings as
) a
) child after his suicidal aunt's ghost asked him to help her.
)
) In accordance with his occult beliefs, he claimed he became a "Master"
) at
) the age of 40 (meaning he could officially give esoteric advice to
) followers
) only after that age). Anthroposophists say that Steiner's book,
) Philosophy
) of Freedom (1894), is occult coded. Peter has said in past posts that
) this
) book was written before Steiner went off the deep end. Steiner made
) other
) claims like "carefully but clearly" guiding the Magazin fur literatur
) into
) esoteric paths around 1897, (5 years before becoming general secretary
) of
) the Theosophical Society). He said his task was to bring a spiritual
) current to bear on literature. I personally think that Steiner was
) extremely
) brilliant at plotting subtexts and presenting outer forms to dupes.
) Although
) I think his doctrine is bunk, I do think he had a knack for layering,
) coding, and hiding--he *was* clever at this. I'm still not sure if
) Peter is
) right or Anthros. are right about Philosophy of Freedom. I'd like to
) know
) for certain. Either way, both arguments support my argument that Steiner
) was
) devious.
P:
It's not devious. The more difficult approach was given first, then it
was given something easier. In "occult science" we find that RS wrote
that the PoF approach is safer and more exact.
"The trustworthiness of the Imaginative stage of cognition can be
assured if the pupil will lend support to his meditation by acquiring
the habit of what may be called ?sense-free? thinking."
(snip)
"(The path that leads to sense-free thinking by way of the
communications of spiritual science is thoroughly reliable and sure.
There is however another that is even more sure, and above all more
exact; at the same time, it is for many people also more difficult. The
path in question is set forth in my books The Theory of Knowledge
implicit in Goethe's World-Conception and The Philosophy of Spiritual
Activity. These books tell of what man's thinking can achieve when
directed, not to impressions that come from the outer world of the
physical senses, but solely upon itself. When this is so, we have within
us no longer the kind of thinking that concerns itself merely with
memories of the things of sense; we have instead pure thinking which is
like a being that has life within itself. In the above-mentioned books
you will find nothing at all that is derived from communications of
spiritual science. They testify to the fact that pure thinking, working
within itself alone, can throw light on the great questions of life ?
questions concerning the universe and man. The books thus occupy a
significant intermediate position between knowledge of the sense world
and knowledge of the spiritual world. What they offer is what thinking
can attain, when it rises above sense-observation, yet still holds back
from entering upon spiritual, supersensible research. One who
wholeheartedly pursues the train of thought indicated in these books is
already in the spiritual world; only it makes itself known to him as a
thought-world. Whoever feels ready to enter upon this intermediate path
of development will be taking a safe and sure road, and it will leave
him a feeling in regard to the higher world that will bear rich fruit
through all time to come.)"
From "The Occult Science" Chapter V, 1910.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 18:01:33 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Pecunia, you wrote,
)Perhaps instead Waldorf really is just doing a good job of running a
)soundly financially
)managed, conservative school with a focus on keeping things simple
)and focused on the
)really important things in education - ideas and personal
)relationships - and not on all the
)frills and excessive "plant" (gymnasiums, swimming pools, top heavy
)administrative bureaucracy,
)runaway educational technology, etc.) that mark many private schools
)these days as well as
)public education.
Frequently not "soundly financially managed." Waldorf schools often
crash from parent/faculty crises (e.g. nothing is done about a bad
teacher till the class leaves en masse), or from simple incompetence.
They always have a board of directors, who are supposed to take care
of the legalities of business, but the board is usually chosen to
support the college of teachers, not lead, and the college makes all
the important decisions. Often the intelligence of a collective
management seems to be divided by the number of members, rather than
being more than the sum of its parts!
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 01:41:22 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
) Peter F responds:
) Sorry Percedol. You have to do a lot of work to convince me it is valid
) today, or valid in 1886. I would say instead, Steiner was wrong then, he
) is
) still wrong now, and so are you. The question being discussed is "was he
)
) honest?" The evidence is leaning towards he was not.
P:
I don't want you to convince you. Only your experience could convince
you. Otherwise would be an act of faith. Esotericism is about experience
not faith. Faith is a matter of religions.
About lack of honesty, I don't see this evidence you mention. Quite the
opposite.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:44:16 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: Not Fan Mail
A person named Kate wrote to PLANS accusing us Waldorf critics of needing to
get a life, etc. and saying that we need to realize that whatever Rudolf
Steiner might have said, he is not a threat because he is dead.
Kate then went on to say:
)) I cannot believe that you are getting away with calling Waldorf
)) Education a cult. You have every right to dislike it, speak out
)) against it, etc. But to call it a cult is liable. I am not an
)) attorney but I am going to check into this and attempt to stop you
)) from saying this.
Lisa: Forgive me, Kate, if this seems overly picky. But I believe that you
are misusing the word "liable" to mean "libel."
"Liable" means responsible for. "Libel" is the legal term I think you
are looking for.
I urge you to go ahead and investigate whether telling the truth is
libelous. I think you will quickly learn that truth is the ultimate defense
against libel.
Adn the truth is that Waldorf schools are the parochial schools of
Anthroposophy, and Anthroposophy could justifiably be termed a cult, which
is a small religious movement or sect.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:48:54 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
) on 4/16/03 2:55 PM, walden at awaldenpond shaw.ca wrote:
) Honesty and integrity must supersede
)) any perceived mission by any member of any school. You are the parent of
)) your child and the teacher is not an "aunt."
)
) Sharon: It was normal for me growing up in South Africa to refer to close
) family friends as aunts and uncles. It was a way to be respectful, yet not
) so formal as to have to use "Mrs.", "Mr." or "Sir", which is how we
) addressed our teachers and the adults we didn't know.
)
) At our ex-Waldorf school, my daughter's main teacher was "Mrs. xxx". Some
) teachers were on first name basis with kids. I prefer first name basis, I
) can't stand to be called "Mrs". (G) It freaks me out when anyone calls me
) "Mrs."
)
Lisa here: at our former Waldorf school, *all* teachers were either "Mrs.,"
"Mr.," or "Ms" with no exceptions that I ever witnessed or heard about. This
was true even in the preschool and kindergarten, which is somewhat unusual
for Maryland, where nursery school teachers and family friends,
acquaintances, etc. are often referred to as "Miss Debbie" or "Mr. Frank,"
etc.
The "Miss" before women's names and the "Mr." before men's names serves
the same purpose that Sharon mentions that "aunt" and "uncle" served in her
South African childhood: it expressed a sense of respect for the older
person, but had a friendly casual aspect to it vis a vis the use of the
first name.
I did not experience this during my childhood, which was spent in
Upstate New York. I thought when we moved here to Maryland that it was a
Southern thing.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 02:45:31 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
G'day pecunia,
I didn't respond earlier but since you only had two responses I might add my
thoughts to this issue. I think you have to add "for who" to your question.
I've already suggested that Steiner's motivation for Anthroposophy may not
have been as pure as DOFs such as Percedol have suggested. It is not obviuos
to me that Steiner did not find the most lucrative career he could by
founding Anthroposophy. Equally, the people teaching in Waldorf Schools get
to do something they want to do and they get paid for it. The amount may not
make anyone rich, but neither does it require those involved to keep a
second job to fund their religious activities.
See you, Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 02:51:39 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
)Percedol:
)I don't want you to convince you. Only your experience could convince
)you.
Peter F responds:
Percedol, how many times must I point out to you that this argument is
wrong. It is incorrect. You are mistaken. It is not the case. I feel like I
am in the dead parrot sketch in Monty Python. It doesn't logically follow.
It has been demonstrated to be false. What this means is that e\ven if you
continue to believe it (which could only be through faith) you can't use it
as an argument with me or anyone else.
See you, Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 03:00:40 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: re: Not Fan Mail
Lisa wrote:
) I urge you to go ahead and investigate whether telling the truth is
)libelous. I think you will quickly learn that truth is the ultimate defense
)against libel.
G'day Lisa,
this is not true in the UK or in Australia to my certain knowledge. As well
there is a High Court ruling in Australia which gives Australian Courts
jurisdiction over web based publications which can be downloaded in
Australia. Keeping in mind my legal training is zero, I believe this means
that if you were to defame me on this archive, and I discovered you were
visiting Australia, I might very well be able to prevent you from leaving
Australia and sue you for defamation under Australian Law, where the truth
of any statement you might have made about me is no defense whatsoever. It
may have some bearing on the amount of damages you might have awarded
against you, and you would also be liable to any legal costs I might incur
as well as court costs. Any Aussie lawyers listening in might like to set me
straight on any detail I have incorrect.
See you, Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:30:43 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Not Fan Mail
) Lisa wrote:
)) I urge you to go ahead and investigate whether telling the truth is
))libelous. I think you will quickly learn that truth is the ultimate defense
))against libel.
)
) G'day Lisa,
) this is not true in the UK or in Australia to my certain knowledge. As well
) there is a High Court ruling in Australia which gives Australian Courts
) jurisdiction over web based publications which can be downloaded in
) Australia. Keeping in mind my legal training is zero, I believe this means
) that if you were to defame me on this archive, and I discovered you were
) visiting Australia, I might very well be able to prevent you from leaving
) Australia and sue you for defamation under Australian Law, where the truth
) of any statement you might have made about me is no defense whatsoever. It
) may have some bearing on the amount of damages you might have awarded
) against you, and you would also be liable to any legal costs I might incur
) as well as court costs. Any Aussie lawyers listening in might like to set me
) straight on any detail I have incorrect.
) See you, Peter F
)
Thanks, Peter. I was being very US-centric in my statement, and I stand
corrected.
In the United States, truth is the ultimate defense against libel. That
I know for certain as it is my business, as a newspaper reporter, to know.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:34:15 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Hi Sharon,
)Peter says
)Steiner converted to occultism after an atheist phase which
)Anthroposophists
)adamantly refute. I'd love to read some of his atheist writings, perhaps
)Peter could tell me where to find them in English.
I don't think they've been translated. Very few of Steiner's non-book-length
texts from before 1900 have been translated. There are however a couple of
English books I haven't yet seen whose titles suggest they date from his
Nietzschean period in the 1890's, and some of his atheist writings might be
in there. At that time Steiner made great fun of the belief in god and of
those weak souls who felt the need to cling to this belief; it was the kind
of pompous and arrogant atheism that I don't have much use for. This period
coincided fairly closely with Steiner's radical rejection of Christianity,
as well as his caustic dismissal of Theosophy. In a couple of his articles
on Haeckel he took a more nuanced view, criticizing belief in god and
organized religion as incompatible with science and a modern outlook.
)In accordance with his occult beliefs, he claimed he became a "Master" at
)the age of 40 (meaning he could officially give esoteric advice to
)followers
)only after that age).
This is the age when I think he really went through a fairly profound
intellectual transformation, repudiating his earlier skeptical stance and
wholeheartedly embracing both Theosophy and Christianity. I don't know how
else to explain the radically contrary positions he staked out before and
after the turn of the century.
)Anthroposophists say that Steiner's book, Philosophy
)of Freedom (1894), is occult coded. Peter has said in past posts that this
)book was written before Steiner went off the deep end.
Yes, that is my assessment. I'm skeptical of the whole notion of occult
coding to begin with, and I just don't see how it could apply to a text like
PoF. The prose is undoubtedly a bit turgid, but it is so fundamentally
unlike every last thing he wrote after his conversion to Theosophy that it
doesn't make sense to me to place the 1894 book into the same category.
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:57:42 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
) Peter F responds:
) Percedol, how many times must I point out to you that this argument is
) wrong. It is incorrect. You are mistaken. It is not the case. I feel like
I
) am in the dead parrot sketch in Monty Python. It doesn't logically follow.
Yes it does.
) It has been demonstrated to be false.
No it hasn't.
What this means is that even if you
) continue to believe it (which could only be through faith) you can't use
it
) as an argument with me or anyone else.
Is this the right room for an argument? Sorry, Peter... you mentioned
Python and I could not resist (g).
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1023
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Question from the far south
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
coded subtexts?
By Diana.Winters verizon.net
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: coded subtexts?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By bus98 hotmail.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By pstaud hotmail.com
Re: New to Waldorf
By hagenaar wxs.nl
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: New to Waldorf
By bus98 hotmail.com
Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By bus98 hotmail.com
Re: New to Waldorf
By cat.morris juno.com
RE: Not Fan Mail
By dkimble mystrotv.com
Gnomes, however, are real.
By bus98 hotmail.com
Re: Question from the far south
By antigonabaires hotmail.com
Gnomes revisited
By bus98 hotmail.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By nmfoss hotmail.com
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By bus98 hotmail.com
RE: Not Fan Mail
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: apologies and update
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
Re: New to Waldorf
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
Re: Question from the far south
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 07:41:51 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Question from the far south
Percedol:
In Italy people are addressed by last name. It is very different in the
USA. I doubt it has to do with rank or social status, it's just a matter
of form. In italy we are very formal, the US is very informal.
No, I was perhaps not clear that my son's school is unusual in the US,
Percedol. My son attends a Quaker school. It is the norm in the US for
children to call their teachers Mr. or Ms. or Mrs.
Dan mentioned that at his Waldorf school it was Mr. or Mrs. regardless
of marital status. At our Waldorf school, there were unmarried female
teachers who did use "Mrs." and others who used "Ms."
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 07:51:09 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: coded subtexts?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C3057F.4B78F6B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sharon:
I personally think that Steiner was extremely brilliant at plotting
subtexts and presenting outer forms to dupes. Although I think his
doctrine is bunk, I do think he had a knack for layering, coding, and
hiding--he *was* clever at this. I'm still not sure if Peter is right
or Anthros. are right about Philosophy of Freedom.
Diana: I think you give him too much credit (Steiner, that is, not
Peter). :-) If the books and lectures were not verbose, rambling, vague,
confused, puffy, I'd have an easier time buying his "brilliance." I
don't think he layered or coded things, he just talked on and on at his
fawning followers. Some apparently think that because he repeats the
same point 6 times in slightly different terms, more is being revealed
as you go and that this is all deliberate . . . all it really means is
he needed a good editor. Because he was the guru nobody had the nerve to
say, "You've said that already."
His followers go over and over his works seeking double meanings and
layers and coded truths, so it is not surprising they find them
everywhere.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 10:24:26 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
on 4/18/03 12:34 AM, Peter Staudenmaier at pstaud hotmail.com wrote:
)
) I don't think they've been translated. Very few of Steiner's non-book-length
) texts from before 1900 have been translated. There are however a couple of
) English books I haven't yet seen whose titles suggest they date from his
) Nietzschean period in the 1890's, and some of his atheist writings might be
) in there. At that time Steiner made great fun of the belief in god and of
) those weak souls who felt the need to cling to this belief; it was the kind
) of pompous and arrogant atheism that I don't have much use for.
Sharon: I feel I've missed an important period of Steiner, wish I could read
some of this.
This period
) coincided fairly closely with Steiner's radical rejection of Christianity,
) as well as his caustic dismissal of Theosophy. In a couple of his articles
) on Haeckel he took a more nuanced view, criticizing belief in god and
) organized religion as incompatible with science and a modern outlook.
Sharon: It's interesting that he would reject Christianity, then use it to
advance his religion. Even so, in reality, despite what he or followeres
say, his later doctrine is also a rejection of Christianity.
)) In accordance with his occult beliefs, he claimed he became a "Master" at
)) the age of 40 (meaning he could officially give esoteric advice to
)) followers
)) only after that age).
)
) This is the age when I think he really went through a fairly profound
) intellectual transformation, repudiating his earlier skeptical stance and
) wholeheartedly embracing both Theosophy and Christianity. I don't know how
) else to explain the radically contrary positions he staked out before and
) after the turn of the century.
Sharon: Yes, this is when he joined the Theosophists and became general
secretary of the Theosophical Society. Strangely, Annie Bessant had the same
transformation. Both were radically anti-Christianity, both were flaming
atheists, and both underwent Theosophical conversions.
)
)
)) Anthroposophists say that Steiner's book, Philosophy
)) of Freedom (1894), is occult coded. Peter has said in past posts that this
)) book was written before Steiner went off the deep end.
)
) Yes, that is my assessment. I'm skeptical of the whole notion of occult
) coding to begin with, and I just don't see how it could apply to a text like
) PoF. The prose is undoubtedly a bit turgid, but it is so fundamentally
) unlike every last thing he wrote after his conversion to Theosophy that it
) doesn't make sense to me to place the 1894 book into the same category.
Sharon: Yes I understand why you would be skeptical, and I'm more inclined
to side with you because you are so well read, and have a terrific
background in German history. You've also got the advantage of being fluent
in German and can read things that I can't. But because of my family's
peculiar Waldorf experience I'm a bit on the fence here when it comes to
occult coding. If you are ignorant about Steiner's occultism going into
Waldorf, the experience is utterly different than if you are aware and
understand the subtext. In *retrospect*, after much study, Waldorf has a
very different meaning to me than it did while we were involved. Due to my
ignorance while in Waldorf, Steiner's esotericism lay beneath the surface,
oozing out occasionally in weird ways, but I was not able to understand the
peculiarities without the information I later gained from reading Steiner.
If I had not had this extraordinary experience, I too would reject Anthros'.
claims about PoF's subtext. In a sense, my Waldorf experience and awakening
mirrors their claims about occult coding in PoF. Very hard to explain, but I
think many of us on list, had similar Waldorf experiences. I know that Debra
and Walden experienced Waldorf much as I did. Diana, being an assistant, was
actually reading Steiner's occultism which is probably why she left sooner
than we did. I think it would be much easier to attribute occult meanings to
non-occult work in retrospect, than to present work that's supposedly
occult-coded.
Thanks for your posts, I learn so much from them.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:22:13 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: coded subtexts?
) This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3133509733_42792_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
on 4/18/03 7:51 AM, Diana Winters at Diana.Winters verizon.net wrote:
Sharon:
I personally think that Steiner was extremely brilliant at plotting subtexts
and presenting outer forms to dupes. Although I think his doctrine is bunk,
I do think he had a knack for layering, coding, and hiding--he *was* clever
at this. I'm still not sure if Peter is right or Anthros. are right about
Philosophy of Freedom.
Diana: I think you give him too much credit (Steiner, that is, not Peter). J
If the books and lectures were not verbose, rambling, vague, confused,
puffy, I?d have an easier time buying his ?brilliance.? I don?t think he
layered or coded things, he just talked on and on at his fawning followers.
Some apparently think that because he repeats the same point 6 times in
slightly different terms, more is being revealed as you go and that this is
all deliberate . . . all it really means is he needed a good editor..
Because he was the guru nobody had the nerve to say, ?You?ve said that
already.?
Sharon: You know Diana, that I think Steiner's doctrine is lunacy and I
totally agree that he needed an editor! (G). I'm not saying that his
doctrine is brilliant, I'm saying that he was a clever trickster, a
sophisticated, psychological manipulator. The example of his asking
teachers to call the prayer a verse clearly demonstrates this knack he had.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:37:41 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Thanks again for your responses. For Peter F. particularly, I'm not sure if
you read my initial message (apologies for length), but the
"for whom" is actually just what I was addressing - is Waldorf "a good
business" for Steiner and the Waldorfers. Diana understood very well what I
was questioning. Is the real driving force behind Waldorf just that it is
actually a lucrative scam that is making some insiders pretty wealthy as the
movement grows, as more schools are established, as public money is brought
in to fund the schools (and thus fuel their expansion), etc. Many other
cults that ostensibly grow because of the spiritual, health, or other
high-sounding benefits claimed (enlightment, nirvana, cancer cures, and
other versions of snake oil) are really just a way to make their insiders
rich. To be crass or practical about it, the profit motive is more
fundamental than the philosophical. The question that keeps recurring to me
is: what motivates these guys? What's the purpose? What's the goal? Is
it really just some nutty occult view of the world (I don't know if I would
quite put it in the class with Heaven's Gate and the Hale Bopp comet
nonsense - there are at least more classical underpinnings here - but it
borders on it) that informs a philosphical view they want to spread (but
why?)? And is the ultimate goal to create some cabal in positions of power
in government and elsewhere staffed by Anthropomorphists? Ie. is the purpose
really just to impose or spread a philosophical position? Or do they
really, as educators, believe that they are promoting a more humanistic,
organic, balanced type of education? Or is it basically a scam to make
money? Considering the last more carefully was my point.
********************
G'day pecunia,
I didn't respond earlier but since you only had two responses I might add my
thoughts to this issue. I think you have to add "for who" to your question.
I've already suggested that Steiner's motivation for Anthroposophy may not
have been as pure as DOFs such as Percedol have suggested. It is not obviuos
to me that Steiner did not find the most lucrative career he could by
founding Anthroposophy. Equally, the people teaching in Waldorf Schools get
to do something they want to do and they get paid for it. The amount may not
make anyone rich, but neither does it require those involved to keep a
second job to fund their religious activities.
See you, Peter F
********************
Thanks to those who responded to my question below, and especially Diana for
the
extension with further insights. With only two responses, I gather most
others don't
think this is an issue or factor.
Perhaps instead Waldorf really is just doing a good job of running a soundly
financially
managed, conservative school with a focus on keeping things simple and
focused on the
really important things in education - ideas and personal relationships -
and not on all the
frills and excessive "plant" (gymnasiums, swimming pools, top heavy
administrative bureaucracy,
runaway educational technology, etc.) that mark many private schools these
days as well as
public education. At the risk of simplistic and stereotypical
generalization, the school is derived
essentially from a Germanic and Northern European orientation (minus all the
Theosophical and
esoteric Indian/Zorastrian/etc. nonsense), and one might expect sound,
simple financial management
from this culture (Swiss and German bankers, etc.). Maybe there is no
hidden great scam or fleecing
going on or profit to be gained. Maybe they are really in it for the
philosophy, and the simplicity and
financial management just fits, as Diana says, as a happy coincidence with
their ideas.
I thought money might be the real motive; but maybe not.
***********************************
Original Message:
This is unrelated to anything that has been posted recently, but is
something I have wondered about, and so am posting to see what
others think.
I have not seen this possibility addressed anywhere, but I wonder if
anyone has considered whether a primary motivation behind Waldorf and it's
attempt to spread itself (and according to PLANS, to do so deviously or
dishonestly) is simply financial? I have seen postings that speculate on
what Steiner's or Waldorf's motivation was/is as being religous,
spiritual, etc., but I wonder if it's just a good business?
An attorney friend of mine once said, "When anybody says, 'It's not the
money,' it's always the money." Or to paraphrase a bit more loosely,
though people do have idealistic or philosophical reasons that drive them
and their causes, despite all of this "stuff," at bottom one often finds
that money is the most basic factor when everything is stripped away -
especially when there is a drive expand something, to prosletyze, etc.
While Waldorf doesn't look on the surface like this is a motivation or
that it is immensely profitable - the teacher salaries start around
$35,000 and the tuition is about $7,000-9,000, the bigwigs haven't (that I
know of) started flying around in helicopters or Lear jets that are
"donated" to them by their grateful followers or holding conferences or
retreats in fancy spa type locations like Maharishi and TM, or
Scientology, or the Moonies, or Baba-Ji, etc. - nevertheless, think about
the economics for a minute.
Even at $7,000-9,000, if a school can get 30-35 kids per class, keep it's
teacher ratio (and thus labor costs) down to one teacher per class, that's
$210,000+ per class/grade x 8 grades = approx. $1.6 million per year,
minus costs. With an opposition to computers and technology, the costs of
all that computer equipment and educational technology are largely
eliminated. Similarly, the educational materials and environments that
are used are fairly low-tech (crayons, chalk, writing in student "study
books" (so no cost also for textbooks). The schools often start, I think,
in a church or left-over empty school, or some similar building - probably
for low cost start-up (and maybe there are non-profit foundations set up
to reduce and tax-protext these costs; at the least they are probably
charitable or non-profit orgs for tax purposes, like other private
schools) - and the schools start often one grade at a time, adding on
grades as the kids grow up; so the school doesn't have large, all-at-once
start-up costs. They grow kind of like chain letters
(and that might be a good analogy).
With the expansion of these schools, and the push to expand them further
by capitalizing on the poor record of and parent antipathy toward public
education, plus the worldwide distribution of Waldorf schools, this would
seem to be possibly quite a lucrative business.
(The worldwide reach not only draws on the school population and income of
communities in countries all over the world, but the standardization of
approach offers the attraction of being able to move one's child from one
Waldorf school to another should one have to relocate - and this could be
a particular attraction to business people and others who move all over
the world these days.)
This idea - of profit motive behind the Waldorf movement - may be
off-the-mark and the analysis here may be wrong, but it seems like an idea
that ought to be considered and examined more closely. Over and over, the
other cults that come along, or the nutraceuticals business, etc. often
boil down to someone making a substantial amount of money, or gaining
power and connections to facilitate their doing this, when all is said and
done. The drive to expand things often has a dollar sign behind it.
That's not per se a bad thing to me; it's the American way.
But if it is the real "occult" agenda here, it ought to be seen for what
it is.
On the other hand, this may be completely wrong. Waldorf may indeed be
what it aspires to be (even at an occult or disguised level that PLANs
doesn't like for church/state reasons) - an idealistic or spiritually
oriented education that it's adherents feel really is a good education.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:15:58 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
That was the best laugh I've had in a while. Thanks Walden!
) ) Peter F responds:
) ) Percedol, how many times must I point out to you that this argument is
) ) wrong. It is incorrect. You are mistaken. It is not the case. I feel
)like
)I
) ) am in the dead parrot sketch in Monty Python. It doesn't logically
)follow.
)
)Yes it does.
)
) ) It has been demonstrated to be false.
)
)No it hasn't.
)
)What this means is that even if you
) ) continue to believe it (which could only be through faith) you can't use
)it
) ) as an argument with me or anyone else.
)
)Is this the right room for an argument? Sorry, Peter... you mentioned
)Python and I could not resist (g).
)
)-Walden
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:25:28 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Hi Sharon,
)Sharon: Yes, this is when he joined the Theosophists and became general
)secretary of the Theosophical Society. Strangely, Annie Bessant had the
)same
)transformation. Both were radically anti-Christianity, both were flaming
)atheists, and both underwent Theosophical conversions.
I very much agree. I think Besant is in some ways the perfect comparison for
Steiner. The difference, I suppose, is that I sort of like Besant's politics
before her theosophical turn, whereas Steiner's early politics were mostly
repellent. But they did indeed both go from profound skepticism toward
religion to the new-fangled faith of Theosophy in a rather abrupt way. I
think it has to do with the "occult science" thing, that aspect of modern
occultism that your quote from Galbreath was getting at. Both Besant and
Steiner seem to have found in Theosophy a way to conjoin (pseudo-)
scientific terminology and paraphernalia with the heightened spiritual
consciousness that occult approaches promise. It must have been a very
appealing combination to people in their social position during that era.
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 20:27:33 +0200
From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
At 08:13 -0600 17-04-2003, cat.morris juno.com wrote:
)I wish there were a school
)that offered all the good things that Waldorf does, without the rigid,
)out-dated developmental approach and without the Anthroposophy. Handwork,
)music, art integrated into the curriculum.
What about homeschooling; the unschooling approach?
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 15:11:31 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
on 4/17/03 3:33 PM, pecunia at bus98 hotmail.com wrote:
With only two responses, I gather most
) others don't
) think this is an issue or factor.
Sharon: I just haven't had time to respond yet (G).
)
) Perhaps instead Waldorf really is just doing a good job of running a soundly
) financially
) managed, conservative school with a focus on keeping things simple and
) focused on the
) really important things in education - ideas and personal relationships -
) and not on all the
) frills and excessive "plant" (gymnasiums, swimming pools, top heavy
) administrative bureaucracy,
) runaway educational technology, etc.) that mark many private schools these
) days as well as
) public education.
Sharon: Our ex-school dreamed of building an Anthro-correct building with
lots of land. They would spend millions if they had it, on domes and
external non Ahrimanic heating sources. Building an "organic" Anthro.
structure is still their plan for the future, and because they believe in
reincarnation, they have lots of time ahead (G). Waldorfers at our ex-school
always talked about the future. (I only really understood what they meant
after I left). Our school put donations in a communal pot and higher ups at
annual meetings, held in various places across America, decided who got
what. Not all donations that parents gave went to their specific school,
though this was not made clear. The school was perpetually in financial
trouble and would come up with all sorts of schemes to address this, like
forcing parents to use Kwik-Trip scrip money, and publicly pressuring us if
we didn't, also making wealthier parents pay higher school fees. In fact,
they actually sent home a form asking parents what they earned so that they
could charge them accordingly! I thought this was invasive, but I also felt
that wealthier people could help less affluent people by contributing more,
though I think it should just be in the form of donations. At one point they
tried to become a public school so that they could get public funding.
Fundraising and pleas for money was perpetual. Parents had to slog for the
school, countless volunteer hours were required. Some of the Anthro.
"festivals" were money making schemes, for example, parents were expected to
make items to sell at the holiday fair, and a dollar amount was set for the
amount to be contributed by each family. If somebody donated something that
wasn't Anthro-Kosher, people would take it off the shelf so as not to lower
the "culture" of the school. Parents had to bake goods for sale, and pay to
attend. Some parents got really resentful because it seemed as if the school
only cared about money. Expensive school supplies came from Anthroposophic
companies. One accountant told me that the numbers to cross her desk for
school supplies were exorbitant, she multiplied these figures by the number
of Waldorf schools in the US and the results prompted her to start her own
Anthro. school supply company.
Waldorf economics are all very self contained. I got in trouble for ordering
products that were not Anthroposophically correct for the school store. At
the time, I did not realize that Weleda and Stockmar were Anthroposophic
companies and that I was united in Anthroposophy. I was trying to be
helpful, to raise money, to supply the store with products that people would
actually buy. I just thought that the school was trying to sell products
that were more environmentally friendly, or more globally friendly, so I
ordered things like "Burt's Bees" products, and paper mache dolls from
Mexico, and hats to help Tibetans etc. People were upset when I ordered
Putamaya world music CDs. At the time I did not know that they believed
recorded music was Ahrimanic. I caused a rumpus when I tried to be helpful!
The weirdness (phonecalls, visits and letters of complaint) translated as
ungratefulness, but now that I know more of the subtext, I can understand
that I wasn't promoting Anthroposophy and Anthroposophy is the main point of
Waldorf schooling. I found the closed Anthro. world stifling, very
oppressive.
The non Waldorf school my daughter attends now is much more relaxed about
fund raising, they have things they do each year, but things are much more
professional. It's a relief.
I think children who are not given computer training will be disadvantaged
and I don't think Waldorf's position on some of these things has anything to
do with "simplicity". That is just the outer form of occultism that is
presented to parents, making Anthroposophy more palatable than it might
otherwise be.
At the risk of simplistic and stereotypical
) generalization, the school is derived
) essentially from a Germanic and Northern European orientation (minus all the
) Theosophical and
) esoteric Indian/Zorastrian/etc. nonsense),
Sharon: No, absolutely not. The schools are based on Steiner's
Aryan/Theosophical/Anthro perspective.
and one might expect sound,
) simple financial management
) from this culture (Swiss and German bankers, etc.).
Sharon: Steiner developed a threefold economic system which Waldorf strives
to usher in. It's not what you think.
Maybe there is no
) hidden great scam or fleecing
) going on or profit to be gained. Maybe they are really in it for the
) philosophy, and the simplicity and
) financial management just fits, as Diana says, as a happy coincidence with
) their ideas.
)
) I thought money might be the real motive; but maybe not.
Sharon: They definitely want to expand, they want to become huge, but I
don't think they want to become rich as individuals. It's much more about
spreading Steiner's religion, and making Anthroposophy a powerful force to
be reckoned with. It's a missionary org. with missionary mentality.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 19:29:02 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
I was going to suggest this myself. Seems like the best of both worlds -
take what you want from the Waldorf approach, and skip or protect yourself
from the cult involvement, wierd ideas, school/teacher intrusion into your
homelife, etc. There are a number of Waldorf oriented homeschooling sites
or sources of Waldorf materials from, which you can combine other
homeschooling materials with also. One that looked reasonable balanced on
brief examination as to how much Waldorf philosophy you had to swallow was:
www.waldorfhomeschoolers.com.
Pecunia
********************************
Re: New to Waldorf Edith Hagenaar
Apr 18, 2003 11:38 PDT
At 08:13 -0600 17-04-2003, cat.m- juno.com wrote:
I wish there were a school
that offered all the good things that Waldorf does, without the rigid,
out-dated developmental approach and without the Anthroposophy. Handwork,
music, art integrated into the curriculum.
What about homeschooling; the unschooling approach?
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 19:43:08 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Thanks for your response, and the info. I'm getting the sense that
you may be right - it's just missionary madness.
Pecunia
*******************************
mysplum
Apr 18, 2003 12:09 PDT
on 4/17/03 3:33 PM, pecunia at bus- hotmail.com wrote:
Sharon: I just haven't had time to respond yet (G).
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:58:18 -0600
From: cat.morris juno.com
Cc: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
Edith: I briefly investigated homeschooling and have relatives who
homeschool. To be honest it doesn't appeal to me.
I am becoming active with a group that is trying to revitalize a local
public school. This group lives in the neighborhood but sends their
children to private schools. We're trying to "reclaim" the school for the
neighborhood, get grants for arts and music programs, and so forth.
I am a public school kid at heart and think we'll give the public system
a shot. I loved school growing up, though I was in the suburbs and it was
a somewhat simpler time. I'm in a semi-urban neighborhood now, and the
school system here is a different thing. Luckily, we can go to a good
quality public school nearby until the other one (the one we're supposed
to attend) is brought up to speed. Parents schedule themselves to help
in the classroom, and funds are good. I just wish art didn't happen for
one half-hour per week, and that little kids weren't on the computer--or
watching hours of tv after school. Awhile back, the first grade teacher
told me that during "choice time" the kids can surf the web if they want,
and that they particularly enjoy Disney.com. Ugh. That's about the time
that a friend introduced me to Waldorf. . . You can imagine my excitement
at finding classrooms full of children playing pennywhistles (is that
what they are?), knitting, drawing, reciting poetry, etc.
Cat
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:02:00 -0600
From: "Dave Kimble" (dkimble mystrotv.com)
Subject: RE: Not Fan Mail
Peter F,
I understand the US legal definition to require that it be malicious and
false.
What is the definition of the crime of libel in AUS and UK? Does it not
have to be false? Or does the maligned just not have to prove it's
false?
Thanks,
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Farrell [mailto:feetapparel hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 9:01 PM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: re: Not Fan Mail
Lisa wrote:
) I urge you to go ahead and investigate whether telling the truth
is
)libelous. I think you will quickly learn that truth is the ultimate
defense
)against libel.
G'day Lisa,
this is not true in the UK or in Australia to my certain knowledge. As
well
there is a High Court ruling in Australia which gives Australian Courts
jurisdiction over web based publications which can be downloaded in
Australia. Keeping in mind my legal training is zero, I believe this
means
that if you were to defame me on this archive, and I discovered you were
visiting Australia, I might very well be able to prevent you from
leaving
Australia and sue you for defamation under Australian Law, where the
truth
of any statement you might have made about me is no defense whatsoever.
It
may have some bearing on the amount of damages you might have awarded
against you, and you would also be liable to any legal costs I might
incur
as well as court costs. Any Aussie lawyers listening in might like to
set me
straight on any detail I have incorrect.
See you, Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 20:13:00 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Gnomes, however, are real.
Gnomes, however, are real. Or maybe it's Ahriman. How else can
I explain all these typos and misspellings?
Pecunia
*************************
I was going to suggest this myself. Seems like the best of both worlds -
take what you want from the Waldorf approach, and skip or protect yourself
from the cult involvement, wierd [WEIRD] ideas, school/teacher intrusion
into your homelife, etc. There are a number of Waldorf oriented
homeschooling sites or sources of Waldorf materials from [delete FROM],
which you can combine other homeschooling materials with also. One that
looked reasonable [REASONABLY] balanced on brief examination as to how much
Waldorf philosophy you had to swallow was: www.waldorfhomeschoolers.com.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:50:01 -0300
From: (antigonabaires hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
Hi y'all.
About this "Tante" thing going on in Argentina, I'd like to point out that
our school belongs to a fully Spanish-speaking community where most people
don't know a word of German. In a city like Buenos Aires you would never
dream of calling anyone "t?a" unless she is your godmother or a very close
person, and your parents tell you to call her so. Teachers are called
"se?orita", regardless of their marital status, and children usually say
"se?o" which I personally don't like, but it's considered "cute".
So beyond the confusion and excessive familiarity it may create in children,
I think the important point here is that teachers count on parents'
ignorance.Waldorf teachers' strength lies on the possession of certain
knowledge that lay people don't have. That's why teachers can tell you how
to dress your child, how to feed her, what time to put her to bed and so on.
Most parents in our class don't know what "Tante" means. They know it's
German and when an average Argentinean thinks of Germans he imagines a
blue-eyed, good-looking person with a very strict sense of order and
efficiency - something of which we haven't had much lately around here. They
think it's nice, and just different, but it's actually one more example of
the things Waldorfers do without parents really knowing what's going on.
Greetings from Argentina.
A.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 21:32:24 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Gnomes revisited
Or, to paraphrase Shakespeare, "The fault, Dear Brutus, is in our stars, not
in ourselves."
(Or, to paraphrase The Lovin' Spoonful [and probably, Rudy himself],
"Do you believe in magic?")
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:35:49 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
Peter S. wrote,
)Both Besant and Steiner seem to have found in Theosophy a way to
)conjoin (pseudo-) scientific terminology and paraphernalia with the
)heightened spiritual consciousness that occult approaches promise.
)It must have been a very appealing combination to people in their
)social position during that era.
Yes, science labs and ceremonial robes! An irresistible combination.
See also the Raelians.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 23:08:50 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Pecunia wrote: Or do they really, as educators, believe that they are
promoting a more humanistic, organic, balanced type of education? Or is it
basically a scam to make money?
Nicole: I was told (in a faculty meeting) by a visiting Waldorf guru that
there were many important souls waiting to incarnate in this century, but
they wouldn't be able to do so if there weren't enough Waldorf schools.
Waldorf schools were supposed to prepare souls so that the Masters could
reincarnate into them (only sufficiently advanced souls would be suitable
for the purpose). Waldorf education is soulwork rather than education in the
commonly understood sense.
As for the business aspect, I have never come across a group of people with
as little business sense as the members of the college of teachers who ran
our school. Some of them were good teachers, but (to put it charitably)
administration was not their forte. I can't believe that profitability would
motivate them as I've heard them compare it to a latter-day form of
monasticism where one is meant to give up worldly things. Materialism is
anathema to them.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 00:10:32 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
I can only be thankful we didn't get the 10 minute argument!
)From: Peter Staudenmaier (pstaud hotmail.com)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
)Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:15:58 -0500
)
)That was the best laugh I've had in a while. Thanks Walden!
)
)
)) ) Peter F responds:
)) ) Percedol, how many times must I point out to you that this argument is
)) ) wrong. It is incorrect. You are mistaken. It is not the case. I feel
))like
))I
)) ) am in the dead parrot sketch in Monty Python. It doesn't logically
))follow.
))
))Yes it does.
))
)) ) It has been demonstrated to be false.
))
))No it hasn't.
))
))What this means is that even if you
)) ) continue to believe it (which could only be through faith) you can't
))use
))it
)) ) as an argument with me or anyone else.
))
))Is this the right room for an argument? Sorry, Peter... you mentioned
))Python and I could not resist (g).
))
))-Walden
)
)
)_________________________________________________________________
)Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
)http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 00:32:06 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
)Nicole: I was told (in a faculty meeting) by a visiting Waldorf guru )that
)there were many important souls waiting to incarnate in this century, )but
)they wouldn't be able to do so if there weren't enough Waldorf )schools.
)Waldorf schools were supposed to prepare souls so that the Masters )could
)reincarnate into them (only sufficiently advanced souls would be )suitable
)for the purpose). Waldorf education is soulwork rather than education ?)in
)the commonly understood sense.
I take it back. They ARE in the same league as Heaven's Gate/Hale Bopp.
)As for the business aspect, I have never come across a group of people
) )with as little business sense as the members of the college of teachers
)who )ran our school. Some of them were good teachers, but (to put it
) )charitably) administration was not their forte. I can't believe that
)profitability )would motivate them as I've heard them compare it to a
)latter-day form of monasticism where one is meant to give up worldly
)things. Materialism )is anathema to them.
As I said, missionary madness. Thanks for the further info.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 00:33:58 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Not Fan Mail
G'day Dave,
I am not a lawyer so my understanding is limited, but I have some awareness
due to reporting of high profile cases. A number of issues arise. One is has
the defamed person deliberately placed themselves in public. For example it
is more difficult but not impossible to defame a politician than a private
person. It is unclear to me how this might apply to a soapie star, or to a
contributor to this list. Any defamation does not have to be false. For
example if I were to publish an article which claimed some chap beat his
wife, and it were true, but it was not common knowledge, then I believe he
could successfully sue me. How the damages might be calculated I have no
idea, but I might also be liable for all the court and legal fees. Someone
without large financial resources is unlikely to sue me because it is
unlikely I would be able to pay substantial damages, but they may be able to
force me to write a retraction or something similar. The defamed does not
have to prove that the allegation is false, although that might assist in
the determination of damages.
I am sorry I can't tell you more but I am pretty ignorant. I'll have a hunt
for some on line info.
I should say that I think our laws need reform, and this is a constant topic
of conversation here. Some cynics suggest that politicians and lawyers do
too well out of defamation suits and so are unwilling to draft and pass such
reform.
See you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 22:37:26 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Re: apologies and update
) they do have special programs for gifted children, I
) found out, they do let gifted children skip classes).
*BOGGLE*
No. You have GOT to be kidding me!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 23:25:24 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Re: New to Waldorf
) Any good science teacher talks about their subject
) with the same sense of mystery and awe as someone
) who's just seen a good magic show.
)
) I wonder if our acceptance of and emphasis on these
) sorts of supernatural entities induce our children to
)direct their natural wonder of magic towards them, at
) the expense of appreciating the magic in the natural
) world around us.
Naaaah. The one leads to the other... it's a continuum just as you've
described with the "What's that behind your ear?" trick.
I understand what you are trying to say, but it reminds me of the argument
many schools are making these days about writing style - they say we should
teach kids D'Nealian instead of script (block) letters, because it will be
easier for them to graduate to cursive and cursive is what they *really*
need to learn.
But there is a REASON why stop signs say STOP instead of (i)Stop(/i) -
because block letters are easier to read. Since little kids are less able to
distinguish between small details, and curvy, fancy letters are much
trickier for them to see clearly, I think it makes perfect sense for
beginning students (preschool, kindergarten, first grade?) to learn plain
script first. Then, as they master script, they can graduate to D'Nealian,
and so on.
Why shouldn't science be the same? All kids start out with magical thinking,
it's a normal part of development. The baby thinks, "Oh look, I drop my
bottle and it falls to the floor. Wow... I wonder if it will happen if I
drop it again?" The whole thing must be very magical to him - he certainly
doesn't think "Oh boy, there must be an invisible force and I can test my
hypothesis..." He just does it, but it takes a long time for it all to make
sense.
My son wants to retain some amount of magical thinking, as he is yet ever
more able to think abstractly and apply scientific principles to his
explorations in the world. You have to be able to imagine the unimaginable
if you are going to believe that there was a super nova a hundred thousand
years ago, and the light is only just reaching us now. So why not believe in
Santa too?
To me, it's just part of the same thought process, only as they mature it
gets directed from myth and legend and "magic" to the real magic that
surrounds us.
You will be happy to know that my son won first place at the egg drop
competition last night - his container was the one with the least mass that
still protected his egg. He designed it himself, choosing a sphere shape and
newspaper for the padding. (The only design assistance he got from me was a
suggestion that we make it out of paper mache, when I told him I didn't know
where to get his requested "cardboard ball".)
And this week he also requested that we bring some vinegar to his school for
experiements, so he could see how different things rected to acid. He
thought it would work just fine, although he did inquire if I would be
willing to get him some nitric acid first.
Last Christmas we tracked Santa's flight on the NORAD website.
It's a process. :-)
Sarina
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 23:33:03 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Re: Question from the far south
Well, I'm not Swiss, but... well, I guess I am Swiss. Half Swiss, to be
exact.
Anyway, whenever I've visited family in Switzerland, the only person I've
been told to call 'Tante' was my Tante Florine (cuz she *was* my Tante, if
you know what I mean!). I was just there in January... I never heard anyone
telling kids to call someone not a relative by that appellation, but that
doesn't mean it doesn't happen (and I've never been in a Swiss Waldorf
school).
Must be an Argentinian Waldorf thing, or maybe even just something
implemented by the folks in that particular school because they read about
the old fashioned German practice!
Sarina
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1024
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Not Fan Mail
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
By hagenaar wxs.nl
Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
By nmfoss hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:47:13 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Not Fan Mail
Here is a document from the Australian Press Council which discusses
defamation law in Australia. It is more complicated than I thought and
perhaps some of what I said earlier was incorrect, but I am not sure. Thos
of you with a legal bent might wish to comment.
http://www.presscouncil.org.au/pcsite/fop/auspres.html#defam
See you, Peter F
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 10:38:35 +0200
From: Edith Hagenaar (hagenaar wxs.nl)
Subject: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
At 22:37 -0700 18-04-2003, Sarina McDonald wrote:
) ) they do have special programs for gifted children, I
)) found out, they do let gifted children skip classes).
)
)*BOGGLE*
)
)No. You have GOT to be kidding me!
It's really true. And it isn't just in our former school: it's the
federation of Waldorf schools in Holland that provided me with 2
books on how to deal with gifted children, one is specific enrichment
stuff and one is on skipping classes and problems that gifted
children might have (from regular/scientific info) and how to deal
with them (anthr. way).
So one of my conclusions was that waldorf schools in the US are far
more rigid and conservative than European (or at least Dutch) Waldorf
schools. Maybe it has to do with exporting the concept. Like when a
family of a certain religion moves abroad and nobody there has their
religion, they tend to become very conservative about their religion,
whereas in their mothercountry the religion evolves and is influenced
by modern society.
--
Edith Hagenaar
http://www.wahm.nl - work at home moms
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 09:35:35 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: "Everything in the guise of Idealistic philosophy"
on 4/18/03 4:35 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
) Peter S. wrote,
)
)) Both Besant and Steiner seem to have found in Theosophy a way to
)) conjoin (pseudo-) scientific terminology and paraphernalia with the
)) heightened spiritual consciousness that occult approaches promise.
)) It must have been a very appealing combination to people in their
)) social position during that era.
)
) Yes, science labs and ceremonial robes! An irresistible combination.
)
) See also the Raelians.
Sharon: But the Raelians say that they are a religion, they are very clear
about that. (G)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 09:43:13 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
on 4/18/03 7:08 PM, Nicole Foss at nmfoss hotmail.com wrote:
) Nicole: I was told (in a faculty meeting) by a visiting Waldorf guru that
) there were many important souls waiting to incarnate in this century, but
) they wouldn't be able to do so if there weren't enough Waldorf schools.
Sharon: Gee, if they'd just print that in their school brochures! (G)
I heard something about Steiner coming back only after X number of threefold
businesses were up and running in America. From what I've gathered, he's
coming back soon, may already be here. Sometimes I get this queasy feeling
when I think that my daughter attended a school where some wondered about
whether or not little Bobby or Debbie was Steiner. I just hope that nobody
*ever*, not for a second (G), thought my kid was Steiner! (G)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 15:08:19 +0000
From: "Nicole Foss" (nmfoss hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Further on: Is Waldorf a good business?
Sharon wrote: I heard something about Steiner coming back only after X
number of threefold businesses were up and running in America. From what
I've gathered, he's coming back soon, may already be here.
Nicole: This fits with things that I've heard as well. I remember the
faculty being exhorted to follow the Masters and one teacher asking how one
was supposed to know who they were as they could have incarnated as anybody.
No answer was forthcoming of course.
Another thing I remember was the visiting guru saying that the school should
focus on the feisty disruptive students (they're the ones you want, he
said). They were the important ones, presumably for some reason of spiritual
suitability (my inference), not the quiet, well-behaved
academically-inclined students. This might go some way toward explaining the
ubiquitous presence of groups of unruly boys.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1025
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Steiner's first book
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 20:57:29 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's first book
Percedol:
)Higher and lower are thoughts. Thinking takes a form, for example as a
)word: higher, lower. What matters is thinking before it takes any form.
Oh the forms don't matter then? This is why this thinking is dangerous.
)Therefore the practice: to experience thought before it becomes formal,
)before it determines for an object.
Percedol, thought without form or content is not possible, unless
perhaps you suffer the medical condition known as persistent vegetative
state, or have taken some interesting drugs. (Anyone else reminded of
late-night college dorm conversation? It's thinking, man, but without,
like, thought. Wow.)
It's another beautiful spiritual dream. A sort of ur-thought; thought as
an ideal form, thought before it is tainted by reality, before humans
ruin it by thinking. Thought before motive, personality, context,
history, language, politics, religion . . . If it existed, it would be
dangerous, I suppose in reality it's just these delusions themselves
that are dangerous.
It is never explained how "determining" ever happens out of this
formless, undetermined, "thinking that comes before thinking."
Unfortunately "forms" do seem to arise from it, and this disconnect
allows anthroposophists to disclaim responsibility for these
thought-forms; suddenly it is all a misunderstanding of the method, a
confusion of method with content.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 21:01:45 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol, you wrote (last week and I meant to get back to it):
)The expected result is the experience of concept in se. To reply you
)have to think. Thinking is your immediate relationship with the world.
)But you don't know what is thought. You use it for everything, to
accept
)or deny anything, but without knowing the movement that allows you to
)accept or deny anything.
You characterize thought as movement. That's possibly a useful metaphor
and yet movement is not content-free. You seem to want to make "thought"
some sort of first principle, nothing coming before it, an experience of
it that is disassociated from human activity or human reality. But you
already have a motive for wanting to do this that in itself is not
content-free; you're never going to strip your thought down to some sort
of primordial activity independent of culture, history, politics,
individuality, psychology, motivation, etc.
)Since thought is the immediate relationship with the world the most
)important act would be to experience this immediate act of
consciousness. )This was missed by scientists. So far.
Let's hope they continue to miss it then, and work on more useful
things, you know, repairing holes in the ozone, curing cancer . . .
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:52:48 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Diana Winters wrote:
)You characterize thought as movement. That's possibly a useful metaphor
)and yet movement is not content-free. You seem to want to make "thought"
)some sort of first principle, nothing coming before it, an experience of
)it that is disassociated from human activity or human reality. But you
)already have a motive for wanting to do this that in itself is not
)content-free; you're never going to strip your thought down to some sort
)of primordial activity independent of culture, history, politics,
)individuality, psychology, motivation, etc.
It's helpful to remember that Steiner was a fundamentalist Platonist;
he preached that ideas (spiritual entities) were reality, and that
things in the physical world were just illusions consequent to the
ideas. Anthroposophists, after enough training, claim to be able to
perceive reality behind the illusions.
) )Since thought is the immediate relationship with the world the most
))important act would be to experience this immediate act of
)consciousness. )This was missed by scientists. So far.
)
)Let's hope they continue to miss it then, and work on more useful
)things, you know, repairing holes in the ozone, curing cancer . . .
I second that motion, er, thought.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:00:45 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
EDITH HAGENAAR
) ) ) they do have special programs for gifted children, I
) )) found out, they do let gifted children skip classes).
SARINA MCDONALD
) )*BOGGLE*
))
))No. You have GOT to be kidding me!
EDITH
)It's really true. And it isn't just in our former school: it's the
)federation of Waldorf schools in Holland that provided me with 2
)books on how to deal with gifted children, one is specific
)enrichment stuff and one is on skipping classes and problems that
)gifted children might have (from regular/scientific info) and how to
)deal with them (anthr. way).
)
)So one of my conclusions was that waldorf schools in the US are far
)more rigid and conservative than European (or at least Dutch)
)Waldorf schools. Maybe it has to do with exporting the concept. Like
)when a family of a certain religion moves abroad and nobody there
)has their religion, they tend to become very conservative about
)their religion, whereas in their mothercountry the religion evolves
)and is influenced by modern society.
DAN DUGAN
Very interesting! I'm pleased to hear that Waldorf theory has evolved
a little in at least one country. I wouldn't generalize to all
European schools. I believe German Waldorfs are as dogmatic as the
Americans, though each says that the other is dogmatic and they are
not. And it was in Holland that the racist ethnography lesson was
busted just a few years ago, revealing a far more dogmatic
Anthroposophical position than any an American school would dare take.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1026
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Theosophy of the R
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 07:40:30 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
I wrote (to Percedol):
)You seem to want to make "thought"
)some sort of first principle, nothing coming before it, an experience
of
)it that is disassociated from human activity or human reality.
Dan:
It's helpful to remember that Steiner was a fundamentalist Platonist;
he preached that ideas (spiritual entities) were reality, and that
things in the physical world were just illusions consequent to the
ideas. Anthroposophists, after enough training, claim to be able to
perceive reality behind the illusions.
I don't think it's exactly the same. We do hear sometimes that he was a
"Platonist" (I remember Sune liked this angle), but I think that gives
this idea more philosophical respectability than it deserves.
Steiner isn't talking about ideas as "forms" or idealized conceptions
that correspond to or determine certain manifestations in the physical
world, the way I read him; it's more like thoughts as spiritual *beings*
- entities - that take actions, for good or bad, *in themselves*. Like
coming to life - or having their own independent life. It's magical
thinking, I don't think it derives from Plato.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 07:46:23 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
Dan:
)Very interesting! I'm pleased to hear that Waldorf theory has evolved
)a little in at least one country.
Hold on, we don't even know what these programs consist of, or what's in
this book. Maybe Edith will tell us (or just title and author)?
Edith wrote originally that this book describes "problems that gifted
children might have (from regular/scientific info) and how to
deal with them (anthr. way)". There is nothing surprising about this,
the question is how they propose to "deal with them" - eurythmy? More
"extra lesson"? Silk wrappings?
You posted a news item awhile back, Dan, showing European Waldorf trying
to get with the program for all the people who want early childhood
programs too. They had done an absolutely fantastic job wording
everything very carefully to appear to be exactly what "people want" - a
program for their 3 year olds - but if you read between the lines there
was obviously not much different about the new program from any other
Waldorf program. I would strongly suspect the same would happen if
they've decided they need to have "gifted programs" so as not to lose
these students.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 11:10:14 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Gifted/Waldorf in Holland
DAN
) )Very interesting! I'm pleased to hear that Waldorf theory has evolved
) )a little in at least one country.
DIANA
)Hold on, we don't even know what these programs consist of, or what's in
)this book. Maybe Edith will tell us (or just title and author)?
)
)Edith wrote originally that this book describes "problems that gifted
)children might have (from regular/scientific info) and how to
)deal with them (anthr. way)". There is nothing surprising about this,
)the question is how they propose to "deal with them" - eurythmy? More
)"extra lesson"? Silk wrappings?
)
)You posted a news item awhile back, Dan, showing European Waldorf trying
)to get with the program for all the people who want early childhood
)programs too. They had done an absolutely fantastic job wording
)everything very carefully to appear to be exactly what "people want" - a
)program for their 3 year olds - but if you read between the lines there
)was obviously not much different about the new program from any other
)Waldorf program. I would strongly suspect the same would happen if
)they've decided they need to have "gifted programs" so as not to lose
)these students.
Spot-on, Diana, it may be all in the packaging.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 11:08:36 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
DIANA
) )You seem to want to make "thought"
))some sort of first principle, nothing coming before it, an experience
)of
) )it that is disassociated from human activity or human reality.
DAN
)It's helpful to remember that Steiner was a fundamentalist Platonist;
)he preached that ideas (spiritual entities) were reality, and that
)things in the physical world were just illusions consequent to the
)ideas. Anthroposophists, after enough training, claim to be able to
)perceive reality behind the illusions.
DIANA
)I don't think it's exactly the same. We do hear sometimes that he was a
)"Platonist" (I remember Sune liked this angle), but I think that gives
)this idea more philosophical respectability than it deserves.
)
)Steiner isn't talking about ideas as "forms" or idealized conceptions
)that correspond to or determine certain manifestations in the physical
)world, the way I read him; it's more like thoughts as spiritual *beings*
)- entities - that take actions, for good or bad, *in themselves*. Like
)coming to life - or having their own independent life. It's magical
)thinking, I don't think it derives from Plato.
DAN
I agree with all but your last line. Looks to me like Steiner's
doctrine derives directly from Plato, but as you point out, he adds
the dimension of making ideas living entities. Maybe "fundamentalist
Platonist" isn't a good way to express it. "Radical Platonist?"
"Spiritualized Platonist?"
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1027
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Theosophy of the R, or Steiner/Waldorf = The Matrix
By bus98 hotmail.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By Percedol netscape.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By bus98 hotmail.com
Steiner on racial progress
By pstaud hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:11:02 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R, or Steiner/Waldorf = The Matrix
Oh...I get it! Steiner's truth is just an earlier version of The Matrix!
eg.
"For someone who believes that the whole perceived world is only an imagined
one, a mental picture, and is in fact the effect upon my soul of things
unknown to me, the real problem of knowledge is naturally concerned not with
the mental pictures present only in the soul but with the things which are
independent of us and which lie outside our consciousness. " (Philosophy
of Freedom, ch. 5)
Or, then again, maybe Plato's was too.
(Sorry, couldn't help injecting a little humor.)
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 22:23:02 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Dan wrote:
)Looks to me like Steiner's doctrine derives directly from Plato,
Well does something "derive" from something else if the original idea
has been completely misunderstood?
)but as you point out, he adds the dimension of making ideas living
)entities.
That's a heck of a dimension to add; it seems to me it is hardly Plato
anymore when the darn forms get up and dance around. In Plato they're
more like logical categories - they're certainly not *creatures*.
Steiner has them sitting like angels or devils on peoples' shoulders,
whispering in our ears - lies turning into demons, for instance. You
cannot get that from Plato. And even beyond springing to life they are
also moralized, Plato's forms turn into independently acting moral
agents. The lie confused with the liar.
)Maybe "fundamentalist Platonist" isn't a good way to express it.
"Radical )Platonist?" "Spiritualized Platonist?"
Confused Platonist. Platonist Unglued. Psychedelic Platonist.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 03:59:23 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
"Materialism is our faith in matter. We do not know how to experience
matter by means of the concrete forces of thinking. Materialism is the
most obscure mysticism simply because it is nourished by mathematical
calculations and dialectical abstractions. It feeds our inner weaknesses
with the dead products of thinking. By failing to penetrate matter, such
thinking elevates it to a mystical reality without any awareness that it
does so. No bigot devotes him or herself more faithfully to the object
of his or her faith than does the materialist.
Nevertheless, 'materialism' is not only the doctrine referred to by the
name: the word also signifies the actual situation of present-day
humanity. Materialism is the uncognized and, therefore, the unelaborated
basis of all the doctrines and spiritualisms, traditional or not, which
ignore the underlying process that gives rise to material appearances.
It shuns the task of confronting the problem of the physical objectivity
of nature: sensory perception and its coming into being as
representation. This is a problem that cannot be solved theoretically,
but only through the active penetration of reality."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1904 01:05:22 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/22/03 2:08 PM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
Maybe "fundamentalist
) Platonist" isn't a good way to express it. "Radical Platonist?"
) "Spiritualized Platonist?"
Sharon: My two cents on the roots of occultism (G)....I think Steiner did
borrow extensively from Plato, who in turn borrowed from his teacher
Socrates (back it goes). Steiner took a lot from Socratic thinkers like
Empedocles who taught the doctrine of the four elements. I personally think
that the history of thought belongs to all of us, we have it in common as it
ebbs and flows into our own, present-day worldviews. The Epicureans are
considered to be some of the first to formalize early Scientific and liberal
humanist philosophy--they thought a bit as I think now. Humans share ways of
thinking, and reject other ways. I think the best way to describe Steiner is
"Anthroposophist", but in order to understand what Anthroposophy is, we have
to turn to it's roots. Since it's a schism of Theosophy, we should say it
comes directly out of that. Theosophists in turn were enamored with the
Greeks as was Steiner, who insisted that Greek myths were taught to Waldorf
pupils to jog their past life memories in ancient Greece. (Annie Besant
rationalized leadbeater's pedophilia as a left-over Greek thing (G) and
Leadbeater claimed to have visited Pythagoras on Samos in 540 BCE--claiming
it was his first introduction to Theosophy (G)!) Steiner's economic system,
his ideas on reincarnation, his anti-material-art stance, his ideas on
thinking... do come out of Plato's work, but so does Christianity which grew
out of the Hellenistic world, and so did Aristotle who was the pupil of
Plato. Plotinus, an Egyptian with a Roman name, is considered the last Greek
philosopher, and it was Plotinus who developed the mysticism of what became
known as Neo-Platonism, so perhaps it would be more accurate to call Steiner
a Neo-Platonist? St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas were highly influenced
by Plotinus' teachings, and Steiner is reputed to be the supposed
reincarnation of Aquinas, (as well as Aristotle (G)).
It's safe to say that Hermeticism, Occultism, Esotericism, Neo-Platonism,
Rosicrucianism, Theosophy and Anthroposophy are all related.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 16:39:51 +0000
From: "bus ref" (bus98 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
RE: Theosophy of the R Percedol
Apr 23, 2003 20:59 PDT
"Materialism is our faith in matter. We do not know how to experience
matter by means of the concrete forces of thinking. Materialism is the
most obscure mysticism simply because it is nourished by mathematical
calculations and dialectical abstractions. It feeds our inner weaknesses
with the dead products of thinking. By failing to penetrate matter, such
thinking elevates it to a mystical reality without any awareness that it
does so. No bigot devotes him or herself more faithfully to the object
of his or her faith than does the materialist.
Nevertheless, 'materialism' is not only the doctrine referred to by the
name: the word also signifies the actual situation of present-day
humanity. Materialism is the uncognized and, therefore, the unelaborated
basis of all the doctrines and spiritualisms, traditional or not, which
ignore the underlying process that gives rise to material appearances.
It shuns the task of confronting the problem of the physical objectivity
of nature: sensory perception and its coming into being as
representation. This is a problem that cannot be solved theoretically,
but only through the active penetration of reality."
***********************************
Say whaaat?
This is among the most incomprehensible pieces of gibberish I've ever read.
What the heck are the "concrete forces of thinking?"
This passage seems, kind of, to be criticizing the reification of thought,
but perhaps not(?) It's pretty obtuse.
I assume that this is from Steiner, because of the quotation marks, but
there is also no attribution.
Pecunia
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 13:08:24 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Steiner on racial progress
Hello critics,
I recently came across a very revealing passage by Steiner which addresses
the related questions of racial evolution, soul evolution, the role of
Christ, the task of the Aryans in preparing properly advanced bodies, and
the decadence of the Chinese and the Jews. I have not found any mention of
this text in any of the various anthroposophical commentaries on Steiner's
racial teachings. The quote is similar in content to a number of other
lectures and articles I have excerpted here, but I think it draws the issues
together in a particularly telling way. It offers a striking juxtaposition
of Steiner's Christian universalism and superficially anti-racist belief in
individual evolution through various racial forms, on the one hand, with his
profoundly racist conception of the hierarchical arrangement and starkly
divergent spiritual significance of these various racial forms, on the other
hand.
The passage, from 1907, reviews Steiner's version of the Aryan myth, in
which the most racially advanced elements of the Atlantean root race
migrated from Atlantis to found the civilizations of the ancient world and
evolve further, racially as well as spiritually. Steiner contrasts this
paradigm of racial progress with the stubborn decadence of the Chinese and
the Jews, degenerate groups that are stuck in obsolete racial forms. He then
projects this contrast into the future, emphasizing that the discrepancy
between advanced racial groups and degenerate ones, as well as the related
discrepancy between advanced souls and stagnant souls, will extend into the
next era. He addresses his German audience as bearers of future racial
progress, and invokes tha antisemitic myth of Ahasver, the Wandering Jew, to
illustrate his point.
The passage begins with Steiner expounding on "the progress of humankind"
and declaring that his spiritual teachings include "a demand to work on the
future condition of humanity." Steiner then explains this demand:
"Everyone who works in this way prepares the ground for the human bodies of
the future, for the bodies that souls will later need. There is a word that
beautifully expresses this work toward the future, which we will understand
when we clarify the difference between soul development and racial
development. All of you were once Atlanteans, and these Atlantean bodies
looked very different, as I have already described. The same soul that was
once in an Atlantean body somewhere is now in your body. But not all bodies
have been prepared, in the way yours have been, by a small number of
colonists who long ago migrated from the West to the East. Those who
remained behind, who bound themselves up with their race, they degenerated,
while the advanced ones founded new civilizations. The last stragglers on
the way to the east, the Mongols, still retain something of the culture of
the Atlanteans. In the same way, the bodies of those people who do not
develop themselves in a progressive fashion will continue into the next era
and will constitute the Chinese of the future. There will once again be
decadent peoples. After all, the souls that inhabit Chinese bodies are those
that will once again have to incarnate in such races, because they had too
strong an attraction to that race. The souls that are today within you will
later incarnate in bodies that come from people who work in the way I have
indicated, and who beget the bodies of the future, just as the first
colonists from Atlantis once did. And those who cling to the ordinary, who
do not want to join with the movement toward the future, they will become
fused with their race. There are people who want to stick to the familiar,
who want nothing to do with progress; they refuse to listen to those who
lead the way beyond the race to newer and newer forms of humanity.
The myths have preserved this intention in a wonderful manner. The best way
they could portray this is by pointing to one of the greatest ones, who
spoke the words: ?Whosoever does not leave father and mother, wife and
child, brother and sister, cannot be my disciple?; and by depicting, in
contrast, the tragedy of the person who says, I want nothing to do with such
a leader, and rejects him. How could one express this more clearly than in
the image of the person who rejects the leader, and who is incapable of
advancing! That is the legend of Ahasver, the Eternal Jew, who sat there and
pushed away the greatest leader, Christ Jesus, who wanted nothing to do with
evolution, and who therefore must remain in his race, must always reappear
in his race. These are myths that have been given to humankind for its
eternal memory, so that humankind knows what it is dealing with."
Rudolf Steiner, Menschheitsentwickelung und Christus-Erkenntnis (GA 100) pp.
186-187; lecture in Kassel, June 29, 1907.
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1028
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Steiner on racial progress
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Theosophy of the R
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: Theosophy of the R
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:10:41 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner on racial progress
on 4/24/03 2:08 PM, Peter Staudenmaier at pstaud hotmail.com wrote:
) Hello critics,
)
) I recently came across a very revealing passage by Steiner which addresses
) the related questions of racial evolution, soul evolution, the role of
) Christ, the task of the Aryans in preparing properly advanced bodies, and
) the decadence of the Chinese and the Jews. I have not found any mention of
) this text in any of the various anthroposophical commentaries on Steiner's
) racial teachings. The quote is similar in content to a number of other
) lectures and articles I have excerpted here, but I think it draws the issues
) together in a particularly telling way. It offers a striking juxtaposition
) of Steiner's Christian universalism and superficially anti-racist belief in
) individual evolution through various racial forms, on the one hand, with his
) profoundly racist conception of the hierarchical arrangement and starkly
) divergent spiritual significance of these various racial forms, on the other
) hand.
Sharon: Just to be an annoying grain of sand in an oyster shell (G), you
should send your new find to van Baarde. The passage is a summery of
Steiner's sermons recorded in "Universal Human" (1909-1916).
)
) The passage, from 1907, reviews Steiner's version of the Aryan myth, in
) which the most racially advanced elements of the Atlantean root race
) migrated from Atlantis to found the civilizations of the ancient world and
) evolve further, racially as well as spiritually. Steiner contrasts this
) paradigm of racial progress with the stubborn decadence of the Chinese and
) the Jews, degenerate groups that are stuck in obsolete racial forms. He then
) projects this contrast into the future, emphasizing that the discrepancy
) between advanced racial groups and degenerate ones, as well as the related
) discrepancy between advanced souls and stagnant souls, will extend into the
) next era. He addresses his German audience as bearers of future racial
) progress, and invokes tha antisemitic myth of Ahasver, the Wandering Jew, to
) illustrate his point.
Sharon: Peter do you know when, where and why the Ahasver myth first
appeared? I'm still trying to find the Theosophist's source for this
nonsense.
I feel really sick when I read passages like the one you posted from
Steiner, I'm ashamed that I propped up Steiner's racist religion because of
ignorance. I'm ashamed that I got a Jewish charitable trust to donate money
to our ex-school (big lump in my throat). The State has no business
advancing Steiner's religion, Waldorf''s "pedagogy" and curriculum is
inextricably entwined with Steiner's Aryan myth. For years critics have been
ringing alarm bells, warning people that Waldorf is a Teutonic mystery
school, yet few people listen.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 10:06:37 -0400
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Theosophy of the R
on 4/24/03 12:39 PM, pecunia at bus98 hotmail.com wrote:
)
) RE: Theosophy of the R Percedol
) Apr 23, 2003 20:59 PDT
)
) "Materialism is our faith in matter. We do not know how to experience
) matter by means of the concrete forces of thinking. Materialism is the
) most obscure mysticism simply because it is nourished by mathematical
) calculations and dialectical abstractions. It feeds our inner weaknesses
) with the dead products of thinking. By failing to penetrate matter, such
) thinking elevates it to a mystical reality without any awareness that it
) does so. No bigot devotes him or herself more faithfully to the object
) of his or her faith than does the materialist.
) Nevertheless, 'materialism' is not only the doctrine referred to by the
) name: the word also signifies the actual situation of present-day
) humanity. Materialism is the uncognized and, therefore, the unelaborated
) basis of all the doctrines and spiritualisms, traditional or not, which
) ignore the underlying process that gives rise to material appearances.
) It shuns the task of confronting the problem of the physical objectivity
) of nature: sensory perception and its coming into being as
) representation. This is a problem that cannot be solved theoretically,
) but only through the active penetration of reality."
)
) ***********************************
)
)Pecunia: Say whaaat?
Sharon: (G)
)
)
)Pecunia: This is among the most incomprehensible pieces of gibberish I've ever
read.
) What the heck are the "concrete forces of thinking?"
)
) This passage seems, kind of, to be criticizing the reification of thought,
) but perhaps not(?) It's pretty obtuse.
)
) I assume that this is from Steiner, because of the quotation marks, but
) there is also no attribution.
Sharon: I also want to know who said this and which sermon it comes from. If
you believe this you might as well wander down the street beating yourself
until you bleed or do as Steiner instructed, carry your body around as if it
were something foreign, like a table. I think people who despise the human
body and natural physical world are loony. I think it's a dangerous kink.
Here's some more that relates to this from the mystagogue:
Steiner: "Where we usually assume a human being somewhere on earth, there is
nothing for the occultist. In fact, forces stream down from above and up
from below and intersect. Then, just as the peculiar relationship of rain
and sunshine produces the rainbow, so forces streaming out of the macrocosm
from above and below result in the phenomenon that looks like a human being.
People are nothing as they stand before us. In truth, they are a phantom,
Maya, an illusion. It is the cosmic forces, intersecting where our eyes
think they see a human being, that are real. Try to take the statement
seriously that a human being is nothing as he or she stands before us. A
human being is but the shadow of many forces. The being who reveals himself
in a person can easily be elsewhere than at that point where the individual
in question is walking around on two legs.
For example, consider three men, first, an ancient Persian whose work was
plowing. He looked like an ordinary man but actually was one of the souls
whose forces were nourished from this or that world, above or below. The
second man was an ancient Persian official. He was formed by forces from
another world that intersected in him. To know him, we must look at these
forces. All of you sitting here are in your reality somewhere else, and only
the forces of your real being radiate into this room. Our third example is a
Persian of whom we have to say he was really a complete illusion, a phantom.
What was there in reality? We must go all the way up to the sun to find the
forces that nourished this phantom. There, among the mysteries of the sun,
we find what can be called the Golden Star, Zarathustra. It radiates down,
and here below stands a figure called Zarathustra. In truth, however, his
being is not there at all." (Steiner, Universal Human, p 63-4.
Anthroposophic Press 1990).
Sharon: I think Steiner had a messianic complex and that he thought he was
Zarathustra. (He claimed he channeled Zarathustra). He taught that Christ
was the reincarnation of Zarathustra. Followers of Steiner become the Aryan
Christ, the "Universal Human".
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 03:20:59 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol wrote quoting Steiner with no reference:
)
)"Materialism is our faith in matter. We do not know how to experience
)matter by means of the concrete forces of thinking. Materialism is the
)most obscure mysticism simply because it is nourished by mathematical
)calculations and dialectical abstractions. It feeds our inner weaknesses
)with the dead products of thinking. By failing to penetrate matter, such
)thinking elevates it to a mystical reality without any awareness that it
)does so. No bigot devotes him or herself more faithfully to the object
)of his or her faith than does the materialist.
)Nevertheless, 'materialism' is not only the doctrine referred to by the
)name: the word also signifies the actual situation of present-day
)humanity. Materialism is the uncognized and, therefore, the unelaborated
)basis of all the doctrines and spiritualisms, traditional or not, which
)ignore the underlying process that gives rise to material appearances.
)It shuns the task of confronting the problem of the physical objectivity
)of nature: sensory perception and its coming into being as
)representation. This is a problem that cannot be solved theoretically,
)but only through the active penetration of reality."
)
Peter F responds:
There have been one or two discussions about the confusion between
materialism and materialism before on this list. I would put it to Percedol
that this is a simple confusion, materialists are not necessarily
materialistic.
Further there is not one shred of evidence to support the notion that there
is a spiritual basis for the world as opposed to a material basis. I object
strenuously to the holier than thou attitude assumed by Percedol and others
who imply because they believe in the spriritual that they are somehow
morally superior to me. If we had to base this argument on Steiner's
writings I would have to say, despite all my own failings, that I do not
recognise Steiner as someone who is morally superior to me.
see you, Peter
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 10:16:13 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Theosophy of the R
Percedol wrote quoting Steiner with no reference:
)It [materialism] shuns the task of confronting the problem of the physical
)objectivity
)of nature: sensory perception and its coming into being as
)representation. This is a problem that cannot be solved theoretically,
)but only through the active penetration of reality."
Peter F responds again:
I think this is false now, and I am fairly certain it was false when this
was written (or said). The issue is not whether or not the standard
scientific and philosophical methods have considered this issue (they have),
but that Steiner had his own approach to this. Evidently Steiner's approach
could not stand any sort of critical scrutiny because he had to resort to
the dishonest style of argument that Percedol has presented us.
See you, Peter F.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1029
-- Topica Digest --
Gifted Kids in Waldorf
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
Re: Steiner on racial progress
By pstaud hotmail.com
Critics' error
By Percedol netscape.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:27:17 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject: Gifted Kids in Waldorf
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C30BD6.078C54D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Dear Waldorf Critics,
A discussion came up recently on a list I am on for parents of gifted
children - someone wanted to know what experience people had with
Waldorf and their Highly Gifted kids. I cross-posted the letter sent
anonymously through Diana Winters. (The one that begins "Hello Edith,
I imagine you've had a few responses as a number of us have left
Waldorf because our gifted kids' needs were unmet.") Someone else
responded that you had to take critics - ANY critics - with a grain
of salt, because if they are going out of their way to create a
website devoted to criticising "x", then it's obvious they had a very
bad experience and may have sour grapes. I do not think this person
has ever read this list or even looked waldorfcritics.org, I felt she
was just giving a general opinion.
Then another poster to that list responded to the sour grapes opinion
with the following - I just had to share (with her permission)
because I think this post sums up the thoughts of many people who
consider themselves Waldorf critics. I hope this helps someone.
Sarina
BEGIN POST FROM OTHER LIST:
I spent a great deal of time looking at Waldorf because there was a
PG (Profoundly Gifted) child on our block who attended one. This was
35-40 years ago. There was a very small teacher/pupil ratio, and
they had a wonderful site and events. I used
to ride my bike there and had loads of fun. So it was natural that I
would check it out for my DD.
I was amazed to find everything exactly as I left it back in my
childhood. Wooden decks and trees, grassy fields, gardens, stained
glass windows... So I visited, did the tour, etc. Then I went home
to look up Steiner and Anthroposophy.
I realized that my friend went there because her family was German,
and there was some German faculty and instruction. She would have
done well anywhere. I also realized that her parents were
Anthroposophists. Anthroposophy is about as
close to religion as you can can get. It is full of medical and
developmental pseudo science. If you intend to send a child to
Waldorf, you must feel comfortable with Anthroposophy.
No, they don't teach kids their philosophy directly, but they live
it. For example, the women wear long dresses so as not to
prematurely excite the little boys sexually. They don't come out and
tell you this, you have to discover it.
I further investigated curriculum. There are vastly different ways
of doing things, singing times tables in first grade,
using eurythmic exercise (part of the Anthroposophical medical
practice), copying text off of the board and making it into
pretty books, and doing hands on experiments for science. The
science is some what made up. You need to investigate in
depth on your own. Visit the anti-Waldorf sites, and see what they
have to say. You will find some parents who feel that
their children were being indoctrinated in Anthroposophy without
their knowledge or understanding. They are justifiably angry.
If you think it is sour grapes, then have a look for similar rants
regarding other educational philosophies. Lots of
kids don't do well at Montessori, but the parents don't go nuts about it.
I would recommend visiting on May day. Almost all Waldorf schools
have a festival then. You can watch how the kids
behave, and the parents interact with the faculty. We wanted so
desperately for it to work out. I loved the gardens and
the calm. We are your basic left over hippy granola types, so it
would have been really wonderful to have our child immersed
in nature and hand made arts rather than the Waldorf-forbidden
plastic items and chemical laden junk food of other schools.
Four things turned the tide for us.
1) The teachers were clearly evasive about their Anthroposophical leanings.
2) My very gifted daughter, already reading chapter books would have
had to stay back a year due to their June cut-off.
She missed by a couple days. They asked me about my due date, since
it was days since conception that really mattered!!
3) We went to the May Day fair, and the kids were just nasty little
brats. If I'd seen that first, I wouldn't have
bothered, but I really wanted it to work.
4) The teachers didn't have the background to teach modern science.
So I have had no bad experience, no sour grapes. Just investigated
and found it really truly was very different than what I thought.
Why can't there be a touchy feely school with lots of gardens and
grass, art, good science, and kind people? Why does there always
have to have an agenda!?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:16:24 -0500
From: "Peter Staudenmaier" (pstaud hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner on racial progress
Hi Sharon,
)Sharon: Peter do you know when, where and why the Ahasver myth first
)appeared? I'm still trying to find the Theosophist's source for this
)nonsense.
I don't know when it first appeared, but it had become a common element in
European folk legends by the 17th century, and was especially popular in
France and German-speaking central Europe in the 19th century. Already by
the mid-1800's bibliographies were published listing the various
permutations of the myth. Goethe drew upon the legend, and it may be that
Steiner's immediate source was Goethe, but it seems more likely to me that
Steiner picked it up from the general cultural currency the legend enjoyed
in Germany at the time. As for the "why", the myth of Ahasver (sometimes
rendered Ahasuerus in English) probably served an important function in
bridging older christian anti-judaism with the emerging racial thinking. In
the version that Steiner repeatedly invoked, the myth combines longstanding
religiously based prejudices against Jews with more modern notions of racial
identity, rootlessness, and evolutionary progress. There are a number of
studies of the topic available, and when I get a chance next week I'll try
to look through some of them and see what I can find in the way of
background material.
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 04:52:22 +0000
From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
Subject: Critics' error
"The thinking process itself must ve vrought into the realm of
experience. It is very clear this can be no mere speculation or further
'reflection' but rather an action in its own right: a 'doing'. Actually,
every science, and particularly the natural sciences, should face this
necessity. After all, we do everything, even all reserach by means of
thinking. But we really know nothing about the act of thinking. Should
we not know the tool with which we bring about everything - even
technology? An ofetn unconscious obstacle standing in the way of this
challenge is that a new capability must be acquired, somewhat like
achieving mastery in an artistic pursuit through doing and practice,
rather than through reading, reflecting and gathering knowledge. Other
than the work of Rudolf Steiner, it is difficult to find guidance
(pedagogy) for such an activity. Steiner's work, however, is not easily
accessible for us today and remains unique in its approach and aim.
The first half of Rudolf Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom deals with a
stage of consciousness that may be characterized by the fact that, at
this stage, the contents of consciousness are given through observation.
In particular, this field of consciousness is most suited for the
observation of thinking - or, more accurately, the already-thought. What
is meant by 'thinking' in the first seven chapters of the Philosophy of
Freedom is not the process itself but, as in the ordinary usage of the
word, the result of this process as it enetrs consciousness. This
becomes particularly clear when Steiner speaks of the observation of
thinking:
'I am moreover, in the same position when I enetr into the exceptional
state and reflect on my own thinking; I can only subsequently take my
experience of my thinking process as the object of fresh thinking.'"
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1030
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Critics' error
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:20:18 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Critics' error
G'day Percedol,
there is no evidence that the critics have made any error here. There is
evidence that both you and Steiner have made an error. Let me repeat the
argument. What you have written about thinking may or may not be true. But
we make a judgement on the likelihood of its being true based on Steiner's
writings on a range of subjects which can be independently tested, some of
which he claims results from this method of studying thinking. I put it to
you again that there is no evidence to believe Steiner was correct.
See you, Peter
)From: Percedol (Percedol netscape.net)
)Reply-To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)To: waldorf-critics topica.com
)Subject: Critics' error
)Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 04:52:22 +0000
)
)"The thinking process itself must ve vrought into the realm of
)experience. It is very clear this can be no mere speculation or further
)'reflection' but rather an action in its own right: a 'doing'. Actually,
)every science, and particularly the natural sciences, should face this
)necessity. After all, we do everything, even all reserach by means of
)thinking. But we really know nothing about the act of thinking. Should
)we not know the tool with which we bring about everything - even
)technology? An ofetn unconscious obstacle standing in the way of this
)challenge is that a new capability must be acquired, somewhat like
)achieving mastery in an artistic pursuit through doing and practice,
)rather than through reading, reflecting and gathering knowledge. Other
)than the work of Rudolf Steiner, it is difficult to find guidance
)(pedagogy) for such an activity. Steiner's work, however, is not easily
)accessible for us today and remains unique in its approach and aim.
)
)The first half of Rudolf Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom deals with a
)stage of consciousness that may be characterized by the fact that, at
)this stage, the contents of consciousness are given through observation.
)In particular, this field of consciousness is most suited for the
)observation of thinking - or, more accurately, the already-thought. What
)is meant by 'thinking' in the first seven chapters of the Philosophy of
)Freedom is not the process itself but, as in the ordinary usage of the
)word, the result of this process as it enetrs consciousness. This
)becomes particularly clear when Steiner speaks of the observation of
)thinking:
)
)'I am moreover, in the same position when I enetr into the exceptional
)state and reflect on my own thinking; I can only subsequently take my
)experience of my thinking process as the object of fresh thinking.'"
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.?Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1031
-- Topica Digest --
=?iso-8859-1?Q?THE_=22HOUSES_OF_WORSHIP_FREE_SPEECH_RESTORATION_ACT=22_H.?=
=?i
By sarinamcdonald msn.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:47:11 -0700
From: "Sarina McDonald" (sarinamcdonald msn.com)
Subject:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?THE_=22HOUSES_OF_WORSHIP_FREE_SPEECH_RESTORATION_ACT=22_H.?=
=?iso-8859-1?Q?R._235?=
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_034C_01C30DD8.1AEA5E10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Slightly OT, perhaps, but probably of interest to many here:
Two members of Congress, who often work in conjunction with Religious
Right pressure groups have quietly introduced divisive bills that
seek to undermine and overturn the separation of religion and
government under the guise of patriotism.
See:
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/Issues/IssuesList.cfm?c=50 for more.
Sarina
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1032
-- Topica Digest --
Needed: List of questions to ask a school
By momof2gals mindspring.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:02:57 -0400
From: "Lisa D. Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Needed: List of questions to ask a school
Sometime back, I posted a list of questions that we critics recommend people
ask when they are considering enrolling their child/ren in a Waldorf school.
If anyone has that list, could you please send it to me offlist? Or else
post it onlist, and we can discuss them. Perhaps there are some new
questions we should add.
Thanks!
Lisa Ercolano
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1033