return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Harmful fairytales?
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
Re: Harmful fairytales?
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
RE: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:39:17 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
Here's a little update from the land of Anthroposophy_Tomorrow, which,
unfortunately, tends not to reflect well on anthroposophy today. Pete K. has
been - well - criticizing Steiner. Here is the sort of response criticism of
Steiner evokes from his die-hard fans.
This one's a beaut - it's really worth reading through. Pete and I along
with Dan and Peter Staudenmaier are described as being on an "unholy
crusade" in preparation for the coming of the anti-Christ.
Yes, they are serious.
Diana
Mike T. wrote:
)You Karma is a serious business and hence be warned - each time you )slang
off at the spiritual world - as yea sew, so shall ye reap. )The spiritual
world is not interested in your petty intellect - )what matters more than
anything is truth, absolute truth; not even )what you think is truth - but
truth. So when one has a thought - it )must be scientifically examined and
contemplated until the truth of )that is known. That is why Steiner would
wait 20 years plus before )he spoke of an issue - where this was warranted.
)His "Occult Science and Outline" has a gestatin period of such a )time
span; he had to be sure of every statement before he could )give it to the
world. Such weighty matters as spiritual truth )cannot be light heartedly
entered into.
)Because you are so flippent with the truth, because you besmirch in )a
mocking condecending shallow pitiful manner, the greates initiate )of the
modern era; whilst I was contemplating your hideous remarks, )I had the
image arise which is that which I first wrote of in my )first post to you -
an observation. Because it is the legends of )evangelical so called
Christians (fundamentalists) who will be the )most ardent followers of the
anti christ.
)Dugan PS, Diana and yourself - on this attempted unholy crusade to )destroy
Arch Angel (Archai) MichaELs work here on earth as a )precursor to the
coming of the anti christ (and this is what you )are in fact doing whether
you are conscious of it or not), will )when you cross the threshold have no
more excuse that you did not know what you were doing- as you have been
told.
)See, PK, once you are told, you have no excuse - the spiritual )world will
judge accordingly. You can hide behind your mockery, )your self dillusion,
your emnity and hatred towards the spiritual )world; but you cant hide FROM
the spriritual world. And whether you )deny it or not, seeds of doubt are
already within your soul. Stand )back man, remain silent for a while, listen
to your innermost being )and contemplate; for things are getting worse for
you by the day.
)Mike T
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 14:36:25 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
The worst part is, Mike T is right - things ARE getting worse for me by
the day. Every day as I read crap like this on AT, I realize how sick
and twisted Anthroposophists can become. I think to myself that because
my kids are in a Waldorf school, they could be exposed to people who
think like this every day. This knowledge makes my life worse by the
day - to be sure.
Pete
Diana Winters wrote:
)
)
) Here's a little update from the land of Anthroposophy_Tomorrow, which,
) unfortunately, tends not to reflect well on anthroposophy today. Pete K.
) has
) been - well - criticizing Steiner. Here is the sort of response
) criticism of
) Steiner evokes from his die-hard fans.
)
) This one's a beaut - it's really worth reading through. Pete and I along
) with Dan and Peter Staudenmaier are described as being on an "unholy
) crusade" in preparation for the coming of the anti-Christ.
)
) Yes, they are serious.
)
) Diana
)
)
)
) Mike T. wrote:
)
) )You Karma is a serious business and hence be warned - each time you
) ))slang
) off at the spiritual world - as yea sew, so shall ye reap. )The
) spiritual
) world is not interested in your petty intellect - )what matters more
) than
) anything is truth, absolute truth; not even )what you think is truth -
) but
) truth. So when one has a thought - it )must be scientifically examined
) and
) contemplated until the truth of )that is known. That is why Steiner
) would
) wait 20 years plus before )he spoke of an issue - where this was
) warranted.
)
) )His "Occult Science and Outline" has a gestatin period of such a )time
) span; he had to be sure of every statement before he could )give it to
) the
) world. Such weighty matters as spiritual truth )cannot be light
) heartedly
) entered into.
)
) )Because you are so flippent with the truth, because you besmirch in )a
) mocking condecending shallow pitiful manner, the greates initiate )of
) the
) modern era; whilst I was contemplating your hideous remarks, )I had the
) image arise which is that which I first wrote of in my )first post to
) you -
) an observation. Because it is the legends of )evangelical so called
) Christians (fundamentalists) who will be the )most ardent followers of
) the
) anti christ.
)
)
) )Dugan PS, Diana and yourself - on this attempted unholy crusade to
) ))destroy
) Arch Angel (Archai) MichaELs work here on earth as a )precursor to the
) coming of the anti christ (and this is what you )are in fact doing
) whether
) you are conscious of it or not), will )when you cross the threshold have
) no
) more excuse that you did not know what you were doing- as you have been
) told.
)
) )See, PK, once you are told, you have no excuse - the spiritual )world
) )will
) judge accordingly. You can hide behind your mockery, )your self
) dillusion,
) your emnity and hatred towards the spiritual )world; but you cant hide
) FROM
) the spriritual world. And whether you )deny it or not, seeds of doubt
) are
) already within your soul. Stand )back man, remain silent for a while,
) listen
) to your innermost being )and contemplate; for things are getting worse
) for
) you by the day.
) )Mike T
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:36:22 EDT
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
It must be nice to be so sure you have all the answers, and that you are pure
and holy, and saved. I wish they could spell, though. (g)
The Unholy, Unsaved, and Unspiritual Lisa, handmaiden of the antiChrist.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:39:36 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Harmful fairytales?
I must comment that whether Steiner was raciest or not is too me
unimportant, but that a teacher could be so racial insensative is
intolerable. Some of the teachers at the school that my child attended were
at least attentive to their audiences needs, a point that Steiner makes. One
teacher took the intiative to by shades of people crayons, a crayloa product
(gasp).
----- Original Message -----
From: (Ldenike aol.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: Harmful fairytales?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get.
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadlRMb1dkiGbOBvpHa/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The other thing many Waldorf parents report is that the princesses or
heroines in most of the fairy tales told at Waldorf have blonde hair and are
very
Nordic in appearance (as described by the story or as drawn by the teacher),
whereas the evil girls or those who are not in favor are dark haired. I know
at
least one Waldorf child who was forced to redraw and repaint her vision of
Eve
from the Garden of Eden story. The child chose to make her Eve have dark
hair
and, I believe, skin. The teacher said that was unacceptable and made the
child
redo it with Eve as a blonde.
My own younger daughter is Asian (adopted from China) and could never draw
herself or anyone who looked like her, because the children in her
Children's
Garden at our Waldorf school were not permitted to use black crayons. When I
found this out (I finally inquired as to why all the girls my daughter drew
at
school had yellow hair), I was very upset. I asked the teacher what children
such as my daughter should do if they wanted to draw people who looked like
them. She suggested she could show the kids how to "rub" various colors
together
to make brown or black. I countered, asking why, if she could do that, she
had
not already done so. Silence. I asked why there were no black or brown
crayons, and was told that those colors are not suitable for children. I
pressed
further, and was told they are not OK spiritually for the children of that
age. I
am sure I stared at the teacher as if she came from the planet Mars, because
I
recall saying "But how can that be true when my daughter's skin is brown and
her hair is black? That's how she was born. Are you saying her skin and hair
color are spiritually not OK? I sure hope not." I proceeded to say that
there
had better be black crayons on the table the next day, or I would make a
loud
fuss in front of other parents.
Lisa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy Stocks and Index Funds for just $4 No Account or
Investment Minimums and No Inactivity Fees Automatically
invest weekly or monthly and build your future.
http://click.topica.com/caadlVFb1dkiGbOBvpHf/Sharebuilder
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 14:00:38 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Harmful fairytales?
We had two different Waldorf teachers.One had to be educated that the Grimms
stories were actually not definative versions and that the parents in the
class found the violent stories unaccepted. She had told the story where the
girl cuts off her finger and uses it as a key and several parents took issue
with causing so much distress on our delicate children. It was a strong
group of parents and she got the point. The other teacher was extremely
judicious in selecting stories and presented an impressive variety of
characters and situations. I love stories and she was one of the few
teachers that would engage in discussing stories, meanings, allusions, etc.
Stories are an avenue of acculturation. So I like to pick and choose, sort
of like with TV.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophy_Tomorrow update: critics in service of anti-Christ
It's classic cult behavior to label as evil anyone who
questions or criticizes the cult's guru or his
teaching.
Margaret
--- Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net) wrote:
) The worst part is, Mike T is right - things ARE
) getting worse for me by
) the day. Every day as I read crap like this on AT,
) I realize how sick
) and twisted Anthroposophists can become. I think to
) myself that because
) my kids are in a Waldorf school, they could be
) exposed to people who
) think like this every day. This knowledge makes my
) life worse by the
) day - to be sure.
)
) Pete
)
) Diana Winters wrote:
) )
) ) Here's a little update from the land of
) Anthroposophy_Tomorrow, which,
) ) unfortunately, tends not to reflect well on
) anthroposophy today. Pete K.
) ) has
) ) been - well - criticizing Steiner. Here is the
) sort of response
) ) criticism of
) ) Steiner evokes from his die-hard fans.
) )
) ) This one's a beaut - it's really worth reading
) through. Pete and I along
) ) with Dan and Peter Staudenmaier are described as
) being on an "unholy
) ) crusade" in preparation for the coming of the
) anti-Christ.
) )
) ) Yes, they are serious.
) )
) ) Diana
) )
) ) Mike T. wrote:
) )
) ) )You Karma is a serious business and hence be
) warned - each time you
) ) ))slang
) ) off at the spiritual world - as yea sew, so shall
) ye reap. )The
) ) spiritual
) ) world is not interested in your petty intellect -
) )what matters more
) ) than
) ) anything is truth, absolute truth; not even )what
) you think is truth -
) ) but
) ) truth. So when one has a thought - it )must be
) scientifically examined
) ) and
) ) contemplated until the truth of )that is known.
) That is why Steiner
) ) would
) ) wait 20 years plus before )he spoke of an issue -
) where this was
) ) warranted.
) )
) ) )His "Occult Science and Outline" has a gestatin
) period of such a )time
) ) span; he had to be sure of every statement before
) he could )give it to
) ) the
) ) world. Such weighty matters as spiritual truth
) )cannot be light
) ) heartedly
) ) entered into.
) )
) ) )Because you are so flippent with the truth,
) because you besmirch in )a
) ) mocking condecending shallow pitiful manner, the
) greates initiate )of
) ) the
) ) modern era; whilst I was contemplating your
) hideous remarks, )I had the
) ) image arise which is that which I first wrote of
) in my )first post to
) ) you -
) ) an observation. Because it is the legends of
) )evangelical so called
) ) Christians (fundamentalists) who will be the )most
) ardent followers of
) ) the
) ) anti christ.
) )
) ) )Dugan PS, Diana and yourself - on this attempted
) unholy crusade to
) ) ))destroy
) ) Arch Angel (Archai) MichaELs work here on earth as
) a )precursor to the
) ) coming of the anti christ (and this is what you
) )are in fact doing
) ) whether
) ) you are conscious of it or not), will )when you
) cross the threshold have
) ) no
) ) more excuse that you did not know what you were
) doing- as you have been
) ) told.
) )
) ) )See, PK, once you are told, you have no excuse -
) the spiritual )world
) ) )will
) ) judge accordingly. You can hide behind your
) mockery, )your self
) ) dillusion,
) ) your emnity and hatred towards the spiritual
) )world; but you cant hide
) ) FROM
) ) the spriritual world. And whether you )deny it or
) not, seeds of doubt
) ) are
) ) already within your soul. Stand )back man, remain
) silent for a while,
) ) listen
) ) to your innermost being )and contemplate; for
) things are getting worse
) ) for
) ) you by the day.
) ) )Mike T
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1743
-- Topica Digest --
Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
By pkcompany netzero.net
Anthroposophy in the USA
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
By jaquesdm msn.com
RE: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
By pkcompany netzero.net
"their creative and artistic skills, personal maturity"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 15:06:16 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
"Science... or the capacity to see the physical world from the 'inside
out' begins with nature stories in Grades 1 and 2 and moves closer to
the earth in Grade 3 with studies of farming and the caring,
responsible, grateful farmer. The sequence continues with animals
(4th), plants (5th), minerals (6th) and acoustics, optics and astronomy
(7th), and the Human kingdom (8th)."
Waldorf Education - A Family Guide - Michaelmas Press 1989-1992 - p54.
Interesting how the sequence seems interrupted - animals, plants,
minerals, [i]accoustics, optics and astronomy[/i], the Human kingdom.
It doesn't seem to be a very natural order. Why do we put acoustics and
optics in there before we study man - excuse me, the "Human kingdom"?
Let's have a look at what happens in the high school:
Re: 12th grade Science
"In the twelfth grade, the students study visual phenomena. This
includes the phenomena associated with coler, reflection and refraction,
as well as some of the physiological and psychological relationships
that are important in constructing a "picture" of the world. Now the
students have to deal with basic philosophical questions such as: How do
we know what we know? What is the foundation for knowing?"
Renewal, Fall/Winter 2004 - Volume 13, Number 2. Phenomenology and the
Waldorf Science Curriculum by Michael J. D'Aleo - p33.
When Waldorf science classes lead up to the questions in the 12th grade
of "How do we know what we know?" and "What is thefoundation for
knowing?" - this, of course, plays completely into the hands of
Anthroposophists. When students come out of Waldorf high school, in
which they are supposedly learning science by observation, the intention
of Waldorf education seems to be that one cannot observe science - one
has to "know" what is real and not trust reality itself. Why do Waldorf
schools introduce philosophy into science? The question should be - How
can people justify Steiner's "Spiritual Science" without introducing
philosophy into science. If one cannot trust reality, if one cannot
rely on one's senses of observation, one must instead fall back on
philosophy - guess who's philosophy? Since belief in Steiner requires
disbelief in science, Waldorf science at the 12th grade level culminates
with optics (visual distortions) to show how distorted things can
appeared when viewed through one lens or another. This is not
accidental - it is intended to show students not to trust what they see
and ultimately not to trust what they believe. When one loses faith in
reality, something must fill that void and that, of course, is
Anthroposophy. When science loses its legitimacy and is replaced with
faith-based ideas of "knowing" without evidence, then one must question
if legitimate science is really being taught in Waldorf schools - or if
the intention is to prove to students that there is no such thing as
legitimate science and that the lines between proof-based ideas and
faith-based ideas can be blurred.
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 22:30:19 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Anthroposophy in the USA
Dear Everybody,
Is there a fairytale where the hero, naturally on a mission to save the (blonde, passive) princess suddenly stops whirling his weapon around & says the Germanic, archetypal equivalent of "I don't think we're in Kansas any more"?
So I thought I'd come in from England (your closest ally, friends) and argue for Anthroposophy and Waldorf schools in an entertaining and open-minded way, throw a few hostages to fortune if need be, and learn a bit on the way.
But the 40-odd drops I've had in my letterbox already have me reeling! Is there anyone out there who has experienced Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy in England as well as in the United States? Are these utterly different universes? You won't like this one bit, but then there's a lot you seem not to like one bit: do you people shoot to kill before you ask the driver for her ID? On the other hand, is it possible that your Waldorf schools are so different from ours that I'm not getting why you're so very angry?
Please, take me on, shoot me down, get me up to speed. I'd like to play in your park, but it doesn't quite feel like cricket, what?
Dan has I think posted a thing I sent him in favour of Waldorf Science, so you could try slugging that one over the bleachers for a start...(See - no one despises America really: it's just we don't want to admit we're members of the world's biggest cult, all of us in our jeans & t-shirts & trainers with Flatt & Scruggs, Delta Blues, Coltrane, Ramones, Whitney, P Diddy & all on our soundtracks...)
Happy Scrapping to all..
Paul Georghiades
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 15:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
--- Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net) wrote:
) "Science... or the capacity to see the physical
) world from the 'inside
) out' begins with nature stories in Grades 1 and 2
) and moves closer to
) the earth in Grade 3 with studies of farming and the
) caring,
) responsible, grateful farmer. The sequence
) continues with animals
) (4th), plants (5th), minerals (6th) and acoustics,
) optics and astronomy
) (7th), and the Human kingdom (8th)."
) Waldorf Education - A Family Guide - Michaelmas
) Press 1989-1992 - p54.
)
) Interesting how the sequence seems interrupted -
) animals, plants,
) minerals, [i]accoustics, optics and astronomy[/i],
) the Human kingdom.
) It doesn't seem to be a very natural order. Why do
) we put acoustics and
) optics in there before we study man - excuse me, the
) "Human kingdom"?
)
) Let's have a look at what happens in the high
) school:
)
) Re: 12th grade Science
)
) "In the twelfth grade, the students study visual
) phenomena. This
) includes the phenomena associated with coler,
) reflection and refraction,
) as well as some of the physiological and
) psychological relationships
) that are important in constructing a "picture" of
) the world. Now the
) students have to deal with basic philosophical
) questions such as: How do
) we know what we know? What is the foundation for
) knowing?"
) Renewal, Fall/Winter 2004 - Volume 13, Number 2.
) Phenomenology and the
) Waldorf Science Curriculum by Michael J. D'Aleo -
) p33.
)
) When Waldorf science classes lead up to the
) questions in the 12th grade
) of "How do we know what we know?" and "What is
) thefoundation for
) knowing?" - this, of course, plays completely into
) the hands of
) Anthroposophists. When students come out of Waldorf
) high school, in
) which they are supposedly learning science by
) observation, the intention
) of Waldorf education seems to be that one cannot
) observe science - one
) has to "know" what is real and not trust reality
) itself. Why do Waldorf
) schools introduce philosophy into science? The
) question should be - How
) can people justify Steiner's "Spiritual Science"
) without introducing
) philosophy into science. If one cannot trust
) reality, if one cannot
) rely on one's senses of observation, one must
) instead fall back on
) philosophy - guess who's philosophy? Since belief
) in Steiner requires
) disbelief in science, Waldorf science at the 12th
) grade level culminates
) with optics (visual distortions) to show how
) distorted things can
) appeared when viewed through one lens or another.
) This is not
) accidental - it is intended to show students not to
) trust what they see
) and ultimately not to trust what they believe. When
) one loses faith in
) reality, something must fill that void and that, of
) course, is
) Anthroposophy. When science loses its legitimacy
) and is replaced with
) faith-based ideas of "knowing" without evidence,
) then one must question
) if legitimate science is really being taught in
) Waldorf schools - or if
) the intention is to prove to students that there is
) no such thing as
) legitimate science and that the lines between
) proof-based ideas and
) faith-based ideas can be blurred.
)
) Pete
Pete, thanks for this insightful analysis of the
Waldorf science curriculum. It helps me clarify my
own thinking about Waldorf science teaching. One of
the things that has been bothering me for a long time
is the idea that Waldorf teachers include Darwin's
theory of evolution in their teaching but, as
Anthroposophists, reject it. I keep thinking that, if
they believe Steiner's version of creationism, they
are not going to present evolution with any enthusiasm
or much of the rapidly growing supply of fascinating
discoveries and information that support it.
This could be another reason why Waldorf schools
encourage zero TV watching in children. Some parents
who limited TV watching by their children prior to
encountering Waldorf, let their children watch a few
shows they thought appropriate, such as nature
documentaries. These documentaries show us images
that most of us are never going to have the
opportunity to see in real life. They are loaded with
unfolding knowledge about the fascinating evolutionary
adaptations different animals have made to improve
their chances of survival. My opinion is that most
Waldorf teachers probably don't even accumulate this
knowledge in the first place, let alone bring
discussion of it into the classroom.
It's my opinion that students whose science teachers
are stuck in a rigid set of cultic beliefs about
science are being horribly cheated of the wonders of
modern knowledge and exploration of how the universe
and all that is in it works.
What I hadn't recognized before reading your post was
the seemingly deliberate undermining of students'
critical thinking skills when it comes to determining
what is science and what is not science.
Margaret
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:30:21 +0000
From: David Dodds (jaquesdm msn.com)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
Paul Georghiades wrote:
Hello Paul, welcome to the list.
) So I thought I'd come in from England (your closest ally, friends)
I can't compete with this. I'm only in Scotland: don't know where we
stand on the list of allies.
)and argue for Anthroposophy and Waldorf schools in an entertaining )and
)open-minded way, throw a few hostages to fortune if need be, and )learn
)a bit on the way. Is there a fairytale where the hero, )naturally on a
)mission to save the (blonde, passive) princess )suddenly stops whirling
)his weapon around & says the Germanic, )archetypal equivalent of "I
)don't think we're in Kansas any more"?
How very welcome is your offer to be entertaining and open-minded. My
own experience is that attempts to lighten discussion are met with
accusations of idiocy, lack of respect, and perhaps worst of all, of
"misunderstanding" or "not getting it" when, in fact all that has
happened is that I'm simply not persuaded.
)
) But the 40-odd drops I've had in my letterbox already have me reeling!
) Is there anyone out there who has experienced Waldorf schools and
) Anthroposophy in England as well as in the United States? Are these
) utterly different universes?
Yes, there are. Most contributors to the list are in N. America, but
there are list members from most of the English speaking world- and
beyond.
You might care to visit http://waldorfeducation.me.uk
)You won't like this one bit, but then there's a lot you seem not to
))like one bit: do you people shoot to kill before you ask the driver
))for her ID?
Hardly. Few people would be inclined to join this list without first
being seriously involved. Some find it a wonderful experience, others
are devastated by it.
)On the other hand, is it possible that your Waldorf schools are so
))different from ours that I'm not getting why you're so very angry?
My background is in special needs care, so I'd best refrain from comment
on education: others are far better qualified than I am.
Referring back to the link I provided earlier might help explain not
just anger, but the hurt: deep, profound and lasting hurt people and
often their loved ones endure. This comes from different directions, but
they do tend to find a common point in Anthroposophy's "keep it in the
family" inclination, which can be pretty corrupt, and tends to shy clear
of the responsibilities of accountability to which other institutions in
receipt of public funding are subject.
My seven-year experience left me convinced that the prime purpose of
a number, if not all anthro institutions is to deliver anthroposophy,
with the prime trust (education, care etc) coming second.
) Please, take me on, shoot me down, get me up to speed. I'd like to play
) in your park, but it doesn't quite feel like cricket, what?
Don't really play much cricket in the Northern Kingdom Old Bean,
although I did personally bowl a respectable right arm over (optimistic)
in my day.
)
) Dan has I think posted a thing I sent him in favour of Waldorf Science,
) so you could try slugging that one over the bleachers for a start...(See
) - no one despises America really: it's just we don't want to admit we're
) members of the world's biggest cult, all of us in our jeans & t-shirts &
) trainers with Flatt & Scruggs, Delta Blues, Coltrane, Ramones, Whitney,
) P Diddy & all on our soundtracks...)
Yes, well , nobody does Paul, and those of us formerly involved had some
deal of difficulty in admitting to ourselves that such was precisely
what we had allowed ourselves to get sucked in to.
My take on what makes a cult is pretty much summed up by the Cult
Information Centre in London.
http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/article3.html
)
)
Not really interested in scrapping Paul: I'm rather more given to trying
to publicise the bits of anthroposophy that the promotional stuff
swerves round, quite genuinely in the belief that this would eventually
help anthroposophy.
)
Welcome again to the list. I do hope other UK people will comment
further- I tend not to very much since most of my limited energies are
otherwise directed.
Respects...if reciprocated!
Davy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 03:50:22 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
Margaret Sachs wrote:
) Pete, thanks for this insightful analysis of the
) Waldorf science curriculum. It helps me clarify my
) own thinking about Waldorf science teaching. One of
) the things that has been bothering me for a long time
) is the idea that Waldorf teachers include Darwin's
) theory of evolution in their teaching but, as
) Anthroposophists, reject it. I keep thinking that, if
) they believe Steiner's version of creationism, they
) are not going to present evolution with any enthusiasm
) or much of the rapidly growing supply of fascinating
) discoveries and information that support it.
I think they need something to play Steiner's creation myth against.
After all, creation myths of all types are apparent year after year in
the Waldorf curriculum and in 10th or 11th grade, students are asked to
write their own creation myths (at least in my experience). All the
creation myth stuff is clearly intended to soften the students up for
the wackiest creation myth of them all - Steiner's. Darwin's evolution
may be taught, but compared to years and years of creation myths, I
hardly think, even if taught with enthusiasm, that natural selection
would take firm root in Waldorf student's minds. With regard to recent
scientific support - I'd guess most Waldorf teachers aren't up on new
scientific developments that don't support things they believe in
(non-vaccination and such).
)
) This could be another reason why Waldorf schools
) encourage zero TV watching in children. Some parents
) who limited TV watching by their children prior to
) encountering Waldorf, let their children watch a few
) shows they thought appropriate, such as nature
) documentaries. These documentaries show us images
) that most of us are never going to have the
) opportunity to see in real life. They are loaded with
) unfolding knowledge about the fascinating evolutionary
) adaptations different animals have made to improve
) their chances of survival. My opinion is that most
) Waldorf teachers probably don't even accumulate this
) knowledge in the first place, let alone bring
) discussion of it into the classroom.
I'm quite sure you are right.
)
) It's my opinion that students whose science teachers
) are stuck in a rigid set of cultic beliefs about
) science are being horribly cheated of the wonders of
) modern knowledge and exploration of how the universe
) and all that is in it works.
And even if the science teachers want to teach modern science, in many
schools they are hampered by the more dogmatic representatives of
Steiner's science.
)
) What I hadn't recognized before reading your post was
) the seemingly deliberate undermining of students'
) critical thinking skills when it comes to determining
) what is science and what is not science.
I only realized it recently myself. After spending a little time on the
AT list, I started understanding how Anthroposphists think regarding
...um... thinking. They don't seem to need to distinguish provable
facts from "known" facts - i.e. a fact becomes a fact when you "know"
it. It requires no proof at that point. That's why Steiner got away
with terms like "Mystical fact" and "Spiritual science". And that's why
they object so strongly that Anthroposophy is a "belief" system -
instead claiming that it is "knowledge".
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 04:08:45 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
Hi Paul, Welcome.
Paul Georghiades wrote:
)
)
) Dear Everybody,
)
) Is there a fairytale where the hero, naturally on a mission to save the
) (blonde, passive) princess suddenly stops whirling his weapon around &
) says the Germanic, archetypal equivalent of "I don't think we're in
) Kansas any more"?
)
I think the quote for Waldorf schools is more like "ignore the man
behind the curtain".
) So I thought I'd come in from England (your closest ally, friends) and
) argue for Anthroposophy and Waldorf schools in an entertaining and
) open-minded way, throw a few hostages to fortune if need be, and learn a
) bit on the way.
)
Again, welcome.
) But the 40-odd drops I've had in my letterbox already have me reeling!
) Is there anyone out there who has experienced Waldorf schools and
) Anthroposophy in England as well as in the United States? Are these
) utterly different universes? (
We had one poster (was it Madpark) who told me my experience (Highland
Hall - Southern California) was very similar to his (Michael Hall -
somewhere in the UK). So, I would say no, the similarity across
international lines is amazing. And I've heard this from both
supporters and critics.
)You won't like this one bit, but then there's a lot you seem not to like
)one bit: do you people shoot to kill before you ask the driver for her
)ID?
I assume that's a rhetorical question. I've been involved with Waldorf
for close to 14 years. I feel I know Ms. Waldorf well enough to be
familiar with her ID and her IUD.
)On the other hand, is it possible that your Waldorf schools are so
)different from ours that I'm not getting why you're so very angry?
It could depend on your experience and expectations. Some people have
great Waldorf experiences and few expectations. Again, I believe
Waldorf schools to, for the most part, exhibit similar characteristics
around the world. Maybe you could help us set the record straight?
)
) Please, take me on, shoot me down, get me up to speed. I'd like to play
) in your park, but it doesn't quite feel like cricket, what?
)
Funny you should mention that - I have been told I share a name with a
famous cricket player. Anyway, I don't suspect you will be shot down -
we like to play with our victims here.
) Dan has I think posted a thing I sent him in favour of Waldorf Science,
) so you could try slugging that one over the bleachers for a start...(See
) - no one despises America really: it's just we don't want to admit we're
) members of the world's biggest cult, all of us in our jeans & t-shirts &
) trainers with Flatt & Scruggs, Delta Blues, Coltrane, Ramones, Whitney,
) P Diddy & all on our soundtracks...)
)
Um... I think a few people despise America, really - but certainly
nobody in the UK, what?
Looking forward to scrapping...
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 00:16:41 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "their creative and artistic skills, personal maturity"
Streatham Guardian
http://www.streathamguardian.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.592933.0.school_
gutted_by_arsonists_to_rise_again.php
School gutted by arsonists to rise again
By Saxon East
This was the shocking moment arsonists almost ruined a parents' dream to give
their children a special education.
The Waldorf School of South West London in Streatham was burnt down in June
last year, by suspected arsonists crawling underneath the raised building and
lighting fires in several places.
The school temporarily relocated to Streatham Methodist Church in Riggindale
Road.
But thanks to the fundraising efforts of the community, Waldorf is being
rebuilt on the site of the fire in Abbotswood Road and will open in September.
Parents, pupils, staff, volunteers and ex-pupils have helped raise the
£200,000 needed to construct the building, which will house eight year groups from
kindergarten up to aged 14 consisting of 80 children.
[...............]
A number of the pupils move on to the BRIT School for Performing Arts and
Technology in Croydon.
BRIT headteacher Nick Williams said: "Each year we admit a number of Waldorf
School of South West London students.
"We are always impressed by their creative and artistic skills, personal
maturity and enthusiasm for learning."
[...............]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1744
-- Topica Digest --
Re: "their creative and artistic skills, personal maturity"
By ldenike aol.com
RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
By qrejy hotmail.com
RE: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 08:23:44 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: "their creative and artistic skills, personal maturity"
Arson is a horrible crime and an awful thing to have happen to any school, home or building. I am sorry for what the school experienced.
Were I the reporter who wrote that story, however, I might have chosen words other than "special education." It makes the school sound as if it is for children with special needs.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Mon, 2 May 2005 00:16:41 EDT
Subject: "their creative and artistic skills, personal maturity"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a Laptop? Get a Sony Vaio Laptop Free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaFb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Streatham Guardian
http://www.streathamguardian.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.592933.0.school_
gutted_by_arsonists_to_rise_again.php
School gutted by arsonists to rise again
By Saxon East
This was the shocking moment arsonists almost ruined a parents' dream to give
their children a special education.
The Waldorf School of South West London in Streatham was burnt down in June
last year, by suspected arsonists crawling underneath the raised building and
lighting fires in several places.
The school temporarily relocated to Streatham Methodist Church in Riggindale
Road.
But thanks to the fundraising efforts of the community, Waldorf is being
rebuilt on the site of the fire in Abbotswood Road and will open in September.
Parents, pupils, staff, volunteers and ex-pupils have helped raise the
£200,000 needed to construct the building, which will house eight year groups
from
kindergarten up to aged 14 consisting of 80 children.
[...............]
A number of the pupils move on to the BRIT School for Performing Arts and
Technology in Croydon.
BRIT headteacher Nick Williams said: "Each year we admit a number of Waldorf
School of South West London students.
"We are always impressed by their creative and artistic skills, personal
maturity and enthusiasm for learning."
[...............]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox!
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68%. Click
here to start looking younger today!
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 20:40:45 +0000
From: DW's Mom (qrejy hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Anthroposophy in the USA
Paul Georghiades wrote:
) Dan has I think posted a thing I sent him in favour of Waldorf )
) Science, so you could try slugging that one over the bleachers for ) a
) start...
Yes Paul, Dan posted your letter under the subject "Strange Science" on
April 13th. I replied to said letter, also on April 13th.
I'm still anxiously awaiting your reply and further discussion from
others on this list.
DW's Mom
"Minds are like parachutes; they only work when open."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 14:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf Science Curriculum creating Anthroposophists?
) Margaret Sachs wrote previously:
) ) What I hadn't recognized before reading your post
) was
) ) the seemingly deliberate undermining of students'
) ) critical thinking skills when it comes to
) determining
) ) what is science and what is not science.
Pete Karaiskos replied:
) I only realized it recently myself. After spending
) a little time on the
) AT list, I started understanding how Anthroposphists
) think regarding
) ...um... thinking. They don't seem to need to
) distinguish provable
) facts from "known" facts - i.e. a fact becomes a
) fact when you "know"
) it. It requires no proof at that point. That's why
) Steiner got away
) with terms like "Mystical fact" and "Spiritual
) science". And that's why
) they object so strongly that Anthroposophy is a
) "belief" system -
) instead claiming that it is "knowledge".
I see the light now! I think the following from the
"Thought Reform" chapter of Margaret Thaler Singer's
book "Cults in Our Midst" is somewhat relevant to that
observation (parentheses mine):
"Sacred science. The leader's wisdom is given a
patina of science, adding a credible layer to his
philosophical, psychological, or political notion. He
can then profess that the group's philosophy should be
applied to all humankind and that anyone who disagrees
or has alternative ideas is not only immoral and
irreverent but also unscientific. Many leaders, for
example, inflate their curricula vitae to make it look
as though they are connected to higher powers [the
Akashic Records], respected historical leaders
[previous reincarnations such as Plato, etc.], and so
forth. Many a cult leader has said that he follows in
he tradition of the greatest -Sigmund Freud, Karl
Marx, the Buddha, Martin Luther, or Jesus Christ."
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1745
-- Topica Digest --
Arson is HORRIBLE!
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Just a Small-Town Boy
By yarngal webtv.net
RE: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
By diana.winters verizon.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 17:30:23 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Arson is HORRIBLE!
Arson is HORRIBLE! There is NO excuse for it! I am sorry to hear what
happened.
Take care, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 00:45:45 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
Folks, I'm busy in the next few weeks: Teaching a physics block, getting ready to put on the Merchant of Venice with my class, taking them to Romania. So I'll deal with the fallout as I can.
But look, here's what will undermine the whole thing: Dan, I wasn't being sarcastic at all when I indicated why I was motivated to write in. Consider that the tape of your talk was lent me by a Waldorf teacher trainer who genuinely was interested, and thought I would be too.
The possibilities are: real, naive human interest and enthusiasm for dialogue.
OR: A cult in action, masked by a show of the above.
OR: A sad demonstration of how the cult has so brainwashed me that my naive interest is being falsely directed even without me knowing it.
The other, perhaps more scary thought is that the conditions in the US are so very different on both sides of the divide that the world I'm speaking from is just not relevant to what is exercising you. Perhaps the schools there would scare me, too, and perhaps the "shoot to kill" tone I'm detecting is built in to everyone's cultural inheritance, again on both sides of the Waldorf divide. That's why I asked if anyone has had some experience in England as well, to help me tune in better.
A bit about our school. We have no state or local funding. We are so cheap you would laugh, and then perhaps be horrified by our lack of resources. We try to turn no one away on financial grounds. (Around 50% of our families have bursaries, discounts or deferred payment arrangements). We are non-selective on academic grounds, and every class has some children who probably couldn't manage elsewhere. Yet we work to the highest standards we can aim for. Parents are closely involved at every level (we include parent listeners on our teacher interviews and collate their feedback), and run many parts of the school. If we don't communicate with our parents, we don't have a school. There are issues about explaining the curriculum, but they tend to be at the "How long have you got to talk about this?" level - and there is a lot of public domain information. We state explicitly that we are a Christian-based school in our prospectus, but we're in a very New Age area and we hope it will stop people enthusiastically pitching in and then discovering that we make much of Easter and being offended. We are full of faults and problems, but perhaps different ones than the difficulties you perceive. High-falutin Anthroposophical talk gets a warm welcome when clearly related to living experience, and pretty short shrift otherwise.
When I get a bit of time for this I'll try to be more specific with inputs.
As for phenomenological science, please take a look at the work of Schumacher College in Dartington, UK. It's not sweeping the globe yet, but it genuinely is a bigger set than Anthroposophy. I suspect its day will come through ecological concerns...
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 18:53:36 -0500 (CDT)
From: yarngal webtv.net
Subject: Just a Small-Town Boy
You have been sent this message from yarngal webtv.net as a courtesy of Utne (http://www.utne.com).
Interesting article. It mentions a Waldorf School.
What do you think?
Best Wishes,yarngal
The entire article may be viewed at http://www.utne.com/pub/2005_129/promo/11642-1.html
Just a Small-Town Boy
May / June 2005
By Joseph Hart, Utne magazine
A writer gives up the rat race and finds peace in the country
When contributing editor Joseph Hart announced that he was moving to a little town called Viroqua, we were not only sad to see him go but also worried that he would regret the decision. He was leaving behind his home and a blossoming career, after all, and it was easy to believe that his urge to slow down might be replaced by a desperate need for stimulation. Save for a few folks, such as assistant editor Laine Bergeson, most of us find that our uneasiness has been replaced with a touch of envy. As you'll read in the following essays, Joe is thriving, personally and professionally, and is part of a growing movement dubbed the rural rebound. And Laine. . . . well, let's just say she remains a tad skeptical. -- The Editors
As a teenager in the Minnesota backwoods, I couldn't wait to move to the city. A gawky, bookish, sometimes snob, I probably would have had a difficult adolescence wherever I lived. But it didn't help my social standing to be one of the only kids in high school whose dad had a Ph.D. Or that my back-to-the-land family lived in a couple of cabins without toilet, telephone, or television. At school, I ran a gauntlet of hostility every day, and I blamed all my problems on the narrow-mindedness of small-town life.
At 17, I moved to Minneapolis and found the glittering glass and steel of that minor metropolis was everything I had dreamed of. I loved the way the sidewalks soaked up the summer heat; the cacophony of radios, cars, and hissing buses; the whirling, cosmopolitan mix of immigrants from Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Most of all, I liked the anonymous freedom of being alone in a downtown crowd. Urban America is rife with struggle, but it's also egalitarian: At some level, everyone in the mass is an equal.
For the next 15 years, I had one urban adventure after another: I slung hash at a punk-rock cafe, made art on street corners, marched in protests, attended shows, wasted long afternoons in coffee shops, made good friends and girlfriends. I found my career, met my wife, had kids. I became, if there is such a thing, a stereotypical, urban Gen-X knowledge worker.
But through it all, I missed the rural life. I had felt like an outsider in my small-town high school. Living in the city didn't annul the alienation. Among yokels, I had been a prig. Among my urban peers, I was a yokel.
Or if not a yokel exactly, separated by a philosophical gulf that I attribute to my rural upbringing. The city is a contrived environment right down to which trees are allowed to grow where. Some days I would look around at the houses and streets, the people with their haircuts and cars and jobs and worries, and I would think none of this is real. This sense of unreality is a symptom of traumatic shock, and it was that palpable to me. I missed the real: the night sky, winter air, room to roam, a sense of privacy.
City consumerism also bothered me. Urban "alternative culture" seemed defined by it. Want to make the world a better place? Buy fair trade instead of Folgers, hemp instead of Gap. I do. And I believe that doing so makes a difference -- up to a point. After that, the difference between a Volvo-driving co-op Rasta and an Escalade-driving corporate drone boils down to brand affiliation. I wanted a life in which brands were irrelevant.
After my second child was born, I had little time or money to enjoy city life. In fact, I started to hate it. I was sick of looking at the litter. I was sick of traffic, an hour of anxiety just to visit a friend across town. I was sick of feeling like I couldn't confront the cursing teenagers who made the neighborhood playground scary for my kids, sick of the low-level hostility of strangers, sick of dirty snow in the winter and a spring that smelled like dog crap instead of dirt. One afternoon I watched as my daughter, Irene, cowered in the back yard with her hands over her ears while a semitruck rumbled down the street, and I realized that it was time to get out.
--------------------------------page 2-------------------------------------
TWO YEARS AGO we rolled into Viroqua, population 4,335, for the first time on a cold January day. It didn't look like Eden to me. The north end of town is a vanilla Midwestern strip -- Wal-Mart, McDonald's, Subway, car dealerships. I couldn't imagine that the place could offer respite from urban junk culture. Over the course of a weekend, though, this small Wisconsin town won us over.
The trip was the culmination of three years of planning. We had listed the attributes we wanted in a small town: a bookstore, a thriving food co-op, good schools, an arts community, affordable housing. Also on our list were items like quiet back yards, beautiful scenery, and nearby parks. Viroqua, an hour off the interstate, checked out. Located in the "driftless" region of Wisconsin, missed by the glaciers that scraped the Great Plains, it's full of ancient cliffs, fertile valleys, spring-fed trout streams, and old oak stands.
Most importantly, we wanted a place to raise our children -- Nate, 16; Irene, 6; and Sam, 3 -- where at least some of our neighbors shared our values, while the rest would tolerate them. In Viroqua, two institutions that have shaped the growth and character of the region in recent years gave us hope that we would find these kind, kindred spirits.
Organic Valley, the largest independent organic farmers' co-op in the nation, has lured people interested in alternative agriculture to this place. Some claim that our county has the most organic farmers per capita in the nation, and it's easy to believe. You can find fresh, local organics at the farmers' market and the food co-op (which will open a big new store this summer); we buy milk, eggs, and produce right off the farm.
The Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School, one of the only rural Waldorf schools in the country (and the first Wisconsin school to offer an organic hot lunch), will celebrate its 25th anniversary later this year. I didn't know much about the 85-year-old Waldorf curriculum before I moved here, but I knew the school attracted a lot of people like me who want their lives to harbor more meaning and passion than the American imperative to "work, buy, consume, die." I've grown to value the school's commitment to art and creativity, and to what Waldorf pedagogy calls "the whole child" -- physical, spiritual, and intellectual.
It was when we visited Pleasant Ridge, where the students all seemed so capable and poised, that we met Paul and Paula Grenier, both chiropractors, and the ad hoc ambassadors of Viroqua. Paula struck up a conversation with my wife, Anne, during the school assembly. Then she whisked us off to their house in the country. They fed us, answered our questions about Viroqua, and then kept an eye on our kids while Anne and I hopped into their hot tub under a brilliant January moon. There, beneath the stars, we made up our minds to move to this place.
What we didn't realize then was that in Viroqua, such encounters are typical. Back in Minneapolis, we had terrific friends. But our visits were penciled in. Social life -- the essence of community -- got scheduled around work, soccer practice, and the daily grind. Here, social life simply materializes. Picking up the kids from school turns into an afternoon at the playground, which turns into a shared dinner, which turns into a bonfire.
This palpable sense of community extends to mutual assistance. When we showed up with our moving truck, we were met by a dozen strangers who helped us bring the boxes in. (Last week, I helped move my fifth piano.) One of our neighbors caught pneumonia last winter, and within days a food brigade had been organized to deliver supper -- for several weeks. My wife and some other mothers with preschoolers meet weekly to share housework.
This social life is the essential difference between city and small-town life. In the city, "community" meant neighborhoods, the city council, the news and issues of the day. My friends and neighbors fit in somewhere, but the primary collective structure was the polis. Here in Viroqua, the primary collective structure is, well, us -- my circle of friends and neighbors, held together from year to year by a thousand shared moments.
--------------------------------page 3-------------------------------------
WHEN MY FAMILY MOVED to Viroqua, we joined one of the most significant population shifts in recent history. Demographers call it "the rural rebound." Rural counties like mine have been losing population since the Civil War. In the 1970s, that trend reversed for the first time. Interrupted by the 1980s farm crisis, the rebound resumed during the 1990s and continues today in spite of recession and war.
Demographers like Kenneth Johnson at Loyola University point to a number of reasons for this shift. Manufacturing jobs are returning to small towns. Retiring boomers are flocking to recreational zones. Urban professionals are taking their work anywhere they like, thanks to the Internet, fax machines, FedEx, and higher speed limits. Finally, there are many people who see the promise of life in the country as not only a personal boon, but also a model for a sane future. The Fellowship for Intentional Community, which publishes an annual directory of co-ops, cohousing, communal living arrangements, and so on, now reports the highest number of forming communities since the late 1960s.
Within the larger rebound are several types of growth patterns. Small towns near a city are becoming outer-ring suburbs. They retain some individuality but are slowly being swallowed up by parking lots, big-box retailers, and McMansions. Others, like Viroqua, lie far from the interstate and the city. These places often have natural beauty and seem to be specializing in an interesting way. Ashland, Oregon, with its Shakespeare festival is one example. Fairfield, Iowa, home of the Maharishi University, is another. A third type of small town is not growing at all. According to Johnson, these towns rely on the traditional rural jobs of farming and mining. In fact, while more people are moving to the country, fewer Americans are actually farming than ever before.
Instead, they're taking jobs in manufacturing or, increasingly, bringing traditionally urban professions along for the ride. Our neighbors are a typical sample. Next door are a welder and a truck driver. Across the street a retired tobacco farmer resides (for years, tobacco was our county's cash crop). Down the block live a violin maker, a homeopathic nurse-practitioner, a graphic designer, and the editor of a regional New Age newspaper. Widen the circle a bit, and you will find several software engineers, innumerable carpenters, massage therapists, writers, musicians, artists, psychologists, and doctors. (Most of us would smile at this catalog of careers, though. People here say they're not making a living, they're making a life.)
In Viroqua, the influx of newcomers has had a profound effect on the social and economic life of the town. One woman who grew up here, now in her 40s, told me that when "hippies" first started moving here in the 1970s, they were met with hostility -- and sometimes with baseball bats. Today's migrants, who often bring money and jobs into the community, are welcomed. Twenty years ago, as one local puts it, downtown was an empty canyon. Today, the brick main street operates at full capacity, with a jewelry store, two drugstores, a dance studio, a smoothie shop, a restored 1920s theater, and many offices, including my own. An auto showroom has been converted into an indoor market.
Of course, the rural rebound has its downsides. As agricultural land gives way to suburban tracts (and sumptuous timber-frame retreats) and the highways fill up, some worry that newcomers will destroy what attracted them in the first place: rural charm and a clean environment. And the physical incursions may be matched by a kind of cultural imperialism on the part of some urban refugees who look on their new environs as little more than a pretty painted backdrop to their movielike lives.
I try to remember that I will essentially be a guest in Viroqua for at least the first 10 or 20 years of my residency -- maybe my whole life. As such, I want to honor the specific cultural heritage of the place I've chosen as my home. I want to invest my time making my community a better place for everyone. That means supporting levies for a school my children don't attend, buying from the local hardware store instead of going for cheaper prices at Home Depot, pitching in at community events, and helping my neighbors when they need me.
I even drove a car in the county demolition derby last year. As much as anything, it was an act of ambassadorship -- a hand extended across the internal geography that divides my urban refugee friends from my local friends. It was also a strangely unifying experience for me. For once, my country and city selves felt aligned. Better still, I took second place in my heat and won a hundred dollars.
--------------------------------page 4-------------------------------------
FOR MUCH OF HISTORY, urban life symbolized all that was sinister and immoral in America, while the countryside promised a utopian idyll. Thoreau's description in Walden of his escape to a cabin on the outskirts of Concord is the classic expression of this complex polarity between wilderness and society: "While civilization has been improving our houses," he writes, "it has not equally improved the men who are to inhabit them." In recent history, however, Americans have taken a dim view of small-town life. From Sinclair Lewis' Gopher Prairie to Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegon, small towns occupy a symbolic placeholder for all that is smug, ignorant, and paranoid about our culture.
Not long after moving to Viroqua, I saw a series of events that seemed to confirm this negative view: When word got out that a gay couple would be speaking at the public school's annual Diversity Day, a group circulated a petition opposing the event, and the school board voted to cancel it. It was a low point for the town. A white supremacist group picked up the story and praised the school board on its Web site. Jay Leno mocked the decision on The Tonight Show. The whole episode reminded me of why I had fled small-town America.
What happened next renewed my faith. Within hours of the vote, a new petition that favored the gay speakers gathered twice the number of signatures from residents old and new. Others raised money for a full-page ad supporting diversity. In short order, the school board reversed itself, and the gay couple was allowed to speak.
But a more important outcome illustrates the unique nature of small-town life: The controversy divided not strangers, but neighbors. And so a band of residents (including my wife) came together to keep the conversation alive. The group, which still meets today, includes both a lesbian and a local evangelical minister who believes homosexuality is a sin.
The fact of the matter is that neither Thoreau nor Keillor get it quite right. Both reduce the country to a kind of parody opposition to the city. It's my firm conviction, though, that if you spend five minutes talking to a rube, you'll discover a sophisticated intelligence and rich emotional life. Spend five minutes talking to a member of the urban intelligentsia, and you'll find a rube.
In other words, each of us has the same capacity for openness and intolerance. The controversy over the gay speaker could happen anywhere -- city folk wear blinders, too. In fact, for all its diversity, the city's segmented society makes it easy to stay in your own circle and to dismiss those with whom you disagree. Our lives here are so intertwined that we're forced into deeper relationships. Here, someone you disagree with is liable to bring you a meal when you're sick.
--------------------------------page 5-------------------------------------
LAST FALL I WENT with my family and two others to gather apples at a nearby orchard. The trees were heavy with fruit, row upon row. The sun turned the orchard into an ocean of light. A pileated woodpecker patrolled our progress. One had only to reach out a hand to find it filled with warm, sweet fruit. Our children played together under the trees, eating apples. Later I made quart after quart of applesauce.
This day has become emblematic of my reasons for living here: all the gifts the planet has to offer, all the warm time spent preparing food and eating it with good friends and their children -- friends who will be here next year, children who will grow up together and learn country ways.
Above all, moving here has allowed me to make room for these experiences. And I'm more convinced than ever that this is life as I ought to be living it. What don't I do in order to have time to gather apples in the fall? I don't read the daily newspaper -- an omission that would have scandalized my urban news-junky self. (But I stay informed and send letters to politicians and editors.) I don't worry about my career. (But I write every day and am more intensely engaged in my work.) Ultimately, I try not to worry about much of anything. That leaves me plenty of time.
Sure, there are moments when I miss my old friends, my old life. I miss the neighborhood bar where I used to take my work to drink and think, where I was a familiar face, nothing more. Sometimes I even miss the smell of heat coming up from the sidewalk.
But I'll trade all that for life with this circle of near and dear -- for a bottle of country wine, a slice of Allison's cheesecake, a soak in Paul and Paula's hot tub, a sip of Bjorn's goat milk, and for all of us together, around my kitchen table, while our children play in the back yard.
--------------------------------page 6-------------------------------------
TELL ME MORE
If you're thinking about a move to small-town America, the following resources are a good place to start:
Books
Moving to a Small Town: A Guidebook to Moving From Urban To Rural America (Simon & Schuster) by Wanda Urbanska and Frank Levering
Finding & Buying Your Place in the Country (Dearborn Trade) by Les Scher and Carol Scher
The 100 Best Small Art Towns in America (Avalon Travel) by John Villani
Almanac of the 50 States (Information Publications) edited by Edith R. Hornor
The Encyclopedia of Country Living (Sasquatch) by Carla Emery
Web Sites
Renewing the Countryside: Resources and links for making the leap to the country. www.renewingthecountryside.org
American FactFinder: Fast access to census data about small towns. www.factfinder.census.gov
Realtor.com: Online searching of MLS listings for a snapshot of home prices. www.realtor.com
Green People: Listings of food co-ops, community-supported agriculture arrangements, farmers' markets, etc. www.greenpeople.org
Intentional Communities: A list of nearly 1,000 intentional
communities worldwide. www.ic.org
Joseph Hart is a contributing editor of Utne. He can be reached at TheDrift frontiernet.net
--------------------------------page 7-------------------------------------
Viroqua, Wisconsin Photo Essay
All images by
Jonathan Chapman Photography.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 23:40:35 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
Hi Paul, you wrote:
)The possibilities are: real, naive human interest and enthusiasm for
)dialogue.
)OR: A cult in action, masked by a show of the above.
)OR: A sad demonstration of how the cult has so brainwashed me that my naive
)interest is being falsely directed even without me knowing it.
I think it's more complicated than that. I would guess a mix of real, naïve
or not naïve human interest and enthusiasm for dialogue AND a cult in
action! Cults have ordinary people in them, like Waldorf teachers, with
human interest and enthusiasm for dialogue etc. Welcome to the list.
Diana
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1746
-- Topica Digest --
cranial sacral quackery
By pathman00 hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 00:53:14 +0000
From: Curtis McGuyer (pathman00 hotmail.com)
Subject: cranial sacral quackery
While picking my youngest son up from the San Diego Waldorf School on
4/28/05, I was told that I could find him in the music room with "Dr.
Ann". I was directed to this room with an unlocked closed door and
opened it to find my son lying supine while a lady, who I did not know,
was doing something to the back of his head. I asked what had happened.
Was my child o.k.? Had there been an accident? "No", she said. She
said that she was moving the bones of my 11 y.o. son's skull to correct
an abnormality of the occipital region. She told me that the occipital
region of his skull was mishapen, abnormal or otherwise malformed such
that it had caused his "meninges to be pulled too far forward". She
also told me that my son's eyes could not track objects, but that this
therapy had helped and that his meninges had returned to the normal
location. Of course, I went ballistic. This lady did not have my
parental consent to touch or "treat" my son. My son is a perfectly
healthy, well formed child. I believe it is harmful to tell a child that
there is something wrong with him, when in reality he is normal. She
claimed to be a naturopathic doctor. Her name is Ann Szaur, N.D., R.N.
I immediately spoke with the school administrator and informed her that
this lady should never again touch my child without my permission. The
administrator told me that "Dr." Szaur was not on the Waldorf staff and
that she had been provided visitor status and given a room in which she
could see children.
I contacted the Department of Consumer Affairs in California and
registered a complaint against Ann Szaur. I spoke with the head of the
Naturopathic Bureau within the DCA, Kathy McKeever, Who told me that
there were 80 licensed naturopathic doctors in California BUT Ann Szaur
is not one of them. Apparently Ann Szaur is practicing without a
license in this state. I have seen her colorful website which advertises
various holistic modalities. She claims on her website to be an
anthrophosophical doctor and a nationaly recognized Waldorf doctor. I
believe she is a quack and practicing without a license in the state of
California.
Does anyone have any additional information about this individual
and/or her involvement in the waldorf system.
A concerned parent
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1747
-- Topica Digest --
Re: cranial sacral quackery
By madpark nildram.co.uk
Re: cranial sacral quackery
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
By dan dandugan.com
Re: cranial sacral quackery
By dan dandugan.com
Re: cranial sacral quackery
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 07:59:09 +0100
From: madpark (madpark nildram.co.uk)
Subject: Re: cranial sacral quackery
Hello curtis
Here in England at the Waldorf school the children were taken to the
Anthroposophical ³Doctor² we didn¹t hear much about it unless they needed
Œmedicine¹, in that instance we would be billed on the school bill, my
daughter was told she had ³arthritis² in her big toe (at age 12) and we were
charged £35 for the tube of cream (approx $70) which arrived by post 3 weeks
later...we threw it away...and complained to the class teacher as there was
no channel to the Doctor, the class teacher explained that Œarth¹ and Œitis¹
means Œinflamation¹ and Œjoint¹ so she must be inflamed in her toe...we gave
up at that point...I wish we had left the school but at that time we were
still convinced it was a good education and turned a blind eye to the wacko
bits
elle
) Curtis wrote:
) While picking my youngest son up from the San Diego Waldorf School on
) 4/28/05, I was told that I could find him in the music room with "Dr.
) Ann". I was directed to this room with an unlocked closed door and
) opened it to find my son lying supine while a lady, who I did not know,
) was doing something to the back of his head. I asked what had happened.
) Was my child o.k.? Had there been an accident? "No", she said. She
) said that she was moving the bones of my 11 y.o. son's skull to correct
) an abnormality of the occipital region. She told me that the occipital
) region of his skull was mishapen, abnormal or otherwise malformed such
) that it had caused his "meninges to be pulled too far forward". She
) also told me that my son's eyes could not track objects, but that this
) therapy had helped and that his meninges had returned to the normal
) location. Of course, I went ballistic. This lady did not have my
) parental consent to touch or "treat" my son. My son is a perfectly
) healthy, well formed child. I believe it is harmful to tell a child that
) there is something wrong with him, when in reality he is normal. She
) claimed to be a naturopathic doctor. Her name is Ann Szaur, N.D., R.N.
) I immediately spoke with the school administrator and informed her that
) this lady should never again touch my child without my permission. The
) administrator told me that "Dr." Szaur was not on the Waldorf staff and
) that she had been provided visitor status and given a room in which she
) could see children.
)
) I contacted the Department of Consumer Affairs in California and
) registered a complaint against Ann Szaur. I spoke with the head of the
) Naturopathic Bureau within the DCA, Kathy McKeever, Who told me that
) there were 80 licensed naturopathic doctors in California BUT Ann Szaur
) is not one of them. Apparently Ann Szaur is practicing without a
) license in this state. I have seen her colorful website which advertises
) various holistic modalities. She claims on her website to be an
) anthrophosophical doctor and a nationaly recognized Waldorf doctor. I
) believe she is a quack and practicing without a license in the state of
) California.
)
) Does anyone have any additional information about this individual
) and/or her involvement in the waldorf system.
)
) A concerned parent
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without Botox!
) Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68%. Click
) here to start looking younger today!
) http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGb7sxn1f/Nexiderm
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
) threads are always welcome.
)
)
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 13:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: cranial sacral quackery
Hello Curtis:
We initially had some faith in Anthroposophical
doctors because years before we ever heard of Waldorf
my husband went to one near where he grew up. He had
some digestive problem and the Anthro doctor gave him
some white powder (no, not cocaine!) that cured the
problem.
When our kids were in Waldorf, the scool promoted an
Anthro doc newly arrived from Brazil. I went to see
her. I was taking iron tablets for anemia at the
time. She told me to stop taking them and to start on
a whole regimen of products sold by the mail order
Anthro pharmacy here in the US. After a couple of
weeks on the Anthro regimen I was fading fast and
barely had the energy to get up in the mornings. I
threw out the Anthro meds, started taking my iron
pills again, and was back in shape again within a
couple of days. The Brazilian Anthro doc did not stay
in LA very long.
When our Waldorf school suggested families make
appointments with a popular visiting Anthroposophist
doctor from another state, despite my previous
experience and out of curiosity, we made an
appointment for our son. Anthroposophist doctors in
the US supposedly have medical degrees in addition to
being anthroposophically trained. Given the lack of
honesty within the Anthro community, it has never
occurred to me before this moment that this might not
be true. The Anthro doctor did no tests other than
visual observation and then pronounced our son anemic.
I took him to his regular pediatrician, who gave him
a blood test. The blood test showed our son was not
anemic.
At that point I knew for sure that Anthro medicine is
quackery.
What happened to your son is particularly outrageous,
given that there was no parental permission. Of
course, at Waldorf schools the child's teacher is
considered the most significant adult in the child's
life and the parents are looked down upon as
spiritually less evolved beings unless they happen to
be Anthroposophists.
Best wishes,
Margaret in L.A.
Discover Yahoo!
Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 11:44:13 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Dan's remarks on "Strange Science": New Kid Nearly Offended
Paul Georghiades, you wrote,
)Folks, I'm busy in the next few weeks: Teaching a physics block,
)getting ready to put on the Merchant of Venice with my class, taking
)them to Romania. So I'll deal with the fallout as I can.
I understand. I want to dialogue more with you, but I've been busy
with spring trade shows and a great nature recording trip to Utah.
It's OK to reopen a thread weeks later.
)But look, here's what will undermine the whole thing: Dan, I wasn't
)being sarcastic at all when I indicated why I was motivated to write
)in. Consider that the tape of your talk was lent me by a Waldorf
)teacher trainer who genuinely was interested, and thought I would be
)too.
)
)The possibilities are: real, naive human interest and enthusiasm for dialogue.
Let's go for it.
)OR: A cult in action, masked by a show of the above.
)OR: A sad demonstration of how the cult has so brainwashed me that
)my naive interest is being falsely directed even without me knowing
)it.
I appreciate your considering that these are possibilities. I
cultivate skeptical and scientific attitudes, yet Waldorf's beautiful
romanticism was sufficient to make me put them aside until I ran into
things that I just couldn't tolerate.
)The other, perhaps more scary thought is that the conditions in the
)US are so very different on both sides of the divide that the world
)I'm speaking from is just not relevant to what is exercising you.
I don't think so. There's been a tendency in this controversy for
American Waldorf promoters to say that we're enlightened over here,
we aren't Steiner doctrinaires like the Europeans, and for European
Waldorf promoters to say that the new converts in American are
overzealous, the European Waldorf movement is mature and sensible.
The fact is that the Waldorf movement on both sides of the Atlantic
is very similar, with both reasonable and nutty individuals to be
found, often side by side. They all draw on the same publications.
)...A bit about our school. We have no state or local funding. We are
)so cheap you would laugh, and then perhaps be horrified by our lack
)of resources. We try to turn no one away on financial grounds.
)(Around 50% of our families have bursaries, discounts or deferred
)payment arrangements). We are non-selective on academic grounds, and
)every class has some children who probably couldn't manage
)elsewhere. Yet we work to the highest standards we can aim for.
Sounds good, I'd love to visit.
)Parents are closely involved at every level (we include parent
)listeners on our teacher interviews and collate their feedback), and
)run many parts of the school. If we don't communicate with our
)parents, we don't have a school.
That's admirable, I've never heard of a school doing that.
)There are issues about explaining the curriculum, but they tend to
)be at the "How long have you got to talk about this?" level - and
)there is a lot of public domain information. We state explicitly
)that we are a Christian-based school in our prospectus, but we're in
)a very New Age area and we hope it will stop people enthusiastically
)pitching in and then discovering that we make much of Easter and
)being offended.
I'll take issue with that. It's common for Waldorf schools in Europe
to say that they're Christian, and in America to say that they're
nonsectarian. And in Egypt they say that they're Muslim! This is
deceptive, just playing to the local majority. Waldorf schools are
Anthroposophical. Their Christianity isn't the Christianity that most
people mean when they use the word, and they aren't nonsectarian,
either.
)...As for phenomenological science, please take a look at the work
)of Schumacher College in Dartington, UK. It's not sweeping the globe
)yet, but it genuinely is a bigger set than Anthroposophy. I suspect
)its day will come through ecological concerns...
This I want to discuss with you, when you have time. I'd like you to
present what you think phenomenological science is, and why it's
important. Shumacher College says:
)The twin convictions that underpin Schumacher College are these:
)that the rational and scientific view of the world that has so
)dominated Western civilization is incomplete, and that new vision is
)needed to sustain the Earth. Accordingly, it represents a pioneering
)attempt to establish a center in which the conceptual, social and
)moral dimensions of new world-views can be put to the test.
Sounds good, but as Sir Andrew Aguecheek says in Twelfth Night, "What
is 'pourquoi'? Do or not do?" What does a phenomenological or
holistic scientist -do- that is different from what a high-minded
"reductionist" scientist does? In my experience with
Anthroposophists, the high-sounding principles are used as a cover
for unforgivably undisciplined work that has an audience only within
the cult. Your mileage may vary.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 11:05:10 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: cranial sacral quackery
Welcome to the list, Curtis. You wrote,
)This lady did not have my
)parental consent to touch or "treat" my son. My son is a perfectly
)healthy, well formed child. I believe it is harmful to tell a child that
)there is something wrong with him, when in reality he is normal.
I had a similar experience with my middle son and a chiropractor who
claimed to be able to cure his overbite by manipulating his skull.
That also happened in an insular religious group. In that case it was
an evangelical Christian congregation where both my son's mom and the
chiropractor were members. I threatened to complain to licensing
authorities and he backed off.
)I have seen her colorful website which advertises
)various holistic modalities.
See http://annszaur.com/. Like so many "alternative" and "holistic"
practitioners, she claims to be able to do almost everything!
)She claims on her website to be an
)anthrophosophical doctor and a nationaly recognized Waldorf doctor. I
)believe she is a quack and practicing without a license in the state of
)California.
I agree wholeheartedly with the opinion that Anthroposophical
medicine is quackery. Promotion of AM was one of the issues I had
with elder son's Waldorf school.
Please be careful about libel. It's defensible to say that in your
opinion someone's practice is quackery; stating it as a fact may
expose both you and us.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 18:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: cranial sacral quackery
I would like to add that what I wrote below is my
personal opinion.
Margaret
--- Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com) wrote:
)
) Hello Curtis:
)
) We initially had some faith in Anthroposophical
) doctors because years before we ever heard of
) Waldorf
) my husband went to one near where he grew up. He had
) some digestive problem and the Anthro doctor gave
) him
) some white powder (no, not cocaine!) that cured the
) problem.
)
) When our kids were in Waldorf, the scool promoted an
) Anthro doc newly arrived from Brazil. I went to see
) her. I was taking iron tablets for anemia at the
) time. She told me to stop taking them and to start
) on
) a whole regimen of products sold by the mail order
) Anthro pharmacy here in the US. After a couple of
) weeks on the Anthro regimen I was fading fast and
) barely had the energy to get up in the mornings. I
) threw out the Anthro meds, started taking my iron
) pills again, and was back in shape again within a
) couple of days. The Brazilian Anthro doc did not
) stay
) in LA very long.
)
) When our Waldorf school suggested families make
) appointments with a popular visiting Anthroposophist
) doctor from another state, despite my previous
) experience and out of curiosity, we made an
) appointment for our son. Anthroposophist doctors in
) the US supposedly have medical degrees in addition
) to
) being anthroposophically trained. Given the lack of
) honesty within the Anthro community, it has never
) occurred to me before this moment that this might
) not
) be true. The Anthro doctor did no tests other than
) visual observation and then pronounced our son
) anemic.
) I took him to his regular pediatrician, who gave
) him
) a blood test. The blood test showed our son was not
) anemic.
)
) At that point I knew for sure that Anthro medicine
) is
) quackery.
)
) What happened to your son is particularly
) outrageous,
) given that there was no parental permission. Of
) course, at Waldorf schools the child's teacher is
) considered the most significant adult in the child's
) life and the parents are looked down upon as
) spiritually less evolved beings unless they happen
) to
) be Anthroposophists.
)
) Best wishes,
) Margaret in L.A.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1748
-- Topica Digest --
Anthroposophy and science
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Anthroposophy and science
By dan dandugan.com
Anthroposophical medicine suffers setbacks in Europe
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 17:17:18 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Anthroposophy and science
From the current "Anthroposophy Worldwide," page 1:
-Dan Dugan
Blind Spots
Anthroposophy and Science
Right from the beginning anthroposophy was inaugurated by Rudolf
Steiner as a science - as spiritual science. For Rudolf Steiner,
research of esoteric, objective truths was in this way connected with
a scientific, i.e. inter-subjective, verifiable method.
In the meantime, the concept of science and its fields of research
have changed. Leading representatives of the academic sciences have
already a while ago laid to rest the concepts of objectivity and
inter-subjective verifiability, and postulate instead a radical
constructivism: Everyone creates his own 'I' and his own complete
world. At the same time, 'I' and world are also constructed by
society. Other branches of science, such as the neurosciences and
molecular genetics, represent a materialism that extends to all life
processes in that they reduce the entire human being to physiological
structures and processes.
Yet such forms of science, on the level of scientific theory and
epistemology, are hardly compatible with anthroposophy. By contrast,
individual research results can indeed be illumined (and, if
applicable, interpreted) by an anthroposophical perspective, and a
fruitful exchange may take place in the meeting of individual
researchers from both realms.
On the whole one must nevertheless ascertain that a science which,
among other things, 'deconstructs' the 'I', which sees the world as a
man-made illusion and construct, which causally derives all human
soul life from purely physiological, neurological or genetic
processes, and which denies spiritual reality cannot be reconciled
with anthroposophy on a deeper and principal level. This is not
because anthroposophy wants to close itself off from being scientific
(to the contrary: anthroposophy remains a science, but not a
materialistic or deconstructive one), but because the postulated,
scientific method as described above does not recognize its blind
spots, one-sidednesses and materialism. I find it important to
perceive the acuteness of this conflict and to hold it in
consciousness. Hildegard Backhaus, Dornach
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 11:19:45 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy and science
My comments:
)Blind Spots
)Anthroposophy and Science
)
)Right from the beginning anthroposophy was inaugurated by Rudolf
)Steiner as a science - as spiritual science.
"Spiritual science" is as scientific as Christian Science.
)For Rudolf Steiner, research of esoteric, objective truths was in
)this way connected with a scientific, i.e. inter-subjective,
)verifiable method.
Steiner's "observations" of Atlantis, for example, are "verifiable"?
Ridiculous.
)In the meantime, the concept of science and its fields of research
)have changed. Leading representatives of the academic sciences have
)already a while ago laid to rest the concepts of objectivity and
)inter-subjective verifiability, and postulate instead a radical
)constructivism: Everyone creates his own 'I' and his own complete
)world. At the same time, 'I' and world are also constructed by
)society.
Backhaus aligns Anthroposophy with post-modern academic philosophy.
That's appropriate; bullshit goes hand in hand with bullshit. She
pretends that post-modernism represents science today. Not at all.
For a delightful deconstruction of the post-modernists, see Sokal:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/103-0121797-7725416
)Other branches of science, such as the neurosciences and molecular
)genetics, represent a materialism that extends to all life processes
)in that they reduce the entire human being to physiological
)structures and processes.
That's what they study, physiological structures and processes!
)Yet such forms of science, on the level of scientific theory and
)epistemology, are hardly compatible with anthroposophy.
You bet they're not. Scientific epistemolgy is based on critical
tests of ideas, not reverence for revelation.
)By contrast, individual research results can indeed be illumined
)(and, if applicable, interpreted) by an anthroposophical
)perspective, and a fruitful exchange may take place in the meeting
)of individual researchers from both realms.
Can anyone point to any significant knowledge that has been developed
with the help of the Anthroposophical perspective?
)On the whole one must nevertheless ascertain that a science which,
)among other things, 'deconstructs' the 'I', which sees the world as
)a man-made illusion and construct,
Speaking as though modern science and post-modernism were the same thing.
)which causally derives all human soul life from purely
)physiological, neurological or genetic processes, and which denies
)spiritual reality cannot be reconciled with anthroposophy on a
)deeper and principal level. This is not because anthroposophy wants
)to close itself off from being scientific (to the contrary:
)anthroposophy remains a science, but not a materialistic or
)deconstructive one), but because the postulated, scientific method
)as described above does not recognize its blind spots,
)one-sidednesses and materialism.
Science is quite aware that it is materialistic, intentionally so.
)I find it important to perceive the acuteness of this conflict and
)to hold it in consciousness. Hildegard Backhaus, Dornach
The acuteness of this conflict starts to hurt when it hits the
Waldorf classroom, or much worse, the cancer clinic.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 21:30:09 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Anthroposophical medicine suffers setbacks in Europe
From the current "Anthroposophy Worldwide," (No. 4, May 2005) page 1:
-Dan Dugan
Medical Section
If Unknown, Then Also Unrecognized
Michaela Glockler on the challenges to 'anthroposophical Medicine' to
do more research and be publicly present
In recent years the work of the anthroposophical medical movement,
and with it also that of the Medical Section, has come into a very
critical phase of its development in that in two countries in which
anthroposophical medicine was widely recognized, existential problems
have arisen for legal reasons. In Germany, where anthroposophical
medicine was entirely reimbursed by the medical insurance companies,
it became excluded from this coverage per European legislation and as
a national economic measure. In Holland the remedies had even been
prohibited. We were told, "Your medicine has not yet been evaluated
and approved in accordance with European standards."
As a result of, this we said to ourselves: "We cannot just go on like
this. Now we have to carefully take stock and ask ourselves: "What
can we do in order that in the future such developments can be seen
ahead of time and met in a preventive way?" There is an answer that
also the authorities have pointed out to us: "You have to present
valid research results and present yourselves more convincingly to
the public. You are not known." This touches a sensitive spot because
this is in fact the case.
(snip)
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1749
-- Topica Digest --
Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 01:15:58 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Just in from the chalkboard - thanks for various challenging yet friendly and humourous responses!
OK I've had a few days teaching 8th grade Waldorf physics for the first time. We've worked through indices of refraction, light rays & lenses & so on, but of course the contentious part would be prisms & colour.
Using the prisms by looking through them ( and yes there would be another way, as I'll point out in a bit) allowed us to be surprised by radiant colour and then begin to want to order the phenomena into an explanation or theory. In the first session the students suggested that the colours arose on "defined edges" (their formulation).
In the second session I gave them cards with various simple variants on black edge - white edge. I asked them to note all the colour phenomena they observed, generate hypotheses and check them against all the evidence. If one piece of evidence sank their hypothesis, they were to re-think the hypothesis. After some debate they came up with several versions(they were working in groups) of: blue green appears where the shadow lightens; yellow red where the light darkens. Some created other card experiments to clarify their formulation.
Out of this we discussed the scientific method in general, in particular the genius of great scientists in asking original questions and then creating just the right experiments out of which hypotheses can both be tested and rethought. We contrasted statements like "Angels have no weight" with "iron is heavier than polystyrene" in terms of verifiability. I hope you will be pleased to learn that at this point we discarded angels as unscientific without the least nostalgia.
I found the prism work had this general usefulness, that it led them into method quite naturally. Handy in that it was limited enough for them to be able to grasp everything relevant.
But - what about Newton? I thought I was ready for this, because a colleague and I had built a large water prism. We could with this do the other thing: stand away from the prism, darken the room, shine a strong light through it, and observe the deflected beam upon the wall. We did of course see the spectral colours. But we saw blue green at the top edge, red yellow at the bottom edge, and a lot of "white light" in the middle. It does seem as though one would get the whole rainbow and no middle band of white light only in the special case that the beam going into the prism were made sufficiently narrow for top edge and bottom edge of it to be effectively "touching". We were able to create the special case, but it made it harder to present Newton as equally widely applicable in terms of colours arising.
I haven't given up: I've got hold of a wonderful book by Lancelot Hogben (Science for the Citizen), which includes a section on Newton's original prismatic experiment, so I'll work through that & see if I can figure out how to give him his due. Anyone out there done this stuff?
It really did seem to me that the students were deeply satisfied by the logicality of the scientific process because they had the experience of generating the hypotheses and testing them against their evidence. Were the cards stacked by the Anthroposophist teacher? Finally, yes: I chose to go with looking "into" the prism rather than setting it up to look at it. But it was intellectually fruitful, and I did have the water prism to aid what I thought would be balance. I still need to research Newton's original further.
The intellectual downside? I did not teach them that the work of the prism is explained by the differing frequencies of colours being slowed in the denser medium of the prism and refracted at differing angles. But they had noted for themselves the various magnification and deflection effects of the prism other than colour phenomena, and that made the transition to work on lenses a piece of cake, so we have moved on to magnifying, telescopes, prismatic binoculars & traditional drawings of light rays, produced lines of sight and virtual images with the greatest of ease. By the time we finish this block, they should understand as well what many of them use most: Cd players, disk drives, speakers etc, because we'll have the wherewithal to deal with the optical parts, the drive motors, the amplifiers and the magnets and diaphragms.
Oh - and bearing in mind three of these kids have an excellent reggae band, we'll get into electric guitar pickups as well.
On phenomenological science in general: I've found a long, highly philosophical paper by somebody at a Swedish University. I'm checking with him in the hope that he's not a Waldorf warrior, or at least only by coincidence of interest, and will come back with a link for you.
Finally, on my own private cult of America: watch Al Pacino blow away a vast cast of distinguished English character actors in the new film of Merchant of Venice.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1750
-- Topica Digest --
Cult of personality
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
RE: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 17:11:12 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: Cult of personality
Hi,
By way of introduction I am linking up an insightful and quite accurate
;-) post of mine located on the super site:
http://p087.ezboard.com/fopenwaldorffrm2.showMessage?topicID=63.topic
Hope to hear from you soon.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 11:25:59 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Paul Georghiades, you wrote,
)Using the prisms by looking through them ( and yes there would be
)another way, as I'll point out in a bit) allowed us to be surprised
)by radiant colour and then begin to want to order the phenomena into
)an explanation or theory. In the first session the students
)suggested that the colours arose on "defined edges" (their
)formulation).
)
)In the second session I gave them cards with various simple variants
)on black edge - white edge. I asked them to note all the colour
)phenomena they observed, generate hypotheses and check them against
)all the evidence. If one piece of evidence sank their hypothesis,
)they were to re-think the hypothesis. After some debate they came up
)with several versions(they were working in groups) of: blue green
)appears where the shadow lightens; yellow red where the light
)darkens. Some created other card experiments to clarify their
)formulation.
(sarcasm) Congratulations. (/sarcasm) You taught the by-the-book
Anthroposophical lesson, and it worked. Your students "discovered"
Goethe's "primary phenomenon" of color. You and they are now
thoroughly confused about the physics of light and the perception of
color. There are easily-observable phenomena that falsify that theory.
)Out of this we discussed the scientific method in general, in
)particular the genius of great scientists in asking original
)questions and then creating just the right experiments out of which
)hypotheses can both be tested and rethought. We contrasted
)statements like "Angels have no weight" with "iron is heavier than
)polystyrene" in terms of verifiability. I hope you will be pleased
)to learn that at this point we discarded angels as unscientific
)without the least nostalgia.
"Testing" hypotheses is scientific method; but "verifying" them is
not. Do you understand the difference?
)I found the prism work had this general usefulness, that it led them
)into method quite naturally. Handy in that it was limited enough for
)them to be able to grasp everything relevant.
Hardly, since it appears they ended up believing an incorrect theory.
)But - what about Newton? I thought I was ready for this, because a
)colleague and I had built a large water prism. We could with this do
)the other thing: stand away from the prism, darken the room, shine a
)strong light through it, and observe the deflected beam upon the
)wall. We did of course see the spectral colours. But we saw blue
)green at the top edge, red yellow at the bottom edge, and a lot of
)"white light" in the middle. It does seem as though one would get
)the whole rainbow and no middle band of white light only in the
)special case that the beam going into the prism were made
)sufficiently narrow for top edge and bottom edge of it to be
)effectively "touching". We were able to create the special case, but
)it made it harder to present Newton as equally widely applicable in
)terms of colours arising.
It's that special case that teases out the secret in nature. The edge
colors stuff is pretty but misleading.
)I haven't given up: I've got hold of a wonderful book by Lancelot
)Hogben (Science for the Citizen), which includes a section on
)Newton's original prismatic experiment, so I'll work through that &
)see if I can figure out how to give him his due. Anyone out there
)done this stuff?
)
)It really did seem to me that the students were deeply satisfied by
)the logicality of the scientific process because they had the
)experience of generating the hypotheses and testing them against
)their evidence. Were the cards stacked by the Anthroposophist
)teacher? Finally, yes: I chose to go with looking "into" the prism
)rather than setting it up to look at it. But it was intellectually
)fruitful, and I did have the water prism to aid what I thought would
)be balance.
But since the teacher didn't understand the science before the lesson
started, confusion reigned. I hope you'll do your research before you
teach the next time--or use a standard textbook. That's what they're
for, one can't expect a teacher to know everything.
)I still need to research Newton's original further.
)
)The intellectual downside? I did not teach them that the work of the
)prism is explained by the differing frequencies of colours being
)slowed in the denser medium of the prism and refracted at differing
)angles.
So they learned about trivial phenomena and didn't get a physics lesson.
)But they had noted for themselves the various magnification and
)deflection effects of the prism other than colour phenomena, and
)that made the transition to work on lenses a piece of cake, so we
)have moved on to magnifying, telescopes, prismatic binoculars &
)traditional drawings of light rays, produced lines of sight and
)virtual images with the greatest of ease. By the time we finish this
)block, they should understand as well what many of them use most: Cd
)players, disk drives, speakers etc, because we'll have the
)wherewithal to deal with the optical parts, the drive motors, the
)amplifiers and the magnets and diaphragms.
)
)Oh - and bearing in mind three of these kids have an excellent
)reggae band, we'll get into electric guitar pickups as well.
That's all good, if you teach the physics!
)On phenomenological science in general: I've found a long, highly
)philosophical paper by somebody at a Swedish University. I'm
)checking with him in the hope that he's not a Waldorf warrior, or at
)least only by coincidence of interest, and will come back with a
)link for you.
I expect you to make your arguments here, not tell us to go read a
book or look at a web site. Please use links and references to -back
up- your arguments. I want to hear from -you- what Goethean science
is, and why you think it's better than "materialistic" science.
-Dan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 17:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
[sarcasm] Congratulations. [/sarcasm] You taught the by-the-book
Anthroposophical lesson, and it worked. Your students "discovered"
Goethe's "primary phenomenon" of color. You and they are now
thoroughly confused about the physics of light and the perception of
color. There are easily-observable phenomena that falsify that theory.
..."Testing" hypotheses is scientific method; but "verifying" them is
not. Do you understand the difference?...
Hardly, since it appears they ended up believing an incorrect theory....
It's that special case that teases out the secret in nature. The edge
colors stuff is pretty but misleading....
But since the teacher didn't understand the science before the lesson
started, confusion reigned. I hope you'll do your research before you
teach the next time--or use a standard textbook. That's what they're
for, one can't expect a teacher to know everything...So they learned about trivial phenomena and didn't get a physics lesson....That's all good, if you teach the physics!
)On phenomenological science in general: I've found a long, highly
)philosophical paper by somebody at a Swedish University. I'm
)checking with him in the hope that he's not a Waldorf warrior, or at
)least only by coincidence of interest, and will come back with a
)link for you.
I expect you to make your arguments here, not tell us to go read a
book or look at a web site. Please use links and references to -back
up- your arguments. I want to hear from -you- what Goethean science
is, and why you think it's better than "materialistic" science..
Hello, Dan.
You always were a charmer.
As coincidence would have it, I was just talking about the way science is mistreated these days. And you conveniently provide me with an excellent example. It has been bastardized and transformed into a new religion, and Paul here has apparently committed the ultimate sin against it--performing an experiment that doesn't simply confirm what a *true* scientist is allowed to believe. Science isn't supposed to be dictatorial, dogmatic, its experiments aren't meant to be little more than a series lively puppet shows performed to preserve and protect certain pre-approved precepts which have been predestined by properly ordained scientists' and their pet theories.
And science isn't supposed to be challenged they way you have just done~~which is essentially to denounce by decree any and all observations or theories which deviate from the liturgy.
Science is a method, a language, which we use to distill meaningful and sensible conclusions about the world. While you'd prefer, I suppose, that we dispense with it altogether and teach students dogma instead, for others who *do* appreciate an effort to engage students to science by teaching and treating them as if they were scientists, the experiments just described would suit the bill very well.
"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Theory of Colors has continued to fascinate physicists for almost two centuries since its publication in 1810...[]...We agree with Feigenbaum that the experiments contained in Theory of Colors are what gives Goethe's work its abiding interest. In this article, we suggest that Goethe was a remarkable representative of a research style that we call exploratory experimentation. Long ignored by historians and philosophers of science, exploratory experimentation has nevertheless played a crucial role in the history of physics. "--Physics Today
http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-55/iss-7/p43.html
Thanks, Dan.
Linda
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 06:25:01 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
It's funny how often this Physics Today article
(http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-55/iss-7/p43.html
) is quoted with no reference to the resulting discussion.
Have a look at http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-56/iss-3/p10a.html for some
clarification.
While we are discussing the very nice description of the colour lesson in a
Waldorf physics class, it seems remarkable to me that it was apparently
taught without understanding what it was that Newton did or why.
And while we are on verifying versus falsifying this is worth a look
(http://threadtheneedle.blogspot.com/2005/05/battling-confirmation.html).
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 06:30:33 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
I meant to thank Paul Georghiades for taking the time to give us such a
clear description of what he taught and what he thought about it.
I have that Lance Hogben book as well. It's pretty old as I recall. I
haven't looked at it for some years and I'm not certain of being able to put
my hand on it in a hurry, but I will attempt to have a look at it on the
weekend.
See you, peter
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1751
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 10:52:01 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Peter, you posted,
)And while we are on verifying versus falsifying this is worth a look
)(http://threadtheneedle.blogspot.com/2005/05/battling-confirmation.html).
That's an excellent article about confirmation bias. Confirmation
bias is the biggest problem that I have in my fraud- and myth-busting
in audio engineering. People who are experts, like high-end audio
equipment reviewers and mastering engineers, have a -very- hard time
believing that they are just as susceptible to confirmation bias as
anyone else.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 11:31:30 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Linda Clemens, you wrote,
)You always were a charmer.
That's what the ladies tell me!
)As coincidence would have it, I was just talking about the way
)science is mistreated these days. And you conveniently provide me
)with an excellent example. It has been bastardized and transformed
)into a new religion, and Paul here has apparently committed the
)ultimate sin against it--performing an experiment that doesn't
)simply confirm what a *true* scientist is allowed to believe.
)Science isn't supposed to be dictatorial, dogmatic, its experiments
)aren't meant to be little more than a series lively puppet shows
)performed to preserve and protect certain pre-approved precepts
)which have been predestined by properly ordained scientists' and
)their pet theories.
What Paul set up wasn't an experiment, it was an indoctrination that
is repeated in Waldorf schools all over the world. And it worked,
i.e. the students arrived at the "correct" conclusion. A scientific
experiment would test a falsifiable hypothesis.
)And science isn't supposed to be challenged they way you have just
)done~~which is essentially to denounce by decree any and all
)observations or theories which deviate from the liturgy.
I did no such thing. Observations become meaningful only when
associated with a theory. Paul led his students to a theory, as
intended. But then the theory was not tested.
Goethe's "primary phenomenon" theory, that warm colors come from the
darkening of light, and cool colors come from lightening of dark,
fails when critically tested. There are commonly observed phenomena
that contradict it. It is -not- the basic theory behind the
generation of color...it's a special case. It isn't dogmatic to point
out an error.
)Science is a method, a language, which we use to distill meaningful
)and sensible conclusions about the world. While you'd prefer, I
)suppose, that we dispense with it altogether and teach students
)dogma instead, for others who *do* appreciate an effort to engage
)students to science by teaching and treating them as if they were
)scientists, the experiments just described would suit the bill very
)well.
Dogma was just what Paul was teaching, and dogma isn't science. Both
Paul and his students were seduced by a misleading demonstration
that's a traditional part of the Waldorf curriculum. I experienced it
in a lecture-demonstration at the San Francisco Waldorf School, and I
have the prism and card kit that comes with Proskauer's book "The
Rediscovery of Color." I recommend that book if you want background
in depth for the bad physics teaching in Waldorf.
)"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Theory of Colors has continued to
)fascinate physicists for almost two centuries since its publication
)in 1810...[]...We agree with Feigenbaum that the experiments
)contained in Theory of Colors are what gives Goethe's work its
)abiding interest. In this article, we suggest that Goethe was a
)remarkable representative of a research style that we call
)exploratory experimentation. Long ignored by historians and
)philosophers of science, exploratory experimentation has
)nevertheless played a crucial role in the history of physics.
)"--Physics Today
Exploratory experimentation leads to hypotheses (again, observations
alone are meaningless). Hypotheses that have useful explanatory value
and survive critical testing become theories.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 21:59:23 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Hey, Dan, thanks for clearly marking the sarcasm!
Well, that's what I'm here for, to put up what I'm doing & then wait for the
incoming. And I appreciate that you have a vast amount of experience with
colour and light work.
I also accept (in fear & trembling) that you really want me to put up a
straight argument as to what "Goethean science" is and how it is not a
disguised term for "Anthroposophical science". Please give me some time to
get that together.
On Newton, two points. 1) In conversation with others about these phenomena,
I came to the same conclusion, that the special case (if it is that) has
been the fruitful one, certainly in terms of application. Please specify for
me the examples contradictory to Goethe to which you refer. I defer to your
greater knowledge (truthful irony rather than sarcasm). Presumably other
non-specialists following this would like to know about these, too.
2) My next door neighbour, a specialist physics teacher, had this to say
about the middle "white" line band seen through the water prism: "It's
mixing the colours back together again in the middle". Do you agree with
that? Do you see "white light" when you mix the colours back?
On doing it this way in general. A few non-rhetorical questions for you.
Progressing out of optics into fluid mechanics, would you expect a group of
13-14 year olds of widely differing abilities to hypothesise accurately the
gravity-pressure-vacuum tendencies of siphons? Would you want them to be
taught the equation for velocity of fluid in a siphon? Would that constitute
knowing about siphons? Does knowing about light mean students of that age
doing experiments to measure light frequency, or should I just tell them it,
so they know it?
What they gained from ordering the phenomena in simple optics, they used to
figure out other things accurately. I think I'm going to ask you to produce
your model of "knowing" for homework, while I do mine....
As to testing and verifying, please correct me (I know you won't be backward
in coming forward): I understood verifiability to be the basic criterion for
a hypothesis to be scientific. So a hypothesis has to allow for testing
through experiment. If it can't be tested it is unverifiable and therefore
can't be considered a matter for scientific inquiry. Is this a wrong
understanding? My epistemology may be out of date, and my memory fading, but
I believe Karl Popper gets the credit for that one?
Please note this: when you post me your epistemological credo, I would
expect to see a differentiation between "knowing" and "knowing in learning",
OR a clear statement as to why they are the same.
I'm enjoying this the way you do after they strap you into the fairground
ride. I do also get the feeling I've paid my way into the "Can you go 15
rounds with the Blackburn Bruiser" challenge. You're still only sparring
gently and I'm sweating and puffing...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Dugan" (dan dandugan.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOVyTGa/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Georghiades, you wrote,
)Using the prisms by looking through them ( and yes there would be
)another way, as I'll point out in a bit) allowed us to be surprised
)by radiant colour and then begin to want to order the phenomena into
)an explanation or theory. In the first session the students
)suggested that the colours arose on "defined edges" (their
)formulation).
)
)In the second session I gave them cards with various simple variants
)on black edge - white edge. I asked them to note all the colour
)phenomena they observed, generate hypotheses and check them against
)all the evidence. If one piece of evidence sank their hypothesis,
)they were to re-think the hypothesis. After some debate they came up
)with several versions(they were working in groups) of: blue green
)appears where the shadow lightens; yellow red where the light
)darkens. Some created other card experiments to clarify their
)formulation.
(sarcasm) Congratulations. (/sarcasm) You taught the by-the-book
Anthroposophical lesson, and it worked. Your students "discovered"
Goethe's "primary phenomenon" of color. You and they are now
thoroughly confused about the physics of light and the perception of
color. There are easily-observable phenomena that falsify that theory.
)Out of this we discussed the scientific method in general, in
)particular the genius of great scientists in asking original
)questions and then creating just the right experiments out of which
)hypotheses can both be tested and rethought. We contrasted
)statements like "Angels have no weight" with "iron is heavier than
)polystyrene" in terms of verifiability. I hope you will be pleased
)to learn that at this point we discarded angels as unscientific
)without the least nostalgia.
"Testing" hypotheses is scientific method; but "verifying" them is
not. Do you understand the difference?
)I found the prism work had this general usefulness, that it led them
)into method quite naturally. Handy in that it was limited enough for
)them to be able to grasp everything relevant.
Hardly, since it appears they ended up believing an incorrect theory.
)But - what about Newton? I thought I was ready for this, because a
)colleague and I had built a large water prism. We could with this do
)the other thing: stand away from the prism, darken the room, shine a
)strong light through it, and observe the deflected beam upon the
)wall. We did of course see the spectral colours. But we saw blue
)green at the top edge, red yellow at the bottom edge, and a lot of
)"white light" in the middle. It does seem as though one would get
)the whole rainbow and no middle band of white light only in the
)special case that the beam going into the prism were made
)sufficiently narrow for top edge and bottom edge of it to be
)effectively "touching". We were able to create the special case, but
)it made it harder to present Newton as equally widely applicable in
)terms of colours arising.
It's that special case that teases out the secret in nature. The edge
colors stuff is pretty but misleading.
)I haven't given up: I've got hold of a wonderful book by Lancelot
)Hogben (Science for the Citizen), which includes a section on
)Newton's original prismatic experiment, so I'll work through that &
)see if I can figure out how to give him his due. Anyone out there
)done this stuff?
)
)It really did seem to me that the students were deeply satisfied by
)the logicality of the scientific process because they had the
)experience of generating the hypotheses and testing them against
)their evidence. Were the cards stacked by the Anthroposophist
)teacher? Finally, yes: I chose to go with looking "into" the prism
)rather than setting it up to look at it. But it was intellectually
)fruitful, and I did have the water prism to aid what I thought would
)be balance.
But since the teacher didn't understand the science before the lesson
started, confusion reigned. I hope you'll do your research before you
teach the next time--or use a standard textbook. That's what they're
for, one can't expect a teacher to know everything.
)I still need to research Newton's original further.
)
)The intellectual downside? I did not teach them that the work of the
)prism is explained by the differing frequencies of colours being
)slowed in the denser medium of the prism and refracted at differing
)angles.
So they learned about trivial phenomena and didn't get a physics lesson.
)But they had noted for themselves the various magnification and
)deflection effects of the prism other than colour phenomena, and
)that made the transition to work on lenses a piece of cake, so we
)have moved on to magnifying, telescopes, prismatic binoculars &
)traditional drawings of light rays, produced lines of sight and
)virtual images with the greatest of ease. By the time we finish this
)block, they should understand as well what many of them use most: Cd
)players, disk drives, speakers etc, because we'll have the
)wherewithal to deal with the optical parts, the drive motors, the
)amplifiers and the magnets and diaphragms.
)
)Oh - and bearing in mind three of these kids have an excellent
)reggae band, we'll get into electric guitar pickups as well.
That's all good, if you teach the physics!
)On phenomenological science in general: I've found a long, highly
)philosophical paper by somebody at a Swedish University. I'm
)checking with him in the hope that he's not a Waldorf warrior, or at
)least only by coincidence of interest, and will come back with a
)link for you.
I expect you to make your arguments here, not tell us to go read a
book or look at a web site. Please use links and references to -back
up- your arguments. I want to hear from -you- what Goethean science
is, and why you think it's better than "materialistic" science.
-Dan
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOVyTGf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 16:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
What Paul set up wasn't an experiment, it was an indoctrination that
is repeated in Waldorf schools all over the world.
Of course it was an experiment. Perhaps you could characterize them as a short sequence of experiments. Everyone calls them experiments.
) I did no such thing. Observations become meaningful only when
) associated with a theory. Paul led his students to a theory, as
) intended. But then the theory was not tested.
Nonsense. From the observations, the students were led to form hypotheses. The students were then led to test those hypotheses against the evidence. They were led to reject any hypothesis which was found to contradict the evidence. Then the students were led to a discussion of the scientific method.
We're talking school children here, Dan. Not the ultimate showdown, the experimentum crucis to once and for all prove Goethe's color theory rofl. Newton spent *years* on his experiments. As did Goethe. But Paul was a little lax here?.......hilarious.
) Goethe's "primary phenomenon" theory, that warm colors come from the
) darkening of light, and cool colors come from lightening of dark,
) fails when critically tested. There are commonly observed phenomena
) that contradict it. It is -not- the basic theory behind the
) generation of color...it's a special case. It isn't dogmatic to point
) out an error.
Hey, that's great Dan. It would be kinda cool to see a science devotee like you actually *suggest* and describe some test which has been overlooked. As opposed to throwing a tantrum full of hellfire and brimstone over the specter Goethe.
) Dogma was just what Paul was teaching, and dogma isn't science. Both
) Paul and his students were seduced by a misleading demonstration
) that's a traditional part of the Waldorf curriculum.
Seduced into what? They performed a handful of experiments! There was nothing wrong with the experiments. Nothing wrong with how they were conducted. You just don't like the ones that were chosen because you've got a burr up the **** over Goethe.
Once again, this is *school*. I did experiments in school. I did experiments in college. I did experiments with acids and bases and salts and lights and sound and levers and pullies and fruit flies and fungie in petrie dishes. I honestly can't tell you what theories or conclusions were "proven" from a single damn one of these experiments today. Using experiments in a high school class simply for the purposes of adjudicating the validity of established scientific theories would be a completely absurd teaching practice. Conducting experiments are important because they're the perfect way to learn about, de-mystify, and begin to apply modern science method. It's about carefully observing and actively thinking about phenomenon. It's about mastering some technique.
)"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Theory of Colors has continued to
)fascinate physicists for almost two centuries since its publication
)in 1810...[]...We agree with Feigenbaum that the experiments
)contained in Theory of Colors are what gives Goethe's work its
)abiding interest. In this article, we suggest that Goethe was a
)remarkable representative of a research style that we call
)exploratory experimentation. Long ignored by historians and
)philosophers of science, exploratory experimentation has
)nevertheless played a crucial role in the history of physics.
)"--Physics Today
) Exploratory experimentation leads to hypotheses (again, observations
) alone are meaningless). Hypotheses that have useful explanatory value
) and survive critical testing become theories.
So? Your point would be? Are you suggesting that every high school science experiment must culminate in some profound and unassailable scientific theory? I took a look at some experiments NASA has designed for schools. They had a lot of cool ones. But I wouldn't conclude they held themselves to this criteria. "Make your own giant kaleidoscope", for example, encouraged students to experiment with the angles of the mirrors in the instrument. The profound theory determined here? "Kaleidoscopes with smaller angles are more interesting". Wooooo.
Linda
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 16:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Peter Farrell (feetapparel hotmail.com) wrote:
) While we are discussing the very nice description of the colour lesson in a
Waldorf physics class, it seems remarkable to me that it was apparently
taught without understanding what it was that Newton did or why.
I didn't see Goethe's whats and whyfores discussed either. Remarkable.
) And while we are on verifying versus falsifying this is worth a look
(http://threadtheneedle.blogspot.com/2005/05/battling-confirmation.html).
The term "verifying" came up in reference to the class discussing the idea that the weight of angels is a nonscientific concept.
You and Dan both seem itching for some nonsense bone to pick. That's the *only* way you could possibly end up trying to make an issue of this distinction here rofl.
Please, Peter and Dan. After having taking a look at the article, what alternative experimental test should Paul have used to "falsify" the hypothesis that angels have no weight?
Been fun. As usual.
Bye...Linda
See you, Peter
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a Laptop? Get a Sony Vaio Laptop Free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaFb1dkiGbNQ9ROf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1752
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Just a Small-Town Boy
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Gone so soon, Linda?
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 15:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Just a Small-Town Boy
yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net) wrote:
"Interesting article. It mentions a Waldorf School.
What do you think?
Best Wishes,yarngal"
Thanks for the article. It is quite telling. I haven't heard of this guy or know what business he owns in Viroqua, but I'll track it down. I find it interesting that he writes nothing about "Little Mary Sunshine" but uses the "Diversity Days" controversy to his advantage.
It also comes across clearly that he and his family and their friends have a bit of wealth, with their hot tubs and all.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Discover Yahoo!
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 10:44:25 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: Gone so soon, Linda?
Linda Clemens wrote:
) Been fun. As usual.
)
) Bye...Linda
I've been wondering whether you'd respond to this, posted back in
February:
http://lists.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read/message.html?mid=1718441832&sort=d&start=25221#
Perhaps I have my answer.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1753
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By dan dandugan.com
Just a Small town Boy
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By dan dandugan.com
Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
By gideonmills yahoo.com
local Waldorf graduate
By gideonmills yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 10:19:27 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
Paul Georghiades, thanks for continuing the dialogue. You wrote,
)I also accept (in fear & trembling) that you really want me to put up a
)straight argument as to what "Goethean science" is and how it is not a
)disguised term for "Anthroposophical science". Please give me some time to
)get that together.
I would appreciate that.
)On Newton, two points. 1) In conversation with others about these phenomena,
)I came to the same conclusion, that the special case (if it is that) has
)been the fruitful one, certainly in terms of application.
Goethean science teaches that the important law for the generation of
color is that warm colors are made when darkness obscures light, and
cool colors are made when light is over darkness.
The best Waldorf classroom demonstration of this uses a dark room, an
aquarium with a little milk in the water, and a flashlight. The
flashlight beam is directed through the water. When you look directly
into the flashlight beam through the water, it looks amber or red.
When you look at the flashlight beam going through the water from the
side, it looks bluish. Darkness over light, light over darkness.
The natural illustrations of this phenenomenon are the sunset, where
the atmosphere obscures the sunlight and makes warm colors, and the
blue sky, where light passing through the atmosphere in front of the
blackness of space makes blue.
A law of nature? Sort of. The fundamental law for the generation of color? No.
Newton teaches that when light is refracted (bent) at a boundary like
glass and air or air and water, different colors are bent different
amounts, so a thin beam of light can be seen to be divided up into a
spectrum of colors by a prism.
A law of nature? Yes, no exceptions. The fundamental law for the
generation of color? More so than the above, but it's necessary to
understand that color is a perception, and the perception of color is
a whole separate world from the physical world of light and
wavelength. Color perceptions can be caused in other ways than by
wavelengths of light.
)Please specify for
)me the examples contradictory to Goethe to which you refer.
The obvious one is the "white sun." When a layer of clouds is just
the right thickness so you can look right at the sun as a white disc.
Light is being obscured by darkness. Why aren't warm colors
generated? Goethean science can't explain it. And why are storm
clouds gray instead of red? Same problem.
)I defer to your
)greater knowledge (truthful irony rather than sarcasm). Presumably other
)non-specialists following this would like to know about these, too.
I was a theatrical lighting designer starting in childhood (really),
and my interest in light and color led to a lot of reading about both
the physics of light and the biology of color perception.
)2) My next door neighbour, a specialist physics teacher, had this to say
)about the middle "white" line band seen through the water prism: "It's
)mixing the colours back together again in the middle". Do you agree with
)that? Do you see "white light" when you mix the colours back?
Yes, and this was a crucial experiment that Newton performed. It's
unclear whether Goethe got this far when he "reproduced Newton's
experiments." I doubt it.
So why do you think the sun is red at sunset, but not when obscured
by clouds above? The answer lies in knowledge that neither Newton nor
Goethe had access to.
)On doing it this way in general. A few non-rhetorical questions for you.
)Progressing out of optics into fluid mechanics, would you expect a group of
)13-14 year olds of widely differing abilities to hypothesise accurately the
)gravity-pressure-vacuum tendencies of siphons?
That depends on how well you can teach the unit!
)Would you want them to be
)taught the equation for velocity of fluid in a siphon? Would that constitute
)knowing about siphons?
I would say that "knowing about siphons" would be understanding how
they work, equations aside.
)Does knowing about light mean students of that age
)doing experiments to measure light frequency, or should I just tell them it,
)so they know it?
I think it's essential for them to understand the existence of
electromagnetic radiation, its frequency spectrum, and the eye as a
detector of a portion of that spectrum. And hypotheses why mammalian
vision is adapted to a certain portion of the spectrum.
)What they gained from ordering the phenomena in simple optics, they used to
)figure out other things accurately. I think I'm going to ask you to produce
)your model of "knowing" for homework, while I do mine....
Sure. Knowledge about the physical universe should be based on evidence.
)As to testing and verifying, please correct me (I know you won't be backward
)in coming forward): I understood verifiability to be the basic criterion for
)a hypothesis to be scientific. So a hypothesis has to allow for testing
)through experiment. If it can't be tested it is unverifiable and therefore
)can't be considered a matter for scientific inquiry. Is this a wrong
)understanding? My epistemology may be out of date, and my memory fading, but
)I believe Karl Popper gets the credit for that one?
Close, but you have it backwards. What Popper taught, and what
distinguishes 20th-century science from what went before, is that
seeking -verification- of an hypothesis often leads to error. A
better method is to make every attempt to -falsify- the hypothesis.
The proposition "all crows are black" isn't tested by observing more
and more black crows. It's falsified by the observation of one white
crow. Popper's answer to "the demarcation question," how to decide
what is a scientific question, is "is it falsifiable?"
If there's no chance of showing that an hypothesis is wrong, even if
only in a thought experiment, then it isn't a scientific proposition.
Genuine science accepted this whole-heartedly. Post-modernists rebel
because it's too hard.
)Please note this: when you post me your epistemological credo, I would
)expect to see a differentiation between "knowing" and "knowing in learning",
)OR a clear statement as to why they are the same.
It's fortuitous that you mentioned Popper, because he's really
helpful with this kind of question, too. 19th-century philosophers
(and that includes Steiner) are very concerned with knowledge as
being something inside the individual. Popper pointed out that most
of the knowledge in the world is in the libraries, not in people's
heads. That's what's important about knowledge, that it's built
empirically in human culture, nothing to do with Steiner's obsession
with "thinking."
)I'm enjoying this the way you do after they strap you into the fairground
)ride. I do also get the feeling I've paid my way into the "Can you go 15
)rounds with the Blackburn Bruiser" challenge. You're still only sparring
)gently and I'm sweating and puffing...
Relax, I think you're a sincere seeker. I don't blame you for
teaching your students a stupid lesson. In the Anthroposophical
environment, you can't know any better.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 14:48:24 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Just a Small town Boy
Hi Deborah and Everyone,
thanks, Deborah, for answering my post.
I agree with you about the article. It is very telling.
The local people in Viroqua seem to like the Waldorf-related stores,
etc, due to all the MONEY brought into the (formerly economically
depressed) town and county. To criticize Waldorf there is to be called
"intolerant".
I read the local paper at times, and they only have glowing articles
about Waldorf.
A few people are skeptical about the new age and Waldorf related shops
downtown, but they don't post or air their views in public.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 10:33:51 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
DAN DUGAN
)What Paul set up wasn't an experiment, it was an indoctrination that
)is repeated in Waldorf schools all over the world.
LINDA CLEMENS
)Of course it was an experiment. Perhaps you could characterize them
)as a short sequence of experiments. Everyone calls them experiments.
I understand, but they're really demonstrations, not experiments.
) ) I did no such thing. Observations become meaningful only when
)) associated with a theory. Paul led his students to a theory, as
)) intended. But then the theory was not tested.
)
)Nonsense. From the observations, the students were led to form
)hypotheses. The students were then led to test those hypotheses
)against the evidence.
They were led to form a trivial and incorrect theory about the nature
of color that was not based on any understanding of the physics
involved, only the appearances.
)They were led to reject any hypothesis which was found to contradict
)the evidence. Then the students were led to a discussion of the
)scientific method.
Except that the teacher misunderstood the scientific method as being
"verification" of a theory.
)We're talking school children here, Dan. Not the ultimate showdown,
)the experimentum crucis to once and for all prove Goethe's color
)theory rofl. Newton spent *years* on his experiments. As did
)Goethe. But Paul was a little lax here?.......hilarious.
You can minimize it if you want, but I think teaching wrong science
is a very serious matter. And teenagers aren't children.
) ) Goethe's "primary phenomenon" theory, that warm colors come from the
)) darkening of light, and cool colors come from lightening of dark,
)) fails when critically tested. There are commonly observed phenomena
)) that contradict it. It is -not- the basic theory behind the
)) generation of color...it's a special case. It isn't dogmatic to point
)) out an error.
)
)Hey, that's great Dan. It would be kinda cool to see a science
)devotee like you actually *suggest* and describe some test which has
)been overlooked. As opposed to throwing a tantrum full of hellfire
)and brimstone over the specter Goethe.
It's a bit of an exaggeration to call pointing out mistakes a
tantrum. Goethe was a great poet and a lousy scientist.
) ) Dogma was just what Paul was teaching, and dogma isn't science. Both
)) Paul and his students were seduced by a misleading demonstration
)) that's a traditional part of the Waldorf curriculum.
)
)Seduced into what? They performed a handful of experiments! There
)was nothing wrong with the experiments. Nothing wrong with how they
)were conducted. You just don't like the ones that were chosen
)because you've got a burr up the **** over Goethe.
Goethe was wrong when he claimed to have refuted Newton, and
scientists laughed at him for it. I suspect this was why no scientist
was willing to edit Goethe's scientific works, and Steiner got the
job.
)Once again, this is *school*. I did experiments in school. I did
)experiments in college. I did experiments with acids and bases and
)salts and lights and sound and levers and pullies and fruit flies
)and fungie in petrie dishes. I honestly can't tell you what
)theories or conclusions were "proven" from a single damn one of
)these experiments today.
Of course not, but if the demonstrations were good, they left you
with an intuitive understanding of how the world works.
)Using experiments in a high school class simply for the purposes of
)adjudicating the validity of established scientific theories would
)be a completely absurd teaching practice. Conducting experiments
)are important because they're the perfect way to learn about,
)de-mystify, and begin to apply modern science method. It's about
)carefully observing and actively thinking about phenomenon. It's
)about mastering some technique.
I agree.
) )"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Theory of Colors has continued to
))fascinate physicists for almost two centuries since its publication
))in 1810...[]...We agree with Feigenbaum that the experiments
) )contained in Theory of Colors are what gives Goethe's work its
))abiding interest. In this article, we suggest that Goethe was a
))remarkable representative of a research style that we call
))exploratory experimentation. Long ignored by historians and
))philosophers of science, exploratory experimentation has
))nevertheless played a crucial role in the history of physics.
))"--Physics Today
)
)) Exploratory experimentation leads to hypotheses (again, observations
)) alone are meaningless). Hypotheses that have useful explanatory value
)) and survive critical testing become theories.
)
)So? Your point would be? Are you suggesting that every high school
)science experiment must culminate in some profound and unassailable
)scientific theory?
I suggest that science "experiments" should leave students knowing
something fundamental or useful about the subject. In the case of
Paul's class, they were left in the dark.
) I took a look at some experiments NASA has designed for schools.
)They had a lot of cool ones. But I wouldn't conclude they held
)themselves to this criteria. "Make your own giant kaleidoscope",
)for example, encouraged students to experiment with the angles of
)the mirrors in the instrument. The profound theory determined here?
)"Kaleidoscopes with smaller angles are more interesting". Wooooo.
Sounds like "edu-tainment" to me. A good demonstration should reveal
something important to know.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 15:17:22 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
Hi again Deborah (& All),
Most of the Waldorf and others involved in that Community couldn't care
less back then about the "Little Mary Sunshine" play and in fact,
supported it, but since the DIversity Days controversy was centered
around the Gay issue, most of the Waldorf people were active in it.
The local fundamentalist right-wing Christians tried to ban the Gay
rights part of Diversity Days in the local public High School, and that
caused the conflict between them and and the Waldorf/progressive/new age
people, but nevertheless, most of the Christians LIKE the Waldorf school
and related businesses in Viroqua because of all the money they bring
into the economically depressed area,and the Christians have and will
defend the Waldorf school and related businesses (except about the Gay
rights issue).Of course the Christians supported the "Little Mary
Sunshine" play together with the Waldorf people. On THAT (the "Little
Mary Sunshine" play) they agreed and saw it together. In other words, if
American Indians are made fun of in a play, and made a satire, most of
the citizens (Waldorf and Christians) don't mind it, but when it comes
to openly Gay people, the fundamentalist Christians will NOT tolerate
them at all and the Waldorf people will stand up for Gay rights
publicly.
Don't forget Wild West Days is coming up, Deborah. Both the Waldorf
people, the Christians and the other citizens bond together around this
Wild West Days "Cowboys and Indians" festival, like they bonded around
the "Little Mary Sunshine" play. Both groups (Waldorf people and the
Christians) don't tolerate any opposition to those events ("Little Mary
Sunshine" and Wild West Days).
Some Christians make critical comments about the "pagans" (usually in
private or on the Internet), but not against the "pagan" and new age
businesses.
Everyone : What do you think about that kind of tolerance (for Waldorf
in SW Wisconsin)? I am curious about what you here think, since most on
this list are politically progressive. Are there any limits to
tolerance? Or should we just tolerate everyone, including the Waldorf
school and businesses?
For example, I don't really mind the Gay people around here, and it
is none of my business what two consenting adults do in private.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 22:43:26 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
L G Clemens wrote in response to me
)Peter:
) ) While we are discussing the very nice description of the colour lesson
)in a
)Waldorf physics class, it seems remarkable to me that it was apparently
)taught without understanding what it was that Newton did or why.
)
)
)I didn't see Goethe's whats and whyfores discussed either. Remarkable.
Apparently I wasn't sufficiently clear. It was the teacher in this case who
didn't understand what Newton was about before presenting this lesson. This
seems to me to be remarkable because Newton's experiments and understanding
are accepted by the overwhelming majority of modern physics as being at the
centre of modern conceptions of optics. Goethe is at best a side issue
(perhaps an interesting one).
)
) ) And while we are on verifying versus falsifying this is worth a look
)(http://threadtheneedle.blogspot.com/2005/05/battling-confirmation.html).
)
)The term "verifying" came up in reference to the class discussing the idea
)that the weight of angels is a nonscientific concept.
)
)You and Dan both seem itching for some nonsense bone to pick. That's the
)*only* way you could possibly end up trying to make an issue of this
)distinction here rofl.
I made no comment about verification or falsification other than pointing to
this interesting article.
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 22:43:26 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Goethe ring - Newton wroght?
L G Clemens wrote in response to me
)Peter:
) ) While we are discussing the very nice description of the colour lesson
)in a
)Waldorf physics class, it seems remarkable to me that it was apparently
)taught without understanding what it was that Newton did or why.
)
)
)I didn't see Goethe's whats and whyfores discussed either. Remarkable.
Apparently I wasn't sufficiently clear. It was the teacher in this case who
didn't understand what Newton was about before presenting this lesson. This
seems to me to be remarkable because Newton's experiments and understanding
are accepted by the overwhelming majority of modern physics as being at the
centre of modern conceptions of optics. Goethe is at best a side issue
(perhaps an interesting one).
)
) ) And while we are on verifying versus falsifying this is worth a look
)(http://threadtheneedle.blogspot.com/2005/05/battling-confirmation.html).
)
)The term "verifying" came up in reference to the class discussing the idea
)that the weight of angels is a nonscientific concept.
)
)You and Dan both seem itching for some nonsense bone to pick. That's the
)*only* way you could possibly end up trying to make an issue of this
)distinction here rofl.
I made no comment about verification or falsification other than pointing to
this interesting article.
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 17:33:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net) wrote:
"Hi again Deborah (& All),
Most of the Waldorf and others involved in that Community couldn't care
less back then about the "Little Mary Sunshine" play and in fact,
supported it, but since the DIversity Days controversy was centered
around the Gay issue, most of the Waldorf people were active in it."
I am still unsure of how Steiner and the contemporary anthrops view gay people and what basis they advocate (however limited that is) for them. Does it have to do with karma and/or reincarnation?
"The local fundamentalist right-wing Christians tried to ban the Gay
rights part of Diversity Days in the local public High School, and that
caused the conflict between them and and the Waldorf/progressive/new age
people,"
Although, not that much friction really. The school board is reflective of the comradery that exists among the local non-Waldorf professionals and the local Waldorf professionals. The lead role in "Little Mary Sunshine" was played by a Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School graduate, but the daughter of the school board president, the daughter of a local Waldorf doctor and the son of a local doctor who claims to highly dislike anthroposophy and Waldord were also in that play and their parents were all equally defensive about allowing their children to be part of something that was roundly denounced not just by individual First Nations people, but by the Great Lakes Intertribal Council, which represents all 11 (eleven) of Wisconsin's federally recognized "tribes," and every other high-profile FN group in this state.
"In other words, if American Indians are made fun of in a play, and made a satire, most of the citizens (Waldorf and Christians) don't mind it,"
The motivations, however, may somewhat differ. Many of the local Waldorf people make a business out of defining themselves as the true owners of "Indianness," e.g. they charge for "pipe ceremonies," "sweat lodges," "medicine wheel" workshops, etc. It is to their advantage to be able to define "Indianness" away from what real "Indian" people are. I have heard from several local high schoolers that they thought that "Indian" people were extinct, which obviously reflects what they have learned or not learned in school (contrary to statutory mandates), within their families and within this community. That includes what they have learned via the well advertised cultural appropriation of the local Waldorf community.
"Don't forget Wild West Days is coming up, Deborah. Both the Waldorf
people, the Christians and the other citizens bond together around this
Wild West Days "Cowboys and Indians" festival, like they bonded around
the "Little Mary Sunshine" play."
Yes, they do. In fact, some of the local Waldorf people have booths set up at "Wild West Days" selling their "dream catchers," "medicine wheels," and other items they have appropriated from FN people.
"Some Christians make critical comments about the "pagans" (usually in
private or on the Internet), but not against the "pagan" and new age
businesses."
I have become close to several of the local Christians who are actually quite concerned with what is going on in this community via the Waldorf people and with my assistance they are getting well educated in anthroposophy. Their initial concern has been with the practice of Wicca within this Waldorf community and my immediate response has been "If only it were that benign." S.L.'s articles have been the most helpful in terms of educating Viroqua people re: Waldorf and, specifically, the PRWS.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 17:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: local Waldorf graduate
The following links concern a graduate of the Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School and a student of Laurel High School (a surreptitious Waldorf charter school in Viroqua). My daughter and I met M.F. when she was only seven years old and my daughter attended school with her for a short time. M.F. is unusual in the local Waldorf community only because she now faces legal consequences for her actions, which seem clearly to be as a result of the community in which she grew up, and by that I am not limiting it to the local Waldorf community. I know of only one Waldorf graduate who is thriving (at least I hope he is still thriving) in large part because he greatly distanced himself from the Waldorf community, Viroqua and his family. What has happened with M.F. is, from what I have experienced, the norm for PRWS graduates. All of the PRWS graduates I know have at the very least DWI's, are potheads, alcoholics and are - to be blunt- lost children. I have to say that this situation with M.F.
is generally quite nightmarish. I have just watched the "Devil's Playground" (which concerns Amish communities) and came away convinced of what happens to children living in closed and secretive groups (a.k.a. cults).
Deborah
www.voicesnet.com/darkpoems/poempoetry48412.htm
www.voicesnet.com/darkpoems/poempoetry43558.htm
http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2005/04/29/news/02death.txt
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1754
-- Topica Digest --
To Deborah and Everyone
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: local Waldorf graduate
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
By lioncell gmx.net
Eagle Heights gardens thrive on diversity
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
By diana.winters verizon.net
'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 08:59:51 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: To Deborah and Everyone
Hi Deborah, Thanks again for your posts on this subject (the Viroqua
area Waldorf, etc.)
I have to agree with you about how many of the Viroqua area Waldorf
people make money out of idealized "Indian" (medicine wheels, dream
catchers , so-called "shamanism", etc.) stereotypes! It is not
surprising then, that they also took part in the "Little Mary Sunshine"
play and they have booths at "Wild West Days".
Both the "noble savage" stereotypes and the "bloodthirsty savage" cowboy
and indians stereotypes exist and if non-Indian people profit from it
(such as with their sweat lodges, selling "Indian" merchandise like
dream catchers , and having "shamanic healing" and "vision
quest"workshops) they won't fight against those harmful and very UNREAL,
false stereotypes!
Modern FIrst Nations peoples do NOT fit into those phony and harmful
stereotypes!
For spiritually bankrupt people to spend lots of money on "shamanic
healing" etc., is just another con-job! Sure, it is their money to
spend, but it just continues another harmful stereotype ("Noble
Savage") about First Nations peoples, who are no different than you or I
in reality.
It is also what you wrote: appropriation (stealing) and the exploiting
of other people's culture for profit and personal fulfillment.
I am glad you are educating some local Christians about the new age
movement.
Like I said, I usually have no problem with peoples' beliefs unless they
cause HARM to others. Continuing and profiting from harmful
stereotypes about others is causing harm, even if it is popular.
Lol, no I won't be going to Wild West Days or to a "shamanic healer"!
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 10:27:43 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: local Waldorf graduate
What a tragedy. I am very sorry for all involved. If, as you say, drug and alcohol use (and other "lost soul" behavior) is the norm for those who attended this particular school, do you think that says most about the school itself, or about the parents/support system, etc. around the kids, or both?
I am no fan of Waldorf (as anyone who has been on this list awhile knows!). But I don't think it is really fair to look at this as a direct cause-and-effect situation. As in: attending a certain school causes X unhealthy and risky behavior to happen.
Once again, I would be more likely to question the environment these kids are being raised in. Are the parents users of recreational drugs or alcohol, etc.?
Not saying this well, but hope my meaning is coming through.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Sun, 15 May 2005 17:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: local Waldorf graduate
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Save up to 75% on luxury bed & bath! Luxury sheets, duvets,
down comforters, plush towels & more woven from the finest
materials -- 400, 600, 1000 thread count & more from $29.99!
http://click.topica.com/caadt4Ab1dkiGbOrq7Ba/SmartBargains
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The following links concern a graduate of the Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School and
a student of Laurel High School (a surreptitious Waldorf charter school in
Viroqua). My daughter and I met M.F. when she was only seven years old and my
daughter attended school with her for a short time. M.F. is unusual in the
local Waldorf community only because she now faces legal consequences for her
actions, which seem clearly to be as a result of the community in which she grew
up, and by that I am not limiting it to the local Waldorf community. I know of
only one Waldorf graduate who is thriving (at least I hope he is still thriving)
in large part because he greatly distanced himself from the Waldorf community,
Viroqua and his family. What has happened with M.F. is, from what I have
experienced, the norm for PRWS graduates. All of the PRWS graduates I know have
at the very least DWI's, are potheads, alcoholics and are - to be blunt- lost
children. I have to say that this situation with M.F.
is generally quite nightmarish. I have just watched the "Devil's Playground"
(which concerns Amish communities) and came away convinced of what happens to
children living in closed and secretive groups (a.k.a. cults).
Deborah
www.voicesnet.com/darkpoems/poempoetry48412.htm
www.voicesnet.com/darkpoems/poempoetry43558.htm
http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2005/04/29/news/02death.txt
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a Laptop? Get a Sony Vaio Laptop Free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaFb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 00:20:45 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
yarngal wrote:
"Hi again Deborah (& All),
Most of the Waldorf and others involved in that Community couldn't care
less back then about the "Little Mary Sunshine" play and in fact,
supported it, but since the DIversity Days controversy was centered
around the Gay issue, most of the Waldorf people were active in it."
Deborah responded:
"I am still unsure of how Steiner and the contemporary anthrops view gay
people and what basis they advocate (however limited that is) for them.
Does it have to do with karma and/or reincarnation?"
Well, from what I gathered the gay issue among anthroposophists is a
complex and often seemingly contradicting one. From what I know Steiner
did not have anything to say on homosexuality, neither male nor female,
so anthroposophists following in his foosteps have tried to construct a
concept of homosexuality that is compatible with anthroposophy's ideas
on sexuality and gender. Opinion does vary but karma and/or
reincarnation, etheric bodies and other weird ideas are used to
"explain" homosexuality. Dutch anthroposophic MD L. F. C Mees thinks of
abortion as one if not the cause of what he labels homophily, unable to
reincarnate in the chosen setting the reincarnating soul seeks refuge in
a less suiting environment. Being aborted and then born in the wrong
setting the socalled displaced person is thought to be unable to root in
home soil, homophily a possible resulting symptom. Mees' theory is that
a child's etheric body first has the same gender as the child which
changes during puberty when the etheric body is worked into the opposite
gender thus enabling the individual to enjoy natural love to the
opposite gender. According to Mees the displaced person is unable to
work his ethric body into the opposing gender. Interestingly, the essay
in question (addressing this issue) is entitled "The Problem of
Homophily". Contrary to Mees Stefan Leber does not seem to explain
homosexuality as the result of failed gender changes in etheric bodies.
Instead he assumes the homosexual is less attracted to the physical body
of his (potential) partner but his etheric body, the individual thus
attracted to the feminine in the male. Christoph Kranich, one of the
more prominent members of bi-sophia (German Bi-sophie), a group of gay
and lesbian anthroposophists http://www.bi-sophie.de/, again shares
Bernard Lievegoed's interpretation on the matter, homosexuality being
related to the development of the physcial body. According to Lievegod
the original kidney's foundation is laid in the first few weeks of an
embryo from which can develop both male and female organs but between
the 20th and 30th day only one possibility is developed, the other held
back, the rest of the possibility resting in our body undeveloped for
the rest of our lives. The etheric body as the forming, activating force
brings about growth and where this is the case the etheric body melts
entirely with the physical one. Wherever the potential possibility which
continues to exist in the etheric body does not find its expressing in
the physical this etheric posssibility lives on, thus a man has a female
etheric body while a female has a male one, thus the opposite gender is
always present in the etheric body. Now according to Lievegod everything
depend on whether the soul focuses more on the physical aspect of one's
manifestation or whether one does not "climb all the way down"
experiencing oneself more within the etheric self, homosexuality thus a
problem of the human soul in relation to the physical and etheric body.
Allegedly many homosexuals feel more elevated than other human due to
feeling less earthly. On the other side the failure to climb down all
the way into one's physical incarnation results in a depriviation in
regard to the possibilities of development of the effected life. The
choice of such conditions of incarnation and the resulting lack of
strength clearly being due to a karmic background. Christoph Kranich
also stresses the difference between man-woman and male-female. That
reminds me of the ying yang discussion and honestly speaking I see no
major difference in as much as both are filled with stereoypical
descriptions of either. All this ideas of explaining homosexuality have
one thing in common, they view heterosexuality as normative and thus
homosexuality as a deviation from a given norm, not just one expression
among a range of other possible ones. I thus do not view any of these
explanations as liberating or challenging. Interestingly, Kranich does
point to a widespread unwillingness among anthroposophists to deal with
the issue which is the reason Kranich refuses to live in any
anthroposophic community.
One thing's for sure, I cannot recall a single anthroposophic gay or
lesbian being on the forefront of gay equal rights movement,
sympathisers I have seen plenty. An acquaintance of mine who had
enlisted her son at the local Waldorf school withdrew after learning
about its homophobic tendencies. I am amazed that had escaped her
attention being within New Age/SWA circles for such a long time but
here we go. Her case is by far not the only one.
On bi-sophia's homepage they also list a number of
books http://www.bi-sophie.de/literatur1.htm they view as recommendable
for teachers and pupils. I cannot say two much about the list as I am
only familiar with two of the listed books (found neither particularly
.... well) but I am concerned about three listed ones from looking over
the respective summary. Lutz van Dick's 'Verdammt starke Liebe' (damn
strong love) covers the 'true' love affair between a Polish boy and a
German soldier during WW II which sounds somewhat remniscent of the old
story of love between a slave and the master, where the situation of
grave power imbalance which simply falls short of a situation of
consenting equals expressed in terms such as love is ignored. Peter
Petersen + Jeanne Rosenhag's 'Dieser kleine Funken Hoffnung' touches on
the story of therapy dealing with the effects of sexual abuse. Being
aware of some of the concepts of healing / therapy within New Age
circles I tend you be quite cautious with such material but will have to
check its content beforehand before jumping to conlcusions. One detail I
do find disturbing though is included in the summary of the last listed
book, Erich Amborn's 'Und dennoch Ja zum Leben', the youth of an
intersexual between 1915-1933. The summary states that an anthroposophic
surgeon working close to Magnus Hirschfeld and his Institute for Sexual
Research being able to allow the intersexual individual accept his fate
with the help of his wider thought, whatever that means. The gay scene
here still seems to suffer from widespread amnesia regarding the role
Magnus Hirschfeld played in the pre-Nazi years. A gay fil director by
the name of Rosa von Praunheim has portrayed Hirschfeld as an early
victim of Naziism in a film biography omitting critical historical
facts, Hirschfeld's activitities within the the eugenic movement
(consequently one of the halls at the institute was named after Ernst
Haeckel), the society for Racial Hygiene, the mutilation of quite a
number of those who sought help with him, his views on homosexuals as
degeneratives who should be excluded from procreation etc etc. Maybe
this link helps for a start http://home.snafu.de/bifff/Hirsengl.htm.
From what I read anthroposophic gays are no exception to this kind of
amnesia which does not really come as a surprise to be honest. None of
the stuff I read about gender roles within anthroposophy does challenge
old stereotypes, obviously gays adhering to anthroposophic principles
have not made a difference either. At the moment I am under the
impression the current approach is a pc one which enables SWA to reach a
wider audience reinforcing the same old principles it taught earlier on
and maybe some never had any major problem with homosexuals as long as
the share in the rest of the whole caboodle. I do recall one of the
problems anthroposophists used to have with gays, single women etc is
their unwillingness to provide for reincarnating souls, e.g. their
refusal to procreate. One of the stories bi-sophists ran on their
homepage was that of a gay men who had been married. No matter the pain
it may or may not have caused him, the wife and children, it is positive
because he did help souls to reincarnate. Seems other forms of
procreation outside traditional arrangement are not viewed as so
favourable (and thus ignored). As I said cannot see anything I have not
come across in one form or the other before, definately no "philosophy
of freedom".
I know this cannot provide for an in-depth coverage of anthroposophic
viewpoints on homosexuality but I do hope it provides a first insight
into the matter.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 00:21:53 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
yarngal wrote:
"Hi again Deborah (& All),
Most of the Waldorf and others involved in that Community couldn't care
less back then about the "Little Mary Sunshine" play and in fact,
supported it, but since the DIversity Days controversy was centered
around the Gay issue, most of the Waldorf people were active in it."
Deborah responded:
"I am still unsure of how Steiner and the contemporary anthrops view gay
people and what basis they advocate (however limited that is) for them.
Does it have to do with karma and/or reincarnation?"
Well, from what I gathered the gay issue among anthroposophists is a
complex and often seemingly contradicting one. From what I know Steiner
did not have anything to say on homosexuality, neither male nor female,
so anthroposophists following in his foosteps have tried to construct a
concept of homosexuality that is compatible with anthroposophy's ideas
on sexuality and gender. Opinion does vary but karma and/or
reincarnation, etheric bodies and other weird ideas are used to
"explain" homosexuality. Dutch anthroposophic MD L. F. C Mees thinks of
abortion as one if not the cause of what he labels homophily, unable to
reincarnate in the chosen setting the reincarnating soul seeks refuge in
a less suiting environment. Being aborted and then born in the wrong
setting the socalled displaced person is thought to be unable to root in
home soil, homophily a possible resulting symptom. Mees' theory is that
a child's etheric body first has the same gender as the child which
changes during puberty when the etheric body is worked into the opposite
gender thus enabling the individual to enjoy natural love to the
opposite gender. According to Mees the displaced person is unable to
work his ethric body into the opposing gender. Interestingly, the essay
in question (addressing this issue) is entitled "The Problem of
Homophily". Contrary to Mees Stefan Leber does not seem to explain
homosexuality as the result of failed gender changes in etheric bodies.
Instead he assumes the homosexual is less attracted to the physical body
of his (potential) partner but his etheric body, the individual thus
attracted to the feminine in the male. Christoph Kranich, one of the
more prominent members of bi-sophia (German Bi-sophie), a group of gay
and lesbian anthroposophists http://www.bi-sophie.de/, again shares
Bernard Lievegoed's interpretation on the matter, homosexuality being
related to the development of the physcial body. According to Lievegod
the original kidney's foundation is laid in the first few weeks of an
embryo from which can develop both male and female organs but between
the 20th and 30th day only one possibility is developed, the other held
back, the rest of the possibility resting in our body undeveloped for
the rest of our lives. The etheric body as the forming, activating force
brings about growth and where this is the case the etheric body melts
entirely with the physical one. Wherever the potential possibility which
continues to exist in the etheric body does not find its expressing in
the physical this etheric posssibility lives on, thus a man has a female
etheric body while a female has a male one, thus the opposite gender is
always present in the etheric body. Now according to Lievegod everything
depend on whether the soul focuses more on the physical aspect of one's
manifestation or whether one does not "climb all the way down"
experiencing oneself more within the etheric self, homosexuality thus a
problem of the human soul in relation to the physical and etheric body.
Allegedly many homosexuals feel more elevated than other human due to
feeling less earthly. On the other side the failure to climb down all
the way into one's physical incarnation results in a depriviation in
regard to the possibilities of development of the effected life. The
choice of such conditions of incarnation and the resulting lack of
strength clearly being due to a karmic background. Christoph Kranich
also stresses the difference between man-woman and male-female. That
reminds me of the ying yang discussion and honestly speaking I see no
major difference in as much as both are filled with stereoypical
descriptions of either. All this ideas of explaining homosexuality have
one thing in common, they view heterosexuality as normative and thus
homosexuality as a deviation from a given norm, not just one expression
among a range of other possible ones. I thus do not view any of these
explanations as liberating or challenging. Interestingly, Kranich does
point to a widespread unwillingness among anthroposophists to deal with
the issue which is the reason Kranich refuses to live in any
anthroposophic community.
One thing's for sure, I cannot recall a single anthroposophic gay or
lesbian being on the forefront of gay equal rights movement,
sympathisers I have seen plenty. An acquaintance of mine who had
enlisted her son at the local Waldorf school withdrew after learning
about its homophobic tendencies. I am amazed that had escaped her
attention being within New Age/SWA circles for such a long time but
here we go. Her case is by far not the only one.
On bi-sophia's homepage they also list a number of
books http://www.bi-sophie.de/literatur1.htm they view as recommendable
for teachers and pupils. I cannot say two much about the list as I am
only familiar with two of the listed books (found neither particularly
.... well) but I am concerned about three listed ones from looking over
the respective summary. Lutz van Dick's 'Verdammt starke Liebe' (damn
strong love) covers the 'true' love affair between a Polish boy and a
German soldier during WW II which sounds somewhat remniscent of the old
story of love between a slave and the master, where the situation of
grave power imbalance which simply falls short of a situation of
consenting equals expressed in terms such as love is ignored. Peter
Petersen + Jeanne Rosenhag's 'Dieser kleine Funken Hoffnung' touches on
the story of therapy dealing with the effects of sexual abuse. Being
aware of some of the concepts of healing / therapy within New Age
circles I tend you be quite cautious with such material but will have to
check its content beforehand before jumping to conlcusions. One detail I
do find disturbing though is included in the summary of the last listed
book, Erich Amborn's 'Und dennoch Ja zum Leben', the youth of an
intersexual between 1915-1933. The summary states that an anthroposophic
surgeon working close to Magnus Hirschfeld and his Institute for Sexual
Research being able to allow the intersexual individual accept his fate
with the help of his wider thought, whatever that means. The gay scene
here still seems to suffer from widespread amnesia regarding the role
Magnus Hirschfeld played in the pre-Nazi years. A gay fil director by
the name of Rosa von Praunheim has portrayed Hirschfeld as an early
victim of Naziism in a film biography omitting critical historical
facts, Hirschfeld's activitities within the the eugenic movement
(consequently one of the halls at the institute was named after Ernst
Haeckel), the society for Racial Hygiene, the mutilation of quite a
number of those who sought help with him, his views on homosexuals as
degeneratives who should be excluded from procreation etc etc. Maybe
this link helps for a start http://home.snafu.de/bifff/Hirsengl.htm.
From what I read anthroposophic gays are no exception to this kind of
amnesia which does not really come as a surprise to be honest. None of
the stuff I read about gender roles within anthroposophy does challenge
old stereotypes, obviously gays adhering to anthroposophic principles
have not made a difference either. At the moment I am under the
impression the current approach is a pc one which enables SWA to reach a
wider audience reinforcing the same old principles it taught earlier on
and maybe some never had any major problem with homosexuals as long as
the share in the rest of the whole caboodle. I do recall one of the
problems anthroposophists used to have with gays, single women etc is
their unwillingness to provide for reincarnating souls, e.g. their
refusal to procreate. One of the stories bi-sophists ran on their
homepage was that of a gay men who had been married. No matter the pain
it may or may not have caused him, the wife and children, it is positive
because he did help souls to reincarnate. Seems other forms of
procreation outside traditional arrangement are not viewed as so
favourable (and thus ignored). As I said cannot see anything I have not
come across in one form or the other before, definately no "philosophy
of freedom".
I know this cannot provide for an in-depth coverage of anthroposophic
viewpoints on homosexuality but I do hope it provides a first insight
into the matter. I am certain there are other interpretations available
on behalf of other anthroposophists but I doubt they are any more
challenging than those cited above.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 19:52:44 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Eagle Heights gardens thrive on diversity
((Already some of the plots at Eagle Heights Community Gardens have been
turned over to the university's Biocore Prairie Restoration program. Still more
plots are being tilled by the "F.H. Kingers" - a university organization that
promotes sustainable agriculture and biodynamic gardening (again, members of the
community without ties to UW-Madison are welcome to join).))
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/features/index.php?ntid=39959&ntpid=1
Eagle Heights gardens thrive on diversity
00:00 am 5/16/05
Chris Martell Wisconsin State Journal
At this time of year, the hill nestled between Frautschi Point, on Lake
Mendota, and the Eagle Heights Apartments looks more like foreign lands than an
area of Madison.
In May, before the hill is blanketed with sunflowers and greenery, evidence
of the work to make it bloom and grow is in place. Women in burkas work beside
people dressed for a day in the rice paddies of Asia. People in African
djellabas crouch besides those in Bucky Badger T-shirts.
Few places in the city display UW-Madison's diversity more vividly than Eagle
Heights Community Gardens, which is said to be both the oldest and the
largest community garden in the U.S.
It opened in 1962, when the tent colony for summer school students was
closed. Since then, produce grown there has fed thousands of families on shoestring
budgets, most of them students living in Eagle Heights apartments.
People from 53 countries currently have plots there. As you walk through the
garden, the cadences of 42 languages can be heard. Signs are posted in several
languages.
Besides English, the most widely spoken languages are Chinese, Spanish,
Korean, French, German, Japanese, Russian, Portugese, Turkish, Hindi and Italian.
Others speak Arabic, Armenian, Bengali, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Urdu, Hmong,
Vietnamese, Hungarian, Yoruba, Indonesian, Lithuanian, Nepali, Norwegian,
Maylay, Polish, Romanian, Sinhalese and Tagolog. Most are graduate students who also
speak English in varying degrees of fluency.
To gardeners, though, the universal language has nothing to do with words.
They share tools, compost - some of it from organic food scraps and coffee
grounds from Madison restaurants - and algae brought from the lakes. They share an
irrigation system with water spigots every 50 feet, and rocks from an old farm
that once stood on the land. And they share admiration for those among them
who are willing to bend over to pick weeds in the communal areas.
In spring, the most important thing the gardeners share is seeds. For the
rest of the season, it's knowledge and encouragement. Americans who grew up on
carrots and green beans now grow bok choy and lemongrass like their Asian
neighbors.
[.............]
Already some of the plots at Eagle Heights Community Gardens have been turned
over to the university's Biocore Prairie Restoration program. Still more
plots are being tilled by the "F.H. Kingers" - a university organization that
promotes sustainable agriculture and biodynamic gardening (again, members of the
community without ties to UW-Madison are welcome to join).
[.............]
People in carriages, often traveling for hours, came to this bluff to see the
panoramic view from the cliffs, surrounded by the Native American mounds. The
"Lake Mendota Pleasure Drive Association" grew into the larger "Madison Park
and Pleasure Drive Association," with its series of rustic roads that provided
access to the picturesque views in and around Madison.
For many of the Eagle Heights gardeners, the view is how they reward
themselves after a long day of turning compost or pulling weeds. Late in the
afternoon, some of them head down to the path that winds along Lake Mendota with their
picnic baskets, resting until sunset.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 23:05:07 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Diversity Days & Little Mary Sunshine (Waldorf Viroqua)
Wow! Thanks Akua. This is quite a bit to take in, I will have to read this
more carefully and ask you some questions, but that's a whole lot of
information I have never had any idea about. Thank you, thank you!
Diana
)Well, from what I gathered the gay issue among anthroposophists is a
complex and often seemingly contradicting one. From what I know Steiner
did not have anything to say on homosexuality,
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:49:22 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
http://www.randi.org/jr/082004nonsense.html
Scroll down 'til you see the Magical Horn of Poo.
'Biodynamics also specifies times for official wine-tasting, too. The
biodynamic growers want their wines tasted only on "fruit" or "flower"
days, but of course not on "leaf" or "root" days. The determination of
which category any given day falls into, is yet another mystical,
anthoposophical, process, equally boring and nonsensical.'
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1755
-- Topica Digest --
Re: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
The Green Dealers A weekend with the Bioneers
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
RE: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Re: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: The Green Dealers A weekend with the Bioneers
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Thanks, Akua (gay issues)
By Yarngal webtv.net
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:07:25 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
In a message dated 5/17/2005 5:49:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
http://www.randi.org/jr/082004nonsense.html
Scroll down 'til you see the Magical Horn of Poo.
'Biodynamics also specifies times for official wine-tasting, too. The
biodynamic growers want their wines tasted only on "fruit" or "flower"
days, but of course not on "leaf" or "root" days. The determination of
which category any given day falls into, is yet another mystical,
anthoposophical, process, equally boring and nonsensical.'
=============
Randi should attend the various world-wide wine symposia
that celebrate biodynamic methods in wine-making. Biodynamics
yields very good and often excellent wines that are praised for their
"terroir" or sense of the place, landscape, earth. These vintners
do not find the process boring or nonsensical or dreamily mystical --
they deal with practicalities. If it didn't work they wouldn't use it.
Maybe PLANS could do a wine-tasting fundraiser using BD wines!
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:19:46 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Steiner students "set good example"
Belfast Telegraph Home ) News
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=638303
Parents and pupils launch their annual 'clean coast' drive
By Gary Grattan
14 May 2005
A LOCAL ferry company has teamed up to support the Rudolph Steiner School's
annual "Clean Coast Campaign".
The school, in Holywood, Co Down, is a registered charity providing
religiously and culturally integrated education for 4-17 year olds.
The central idea of the campaign - which is being backed by Norse Merchant
Ferries - is that both pupils and parents pick up the rubbish from the North
Down coast.
Cleaning the coast is an integral part of the Steiner school's commitment to
making environmental awareness and respect for the planet a central aspect of
education.
Last year the school cleaned from Helen's Bay to Marino and managed to pick
up over 80 bags of rubbish.
Cleaning the beaches is not just a one-off annual fundraising event, but an
extension of the school's commitment to environmental awareness and integrating
'abstract' learning with hands-on experience.
Diane Poole, sales and marketing director at Norse Merchant Ferries, said:
"We all have a responsibility to help and protect the environment and we are
delighted to support the children from Rudolf Steiner School, as they set such a
good example for us all."
Dr John Barry, Northern Ireland Green Party co-leader, is an enthusiastic
supporter of the 'Clean Coast Campaign'. He said: "My daughter goes to the school
and together with other parents and teachers, I will be out cleaning the
beaches.
"The number one culprit in coastal rubbish is the plastic bottle, followed
closely by all manner of other plastic items, such as bags and cups.
"In many ways it is a sad reflection of the environmentally insensitive
behaviour of some people, that we need campaigns such as this."
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:15:08 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: The Green Dealers A weekend with the Bioneers
http://www.science-spirit.org/webexclusives.php?article_id=491
Science and Spirit
The Green Dealers
A weekend with the Bioneers
by Trey Popp
[.........]
Fred Kirschenmann, a longtime biodynamic farmer and the director of the
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University, takes the
stage next. He wears plain slacks and a button-down shirt, and runs through his
PowerPoint presentation with the authority and ease of a seasoned physician
presenting a paper at a medical conference. Starting with a line graph that shows
how Iowa farmers’ gross profits have steadily climbed while their net profits
have stayed flat—an indicator that farmers have been producing more and more
food but making less and less money selling each ton of it—he segues into a
series of photographs that illustrate an inspiring case he calls “the power of
duck.â€
The story is that of Takao Furuno, a rice farmer who owns a five-acre parcel
in southern Japan. In 1987, Furuno grew frustrated with the pressures that
have become increasingly familiar to small-scale conventional farmers all over
the globe. In order to compete, he had to invest a constantly growing portion of
one year’s profits into raising the subsequent year’s crop. Reliant on
pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers marketed by outside companies, he had to
some extent forfeited his sovereignty over the means of production. So Furuno
turned to ducks. Remembering that his grandfather had welcomed the animals onto
the paddies two generations before, Furuno decided to give it a try, uncertain
of what to expect.
To his delight, he found that the ducks ate the insects that feasted on his
rice, which meant that he no longer needed to buy insecticide. In time, he
realized that since he was no longer using insecticide, he might be able to raise
fish when the paddies were flooded. With a bit of trial and error, his plan
worked. And brought another benefit: The fish feasted on his azola, a
lilypadlike water plant that ordinarily spread across his paddies and suffocated the
water beneath. Now the pesky vegetation was under control. Furuno could stop
buying herbicide. He could replant the fig trees that had once grown around the
perimeter of his fields. But it was even better than that—azola is rich in
nitrogen, which now made its way through the fish’s digestive tracts and back into
the soil. Furuno could quit using fertilizer. Through a series of what you
might call natural accidents, he’d gone organic. He’d also gone from a one-crop
farmer to a seller of rice, duck meat, duck eggs, fish, vegetables, and figs.
The financial stability—and fun—was back in farming again.
[.........]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:52:55 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
The school supposedly provides a "religiously and culturally integrated" education. What do you think that means?
Serena, I am guessing your purpose in posting this is to show that some Waldorf kids are doing good things. I doubt anyone here would find that surprising. Kids in all kinds of schools all across the world are doing good social service work.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:19:46 EDT
Subject: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Belfast Telegraph Home ) News
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=638303
Parents and pupils launch their annual 'clean coast' drive
By Gary Grattan
14 May 2005
A LOCAL ferry company has teamed up to support the Rudolph Steiner School's
annual "Clean Coast Campaign".
The school, in Holywood, Co Down, is a registered charity providing
religiously and culturally integrated education for 4-17 year olds.
The central idea of the campaign - which is being backed by Norse Merchant
Ferries - is that both pupils and parents pick up the rubbish from the North
Down coast.
Cleaning the coast is an integral part of the Steiner school's commitment to
making environmental awareness and respect for the planet a central aspect of
education.
Last year the school cleaned from Helen's Bay to Marino and managed to pick
up over 80 bags of rubbish.
Cleaning the beaches is not just a one-off annual fundraising event, but an
extension of the school's commitment to environmental awareness and integrating
'abstract' learning with hands-on experience.
Diane Poole, sales and marketing director at Norse Merchant Ferries, said:
"We all have a responsibility to help and protect the environment and we are
delighted to support the children from Rudolf Steiner School, as they set such a
good example for us all."
Dr John Barry, Northern Ireland Green Party co-leader, is an enthusiastic
supporter of the 'Clean Coast Campaign'. He said: "My daughter goes to the
school
and together with other parents and teachers, I will be out cleaning the
beaches.
"The number one culprit in coastal rubbish is the plastic bottle, followed
closely by all manner of other plastic items, such as bags and cups.
"In many ways it is a sad reflection of the environmentally insensitive
behaviour of some people, that we need campaigns such as this."
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:05:14 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/17/2005 9:54:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
The school supposedly provides a "religiously and culturally integrated"
education. What do you think that means?
Serena, I am guessing your purpose in posting this is to show that some
Waldorf kids are doing good things. I doubt anyone here would find that surprising.
Kids in all kinds of schools all across the world are doing good social
service work.
Lisa
---------------
Since I used to live there and my child went to that school, I know
exactly what it means: Protestant and Catholic children attend the
school. Back in the 70's when the school started, it was probably
the only school that invited students of both faiths to attend. Northern
Ireland was, at that time, very sectarian (and to some extent still is).
There are streets that, if you are Catholic or Prostestant, you just
wouldn't walk or drive through. You can tell if someone is Catholic
or Protestant by their accent or looks or by where they live.
The Holywood School broke this taboo and is recognized for it.
Given the amount of hatred and violence in that country against
members of both faiths, this was a courageous act.
The school sets a good example in more ways than one.
I also posted this because some time ago, Pete said he didn't think that
W students were much good to the world or some sort of nonsense
to that effect.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:53:55 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
If this is all true I'm willing to give them a lot of credit. Bravo to the
Holywood School.
Diana
Serena:
)Since I used to live there and my child went to that school, I know
exactly what it means: Protestant and Catholic children attend the
school. Back in the 70's when the school started, it was probably
the only school that invited students of both faiths to attend. Northern
Ireland was, at that time, very sectarian (and to some extent still is).
There are streets that, if you are Catholic or Prostestant, you just
wouldn't walk or drive through. You can tell if someone is Catholic
or Protestant by their accent or looks or by where they live.
The Holywood School broke this taboo and is recognized for it.
Given the amount of hatred and violence in that country against
members of both faiths, this was a courageous act.
The school sets a good example in more ways than one.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:42:41 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena,
Thanks for your answer. A school which is able to unite Catholic and Protestant children is an impressive accomplishment in that part of the world.
I don't recall Pete ever saying what you indicate he does (below), but as for me, I believe that there are young people from most every walk of life, faith tradition (or lack thereof), school affiliation, etc. who are doing good things in the world. In fact, I daresay that there are more young people doing good things than there are young people doing bad things, such as zoning out on drugs. We just hear more about the negative.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:05:14 EDT
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/17/2005 9:54:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
The school supposedly provides a "religiously and culturally integrated"
education. What do you think that means?
Serena, I am guessing your purpose in posting this is to show that some
Waldorf kids are doing good things. I doubt anyone here would find that
surprising.
Kids in all kinds of schools all across the world are doing good social
service work.
Lisa
---------------
Since I used to live there and my child went to that school, I know
exactly what it means: Protestant and Catholic children attend the
school. Back in the 70's when the school started, it was probably
the only school that invited students of both faiths to attend. Northern
Ireland was, at that time, very sectarian (and to some extent still is).
There are streets that, if you are Catholic or Prostestant, you just
wouldn't walk or drive through. You can tell if someone is Catholic
or Protestant by their accent or looks or by where they live.
The Holywood School broke this taboo and is recognized for it.
Given the amount of hatred and violence in that country against
members of both faiths, this was a courageous act.
The school sets a good example in more ways than one.
I also posted this because some time ago, Pete said he didn't think that
W students were much good to the world or some sort of nonsense
to that effect.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 16:59:38 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) Randi should attend the various world-wide wine symposia
) that celebrate biodynamic methods in wine-making.
I'm sure if he did, he'd be talking to them about confirmation-bias -
see Dan's recent posts in the Newton-Goethe thread.
) Biodynamics yields very good and often excellent wines that are
) praised for their "terroir" or sense of the place, landscape, earth.
) These vintners do not find the process boring or nonsensical or
) dreamily mystical...
Obviously the ones who are attracted to it won't describe it that way.
) ...they deal with practicalities.
Yeah, like selling wine, using a baseless but
groovy-sounding-to-scientific-illiterates method as a Unique Selling
Point. I'm not suggesting biodynamic vintners are at all cynical about
it; I'm sure many of them are sincere scientific illiterates.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 17:03:26 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
)
) Belfast Telegraph Home ) News
)
)
) http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=638303
)
) Parents and pupils launch their annual 'clean coast' drive
Do you have evidence that Waldorf schools are more likely to produce
environmentally-aware kids than other comparable schools? Recycled press
releases from regional newspapers are not evidence.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 17:20:43 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
Diana Winters wrote:
)
)
) If this is all true I'm willing to give them a lot of credit. Bravo to
) the
) Holywood School.
) Diana
At least Catholic and Protestant sectarians are honest about which sect
they belong to. it's bizarre to consider a Waldorf school to be
nonsectarian. Reading what Serena's written about this Waldorf school
you'd think they were the first people to think of nonsectarian
education in Northern Ireland:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicsobituaries/story/0,1441,1223239,00.html
) Born into a politically active Belfast family from the Catholic
) side, Eamonn was educated at St Malachy's College, Belfast, and
) graduated from Queen's University in 1968 with a degree in economics
) and history...He joined the then National Association of
) Schoolmasters, which merged with the Union of Women Teachers to form
) the NASUWT in 1975. He was attracted to the NASUWT because of its
) strictly nonsectarian approach to the troubles in Northern Ireland.
) With his passion for debate, and at no small risk to his personal
) safety, Eamonn helped negotiate the association through a political
) minefield, condemning violence from whichever quarter it emanated.
) As a result, NASUWT recruited from both sides of the Northern
) Ireland divide and became the largest teachers' union in the
) province.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: 'Biodynamics...boring and nonsensical.'
) barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com wrote:
)
) http://www.randi.org/jr/082004nonsense.html
)
) Scroll down 'til you see the Magical Horn of Poo.
)
) 'Biodynamics also specifies times for official
) wine-tasting, too. The
) biodynamic growers want their wines tasted only on
) "fruit" or "flower"
) days, but of course not on "leaf" or "root" days.
) The determination of
) which category any given day falls into, is yet
) another mystical,
) anthoposophical, process, equally boring and
) nonsensical.'
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
(snip)
) If it didn't work they wouldn't use it.
Serena, there is no logic in your statement. It
doesn't take a scientist to understand that every
action a person takes in preparing something does not
necessarily have any effect on the outcome.
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: The Green Dealers A weekend with the Bioneers
Serena, this is a lovely story but what has it to do
with Waldorf?
Margaret
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Your free subscription is supported by today's
) sponsor:
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
) Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum
) Card and get…
) 0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8
) Months, Up to
) 2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100%
) fraud
) protection.
)
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbNGmrya/DiscoverCard
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)
)
http://www.science-spirit.org/webexclusives.php?article_id=491
) Science and Spirit
) The Green Dealers
) A weekend with the Bioneers
)
) by Trey Popp
) [.........]
) Fred Kirschenmann, a longtime biodynamic farmer and
) the director of the
) Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa
) State University, takes the
) stage next. He wears plain slacks and a button-down
) shirt, and runs through his
) PowerPoint presentation with the authority and ease
) of a seasoned physician
) presenting a paper at a medical conference. Starting
) with a line graph that shows
) how Iowa farmers’ gross profits have steadily
) climbed while their net profits
) have stayed flat—an indicator that farmers have
) been producing more and more
) food but making less and less money selling each ton
) of it—he segues into a
) series of photographs that illustrate an inspiring
) case he calls “the power of
) duck.â€
) The story is that of Takao Furuno, a rice farmer who
) owns a five-acre parcel
) in southern Japan. In 1987, Furuno grew frustrated
) with the pressures that
) have become increasingly familiar to small-scale
) conventional farmers all over
) the globe. In order to compete, he had to invest a
) constantly growing portion of
) one year’s profits into raising the subsequent
) year’s crop. Reliant on
) pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers marketed by
) outside companies, he had to
) some extent forfeited his sovereignty over the means
) of production. So Furuno
) turned to ducks. Remembering that his grandfather
) had welcomed the animals onto
) the paddies two generations before, Furuno decided
) to give it a try, uncertain
) of what to expect.
) To his delight, he found that the ducks ate the
) insects that feasted on his
) rice, which meant that he no longer needed to buy
) insecticide. In time, he
) realized that since he was no longer using
) insecticide, he might be able to raise
) fish when the paddies were flooded. With a bit of
) trial and error, his plan
) worked. And brought another benefit: The fish
) feasted on his azola, a
) lilypadlike water plant that ordinarily spread
) across his paddies and suffocated the
) water beneath. Now the pesky vegetation was under
) control. Furuno could stop
) buying herbicide. He could replant the fig trees
) that had once grown around the
) perimeter of his fields. But it was even better than
) that—azola is rich in
) nitrogen, which now made its way through the
) fish’s digestive tracts and back into
) the soil. Furuno could quit using fertilizer.
) Through a series of what you
) might call natural accidents, he’d gone organic.
) He’d also gone from a one-crop
) farmer to a seller of rice, duck meat, duck eggs,
) fish, vegetables, and figs.
) The financial stability—and fun—was back in
) farming again.
) [.........]
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been
) removed]
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's
) sponsor:
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
) Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards
) service!
) Click here.
)
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbNGmryf/ProductTestPanel
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)
==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like
) here, no matter how basic. New threads are always
) welcome.
)
)
)
)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 18:18:19 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
) I also posted this because some time ago, Pete said he didn't think that
)
) W students were much good to the world or some sort of nonsense
) to that effect.
Serena, if you can't show where I said that, then please retract your
statement. The only nonsense here is what comes out of your mouth.
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 11:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
I hope the adults trained the children in Universal
Precautions and supervised them properly before
allowing youngsters to pick up other people's garbage.
At our former Waldorf school some teachers made
children pick up materials contaminated with human
waste without using protective latex gloves.
Margaret
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Belfast Telegraph Home ) News
)
)
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=638303
)
) Parents and pupils launch their annual 'clean coast'
) drive
)
) By Gary Grattan
)
) 14 May 2005
) A LOCAL ferry company has teamed up to support the
) Rudolph Steiner School's
) annual "Clean Coast Campaign".
) The school, in Holywood, Co Down, is a registered
) charity providing
) religiously and culturally integrated education for
) 4-17 year olds.
) The central idea of the campaign - which is being
) backed by Norse Merchant
) Ferries - is that both pupils and parents pick up
) the rubbish from the North
) Down coast.
) Cleaning the coast is an integral part of the
) Steiner school's commitment to
) making environmental awareness and respect for the
) planet a central aspect of
) education.
) Last year the school cleaned from Helen's Bay to
) Marino and managed to pick
) up over 80 bags of rubbish.
) Cleaning the beaches is not just a one-off annual
) fundraising event, but an
) extension of the school's commitment to
) environmental awareness and integrating
) 'abstract' learning with hands-on experience.
) Diane Poole, sales and marketing director at Norse
) Merchant Ferries, said:
) "We all have a responsibility to help and protect
) the environment and we are
) delighted to support the children from Rudolf
) Steiner School, as they set such a
) good example for us all."
) Dr John Barry, Northern Ireland Green Party
) co-leader, is an enthusiastic
) supporter of the 'Clean Coast Campaign'. He said:
) "My daughter goes to the school
) and together with other parents and teachers, I will
) be out cleaning the
) beaches.
) "The number one culprit in coastal rubbish is the
) plastic bottle, followed
) closely by all manner of other plastic items, such
) as bags and cups.
) "In many ways it is a sad reflection of the
) environmentally insensitive
) behaviour of some people, that we need campaigns
) such as this."
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been
) removed]
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's
) sponsor:
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without painful injections with
) Nexiderm SP.
) Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles
) by 68% Click
) here to get your 30-day free supply.
)
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbNGmryf/Nexiderm
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)
==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like
) here, no matter how basic. New threads are always
) welcome.
)
)
)
)
Discover Yahoo!
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 17:11:46 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Thanks, Akua (gay issues)
Thanks, Akua, for your in-depth answers to my question. I never heard of
the "karma-reincarnation" explanation about why some people are gay.
That's so weird!
Still, I have to say the gay and lesbian (and straight and bi-sexual)
Waldorf people around SW Wisconsin are indeed sympathetic of the gay
rights movement (like you wrote that most gay and lesbian
Anthroposophists are sympathetic), from what I saw of their writings and
what they say (they say they fully support gay--GLBT-- rights). They
have pro-gay marriage flyers up in one of the food co-ops where they
frequent. What is the difference between being sympathetic and active?
There are no gay pride marches around here. I don't know if any of them
travel to other areas for gay pride marches or not? I don't talk with
them about it , so all i know is what a lesbian Waldorf parent told me
and what I read in the local newspapers when gay issues come up (Waldorf
people write pro-gay letters to the editor to the local newspapers,
defending gay rights and gay marriage). Perhaps some Waldorf people do
travel to the larger urban areas for gay pride marches. I don't know. I
have no idea whether or not Waldorf schools teach mandatory tolerance
education, including GBLT education, to the children and teens who
attend them, like the public schools do. It seems like the Waldorf
beliefs about gay people may be different in Germany and the USA, since
Germany has a very long standing (many centuries of ) bias against gay
(GLBT) people. In other words, German Waldorf people reflect general
German values, and those in America (the USA in particular) are more
liberal (or radical). I don't know.
Everyone: Do Waldorf schools teach tolerance education?
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 21:52:01 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
Hi Barnaby, and thanks. I didn't research whether it was true, I just gave
Serena the benefit of the doubt. I'm guessing this is a bit like the way the
Waldorf movement portrays themselves as saviors in South Africa, too. It
seems to me they are getting much bolder lately at declaring themselves
leaders and pioneers of this and that, in areas where most people have never
heard of them.
On the other hand, the really scary part is when it turns out to be true!
Diana
I wrote:
)If this is all true I'm willing to give them a lot of credit. Bravo to
)the Holywood School.
Barnaby:
)At least Catholic and Protestant sectarians are honest about which sect
)they belong to. it's bizarre to consider a Waldorf school to be
)nonsectarian. Reading what Serena's written about this Waldorf school
)you'd think they were the first people to think of nonsectarian
)education in Northern Ireland:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicsobituaries/story/0,1441,1223239,00.ht
ml
) Born into a politically active Belfast family from the Catholic
) side, Eamonn was educated at St Malachy's College, Belfast, and
) graduated from Queen's University in 1968 with a degree in economics
) and history...He joined the then National Association of
) Schoolmasters, which merged with the Union of Women Teachers to form
) the NASUWT in 1975. He was attracted to the NASUWT because of its
) strictly nonsectarian approach to the troubles in Northern Ireland.
) With his passion for debate, and at no small risk to his personal
) safety, Eamonn helped negotiate the association through a political
) minefield, condemning violence from whichever quarter it emanated.
) As a result, NASUWT recruited from both sides of the Northern
) Ireland divide and became the largest teachers' union in the
) province.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 23:05:29 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/17/2005 1:21:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
Diana Winters wrote:
)
)
) If this is all true I'm willing to give them a lot of credit. Bravo to
) the Holywood School.
) Diana
At least Catholic and Protestant sectarians are honest about which sect
they belong to. it's bizarre to consider a Waldorf school to be
nonsectarian. Reading what Serena's written about this Waldorf school
you'd think they were the first people to think of nonsectarian
education in Northern Ireland:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicsobituaries/story/0,1441,1223239,00.html
) Born into a politically active Belfast family from the Catholic
) side, Eamonn was educated at St Malachy's College, Belfast, and
) graduated from Queen's University in 1968 with a degree in economics
) and history...He joined the then National Association of
) Schoolmasters, which merged with the Union of Women Teachers to form
) the NASUWT in 1975. He was attracted to the NASUWT because of its
) strictly nonsectarian approach to the troubles in Northern Ireland.
) With his passion for debate, and at no small risk to his personal
) safety, Eamonn helped negotiate the association through a political
) minefield, condemning violence from whichever quarter it emanated.
) As a result, NASUWT recruited from both sides of the Northern
) Ireland divide and became the largest teachers' union in the
) province.
============
In a message dated 5/17/2005 9:53:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Diana.Winters verizon.net writes:
Hi Barnaby, and thanks. I didn't research whether it was true, I just gave
Serena the benefit of the doubt. I'm guessing this is a bit like the way the
Waldorf movement portrays themselves as saviors in South Africa, too. It
seems to me they are getting much bolder lately at declaring themselves
leaders and pioneers of this and that, in areas where most people have never
heard of them.
On the other hand, the really scary part is when it turns out to be true!
Diana
============
If one reads exactly what I wrote, I didn't claim that Holywood
was the first and only school to be non-sectarian. I said "probably"
but actually forgot that Glencraig Camphill School predates Holywood
Steiner School by twenty years or so.
Barnaby's post speaks about a teachers' union, not a school. It
is also considerably later than the founding of Glencraig Camphill
School in 1954 which accepted both P & C students from its founding.
Have you found an example of a non-sectarian private school in
Northern Ireland (besides the Glencraig Camphill Special School
and the Holywood School)? There certainly may be others. If so,
I am not aware of them, at least not in Northern Ireland, a small
country where news like this spread quickly.
Any school or person who bucked the terrible sectarianism
should be considered quite courageous -- "Eamonn" deserves
commendation.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:44:49 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Here's Pete's remarks. He said: "Basically, I think Waldorf gives
NO incentives to becomming productive citizens in our society."
And a few other nonsensical things as well as one (among many)
example of how he brings his children into the discussion.
Serena Blaue
In a message dated 5/17/2005 2:21:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pkcompany netzero.net writes:
) I also posted this because some time ago, Pete said he didn't think that
) W students were much good to the world or some sort of nonsense
) to that effect.
Serena, if you can't show where I said that, then please retract your
statement. The only nonsense here is what comes out of your mouth.
Pete
========================
Subject Re: Propaganda
In a message dated 3/12/2005 6:00:21 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pkcompany netzero.net writes:
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Pete:
)
) "Waldorf schools often undermine family relationships and the
) philosophy, deceit and financial issues sometimes tears families apart."
)
) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) citizens in our society."
)
) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
)
) "I don't think they teach children to be kind or considerate, in fact
) bullying is a huge problem at Waldorf schools."
)
) "Bull! It (WE) teaches all the things that separate man."
)
) "Waldorf schools are breeding grounds for Anthroposophists - plain and
) simple."
)
)
) Serena:
)
) Just a few examples of the propaganda Pete spews. Does he have evidence
)
) that the 800 plus Waldorf schools in the world promote any of the above?
)
)
) Of course not.
Are you asking me to provide evidence or just asking and answering your
own questions?
) "Waldorf schools often undermine family relationships and the
) philosophy,
) deceit and financial issues sometimes tears families apart."
Many, many people have described this to me. The undermining of family
relationships comes in many forms - sometimes in "counsel" where
children are asked to reveal secrets, sometimes in other ways. My
personal experience has been horrible - one teacher fraudulently turned
me in to Child Services in an attempt to cause problems for me. The
same teacher told my daugher she wanted to adopt her. I could talk for
hours about the horrors of my personal experience. Does this kind of
thing happen in all 800 Waldorf schools? I really can't say - any more
than you can honestly say it doesn't. I'd love to see how the divorce
rate among Waldorf families stacks up to the national average.
) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) citizens in our society."
No evidence required - it's what I think.
) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
This is absolutely true. Waldorf kids are expected to play with other
Waldorf kids. There are almost never children outside the Waldorf
community invited to parties, etc. Parents who adhere to Waldorf ideas,
no TV for example, are reluctant to let their kids visit with friends
who, say, watch TV - lest they be corrupted. Kids who are pulled out of
the school are immediately ostricized. My own kids, teenagers now, have
NO friends outside their Waldorf school. My daughter's best friend was
removed from Waldorf, and within weeks, my daughter didn't want to have
any contact with her. It's an isolationist process - and horrible to
experience for normal people.
) "Waldorf schools are breeding grounds for Anthroposophists - plain and
) simple."
Again, this is clear in the philosophy underlying the cirriculum. Dumb
ideas are introduced into the curriculum that are invalidated later in
the child's education or life. This sets up a conflict that is easily
remedied by acceptance of Anthroposophical ideas and values. Start
throwing in a little Anthroposophical medicine at home, Christian
Community church, and parents who are reading Steiner in order to find
out what they've gotten themselves into, and you have a strong
impression on children that this is their path.
)But facts don't matter to propagandists. When they hate,
) their hate is justification alone. Emotion is their substitute for
) facts.
No, the fact is, my view of Waldorf changed when I became aware of what
Waldorf REALLY is.
) Their own
) personal theories should and _must_ be truth for everyone -- and for
) ever.
What, only Anthroposophists are allowed to do this? LOL!!!
)
) Just take one:
)
) Pete, how have you proven that the 800 + Waldorf Schools "breed" (such a
)
) nice word!) Anthroposophists?
Can't prove it - and certainly not for 800+ Waldorf schools. I don't
think anyone anywhere can say anything that applies to all 800+ Waldorf
schools. Certainly, Serena, you can't say anything that applies to all
of them.
)Make it nice and concrete for us and bring
) on the details as well as the citations of objective, neutral
) authorities.
The problem in providing "proof" is that nobody keeps records that
indicate how many Waldorf students begin studying and are eventually
drawn into Anthroposophy. I can draw from my own experience - and from
common sense. In my experience, it is absolutely true. Propaganda
would imply that there is no truth. Again, in such a closed community,
based on a religious philosophy, the conditions are pretty fertile for
kids accepting the religious philosophy they have grown up with. Can
you prove otherwise Serena?
Pete
----------------------------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 00:13:17 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
In a message dated 5/17/2005 1:00:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) Randi should attend the various world-wide wine symposia
) that celebrate biodynamic methods in wine-making.
I'm sure if he did, he'd be talking to them about confirmation-bias -
see Dan's recent posts in the Newton-Goethe thread.
) Biodynamics yields very good and often excellent wines that are
) praised for their "terroir" or sense of the place, landscape, earth.
) These vintners do not find the process boring or nonsensical or
) dreamily mystical...
Obviously the ones who are attracted to it won't describe it that way.
) ...they deal with practicalities.
Yeah, like selling wine, using a baseless but
groovy-sounding-to-scientific-illiterates method as a Unique Selling
Point. I'm not suggesting biodynamic vintners are at all cynical about
it; I'm sure many of them are sincere scientific illiterates.
========================
You ignore that both vintners and those who deal in wines have
enormous expertise and know how to differentiate excellent from
the poor, merely mediocre or the pretentious wines that strive to
impress but leave the taster disappointed.
No amount of mystical voodoo will hide a poor wine. Most bio-
dynamic wines do not use the term on the label. Experts don't
judge wines by the spiel -- but by the quality of the product itself.
Try some!
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1756
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
By ldenike aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
URL for Guardian Article
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Thanks, Akua (gay issues)
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Why aren't those kids in class?
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By ldenike aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By pkcompany netzero.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 09:43:41 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena,
I have to say I am not surprised that the school in question accepted both Protestant and Catholic students, right from the beginning. After all, Waldorf schools (well, the people who run them) don't seem to discriminate between students of various religions (or no religion) when it comes to admission. Why should they? What religion a student comes in with makes no difference to the Anthroposophists, who believe that anyone who turns up at the school to enroll has karma with the institution!
The question I would have is whether all the parents who enrolled their children (Catholic and Protestant) in the Holywood school knew that they were signing their kids up for an Anthro education, the tenets of which might likely clash with some of those beliefs. Of course, I don't know for sure, but it is my guess that the parents did not know that.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Tue, 17 May 2005 23:05:29 EDT
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/17/2005 1:21:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
Diana Winters wrote:
)
)
) If this is all true I'm willing to give them a lot of credit. Bravo to
) the Holywood School.
) Diana
At least Catholic and Protestant sectarians are honest about which sect
they belong to. it's bizarre to consider a Waldorf school to be
nonsectarian. Reading what Serena's written about this Waldorf school
you'd think they were the first people to think of nonsectarian
education in Northern Ireland:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicsobituaries/story/0,1441,1223239,00.html
) Born into a politically active Belfast family from the Catholic
) side, Eamonn was educated at St Malachy's College, Belfast, and
) graduated from Queen's University in 1968 with a degree in economics
) and history...He joined the then National Association of
) Schoolmasters, which merged with the Union of Women Teachers to form
) the NASUWT in 1975. He was attracted to the NASUWT because of its
) strictly nonsectarian approach to the troubles in Northern Ireland.
) With his passion for debate, and at no small risk to his personal
) safety, Eamonn helped negotiate the association through a political
) minefield, condemning violence from whichever quarter it emanated.
) As a result, NASUWT recruited from both sides of the Northern
) Ireland divide and became the largest teachers' union in the
) province.
============
In a message dated 5/17/2005 9:53:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Diana.Winters verizon.net writes:
Hi Barnaby, and thanks. I didn't research whether it was true, I just gave
Serena the benefit of the doubt. I'm guessing this is a bit like the way the
Waldorf movement portrays themselves as saviors in South Africa, too. It
seems to me they are getting much bolder lately at declaring themselves
leaders and pioneers of this and that, in areas where most people have never
heard of them.
On the other hand, the really scary part is when it turns out to be true!
Diana
============
If one reads exactly what I wrote, I didn't claim that Holywood
was the first and only school to be non-sectarian. I said "probably"
but actually forgot that Glencraig Camphill School predates Holywood
Steiner School by twenty years or so.
Barnaby's post speaks about a teachers' union, not a school. It
is also considerably later than the founding of Glencraig Camphill
School in 1954 which accepted both P & C students from its founding.
Have you found an example of a non-sectarian private school in
Northern Ireland (besides the Glencraig Camphill Special School
and the Holywood School)? There certainly may be others. If so,
I am not aware of them, at least not in Northern Ireland, a small
country where news like this spread quickly.
Any school or person who bucked the terrible sectarianism
should be considered quite courageous -- "Eamonn" deserves
commendation.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 09:45:44 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
Who cares about biodynamic wines! If people want to stuff an ox horn with cow poop and plant it when there is a full moon outside, let them. I am far more interested in discussing Waldorf education ...
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 00:13:17 EDT
Subject: Re: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/17/2005 1:00:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) Randi should attend the various world-wide wine symposia
) that celebrate biodynamic methods in wine-making.
I'm sure if he did, he'd be talking to them about confirmation-bias -
see Dan's recent posts in the Newton-Goethe thread.
) Biodynamics yields very good and often excellent wines that are
) praised for their "terroir" or sense of the place, landscape, earth.
) These vintners do not find the process boring or nonsensical or
) dreamily mystical...
Obviously the ones who are attracted to it won't describe it that way.
) ...they deal with practicalities.
Yeah, like selling wine, using a baseless but
groovy-sounding-to-scientific-illiterates method as a Unique Selling
Point. I'm not suggesting biodynamic vintners are at all cynical about
it; I'm sure many of them are sincere scientific illiterates.
========================
You ignore that both vintners and those who deal in wines have
enormous expertise and know how to differentiate excellent from
the poor, merely mediocre or the pretentious wines that strive to
impress but leave the taster disappointed.
No amount of mystical voodoo will hide a poor wine. Most bio-
dynamic wines do not use the term on the label. Experts don't
judge wines by the spiel -- but by the quality of the product itself.
Try some!
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 10:20:25 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
If this is what you mean by Pete "bringing his children into the
discussion," Serena - as you and Dottie kept accusing him - we are all
guilty of this every time we use the phrase "Waldorf students." Actually -
no. Pete didn't even use that phrase. He simply made a comment about
*Waldorf*. We all know he HAS children, Serena, he could hardly be expected
to hide this fact and it applies equally to nearly everyone participating
here!
Diana
)Here's Pete's remarks. He said: "Basically, I think Waldorf gives
)NO incentives to becomming productive citizens in our society."
)And a few other nonsensical things as well as one (among many)
)example of how he brings his children into the discussion.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 10:45:01 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: 'Randi's potshots...boring and nonsensical.'
Lisa:
)Who cares about biodynamic wines! If people want to stuff an ox horn with
)cow poop and plant it when there is a full moon outside, let them. I am far
)more interested in discussing Waldorf education ...
Thank you Lisa!! (G)
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:08:31 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 9:44:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Serena,
I have to say I am not surprised that the school in question accepted both
Protestant and Catholic students, right from the beginning. After all, Waldorf
schools (well, the people who run them) don't seem to discriminate between
students of various religions (or no religion) when it comes to admission. Why
should they? What religion a student comes in with makes no difference to the
Anthroposophists, who believe that anyone who turns up at the school to enroll
has karma with the institution!
The question I would have is whether all the parents who enrolled their
children (Catholic and Protestant) in the Holywood school knew that they were
signing their kids up for an Anthro education, the tenets of which might likely
clash with some of those beliefs. Of course, I don't know for sure, but it is my
guess that the parents did not know that.
Lisa
---------------------------
I would say that the majority of the parents knew exactly what their
children were getting since they were from Camphill. Other parents
were involved with the Maharishi movement and thought WE was the
absolute best education their children could get.
But you are minimizing the courage it took to stand up to the sectarian
nature of N Ireland in 1954 when Glencraig first opened its doors.
From the beginning in 1954, Glencraig's board members were both
C + P -- no small feat in a country where bombs going off were an
everyday fact of life during the time I lived there.
Both Glencraig Camphill Schools and the Holywood School have a
good reputation. Glencraig is beautiful, with the Belfast Loch, the
seals sunning themselves on the rocks, rainbows, the fairy rings
(tree circles).
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:10:49 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Why aren't those kids in class?
http://image.guardian.co.uk/Ads/MPU/arrow9x7.gif
Why aren't those kids in class?
Steiner schools have been criticised for their far-out teaching techniques.
But, says Lucy Mangan, after spending a day with some of their happy,
confident pupils, it's easy to see why they have so many devoted fans
Wednesday May 18, 2005
The Guardian
Bread-making, basketweaving, organic apple-pressing, a soupçon of eurhythmic
dancing and early-morning chanting ... No, it's not a snapshot of life in
the Guardian office (we don't have an apple press), but a day in the life of
a Waldorf-Steiner school student. Specifically, in this case, the Michael
Hall students in East Grinstead, Sussex, whose school is set in 50 hectares
of rolling parkland and partly based (you need a lot of space for baking and
dancing) in an 18th-century Palladian mansion. It enables the school to
offer all the activities that the Steiner approach to education demands.
"We're aware," says education administrator Ewout Van-Manen with a wry
smile, "how lucky we are to have such a setting."
[.................]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:16:59 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: URL for Guardian Article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1486150,00.html
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 15:37:19 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
Diana wrote:
) I'm guessing this is a bit like the way the Waldorf movement
) portrays themselves as saviors in South Africa, too.
I think there may well be parallels. Holywood is a middle-class suburb
of Belfast, the usual kind of place where Waldorf schools are found.
There is generally much less segregation and political violence in
affluent areas. See this 1995 report from Ulster University's Centre for
the Study of Conflict:
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/csc/reports/apartbel.htm
) The lowest levels of segregation are found in the more middle class
) areas of Belfast South and Holywood.
Families living in Belfast's warzones (and that is not a far-fetched
description of conditions there for most of the last 35 years), like the
Shankhill road (Protestant) or Falls road (Catholic) ghettos, would
mostly have been too poor to send their kids out to Holywood on the bus,
never mind pay the school's fees.
Serena wrote:
) If one reads exactly what I wrote, I didn't claim that Holywood
) was the first and only school to be non-sectarian. I said
) "probably" but actually forgot that Glencraig Camphill School
) predates Holywood Steiner School by twenty years or so.
No, you started off with a press release about schoolkids picking up
litter off beaches, which said nothing significant about anthroposophy.
When that was pointed out, we suddenly learned you'd posted it as an
example of nonsectarian education. There are far better examples.
Waldorf and Camphill schools are drenched in anthroposophical religious
dogma: it's wrong to describe them as nonsectarian. If you'd wanted to
tell the whole truth about integrated education in Northern Ireland, you
could also have mentioned the All Children Together movement, which has
been campaigning since 1974, opening its first school, Lagan College, in
1981 in Castlereagh, a highly-segregated Protestant area:
http://education.independent.co.uk/schools/story.jsp?story=626983
) Have you found an example of a non-sectarian private school in
) Northern Ireland (besides the Glencraig Camphill Special School
) and the Holywood School)?
I don't know about private ones, but as the Independent article
mentions, there are enough public integrated schools for 5% of the
province's pupils, none of whom have to pay fees or endure eurhythmy.
Apart from those written by Waldorfers, I was unable to find any article
on integrated education in Northern Ireland which considers
anthroposophical institutions worth mentioning.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:01:00 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena, I apologize if I seemed to minimize, in any way, the courage it took to open such a school to kids on both sides of that horrible ideological divide. I did not mean to do that.
Certainly the school ought to be given credit for that. No question about it.
However, I am now confused. You said that the kids were Catholics and Protestants, and then you tell me (in the same breath!) that these kids were from Camphill.Did the kids have some kind of disabilities or learning issues, etc.? If not, why were they in Camphill? Or, perhaps the "they" you refer to was the parents. Were the parents workers at Camphill? Either way, it changes the picture a little bit. Camphill seems to me a more natural siphon into Waldorf than most other elementary, etc. schools. Then you bring a third element into the mix when you say some of the other parents were involved in the Maharishi movement. Catholics in the Maharishi movement? It just doesn't follow. Unless they were New Agers, which is what I suspect.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:08:31 EDT
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 9:44:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Serena,
I have to say I am not surprised that the school in question accepted both
Protestant and Catholic students, right from the beginning. After all, Waldorf
schools (well, the people who run them) don't seem to discriminate between
students of various religions (or no religion) when it comes to admission. Why
should they? What religion a student comes in with makes no difference to the
Anthroposophists, who believe that anyone who turns up at the school to enroll
has karma with the institution!
The question I would have is whether all the parents who enrolled their
children (Catholic and Protestant) in the Holywood school knew that they were
signing their kids up for an Anthro education, the tenets of which might likely
clash with some of those beliefs. Of course, I don't know for sure, but it is my
guess that the parents did not know that.
Lisa
---------------------------
I would say that the majority of the parents knew exactly what their
children were getting since they were from Camphill. Other parents
were involved with the Maharishi movement and thought WE was the
absolute best education their children could get.
But you are minimizing the courage it took to stand up to the sectarian
nature of N Ireland in 1954 when Glencraig first opened its doors.
From the beginning in 1954, Glencraig's board members were both
C + P -- no small feat in a country where bombs going off were an
everyday fact of life during the time I lived there.
Both Glencraig Camphill Schools and the Holywood School have a
good reputation. Glencraig is beautiful, with the Belfast Loch, the
seals sunning themselves on the rocks, rainbows, the fairy rings
(tree circles).
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:05:40 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 11:38:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com writes:
Diana wrote:
) I'm guessing this is a bit like the way the Waldorf movement
) portrays themselves as saviors in South Africa, too.
I think there may well be parallels. Holywood is a middle-class suburb
of Belfast, the usual kind of place where Waldorf schools are found.
There is generally much less segregation and political violence in
affluent areas. See this 1995 report from Ulster University's Centre for
the Study of Conflict:
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/csc/reports/apartbel.htm
) The lowest levels of segregation are found in the more middle class
) areas of Belfast South and Holywood.
Families living in Belfast's warzones (and that is not a far-fetched
description of conditions there for most of the last 35 years), like the
Shankhill road (Protestant) or Falls road (Catholic) ghettos, would
mostly have been too poor to send their kids out to Holywood on the bus,
never mind pay the school's fees.
Serena wrote:
) If one reads exactly what I wrote, I didn't claim that Holywood
) was the first and only school to be non-sectarian. I said
) "probably" but actually forgot that Glencraig Camphill School
) predates Holywood Steiner School by twenty years or so.
No, you started off with a press release about schoolkids picking up
litter off beaches, which said nothing significant about anthroposophy.
When that was pointed out, we suddenly learned you'd posted it as an
example of nonsectarian education. There are far better examples.
Waldorf and Camphill schools are drenched in anthroposophical religious
dogma: it's wrong to describe them as nonsectarian. If you'd wanted to
tell the whole truth about integrated education in Northern Ireland, you
could also have mentioned the All Children Together movement, which has
been campaigning since 1974, opening its first school, Lagan College, in
1981 in Castlereagh, a highly-segregated Protestant area:
http://education.independent.co.uk/schools/story.jsp?story=626983
) Have you found an example of a non-sectarian private school in
) Northern Ireland (besides the Glencraig Camphill Special School
) and the Holywood School)?
I don't know about private ones, but as the Independent article
mentions, there are enough public integrated schools for 5% of the
province's pupils, none of whom have to pay fees or endure eurhythmy.
Apart from those written by Waldorfers, I was unable to find any article
on integrated education in Northern Ireland which considers
anthroposophical institutions worth mentioning.
============
Barnaby --
I see that you have not found any examples of private schools that
accepted both Catholic and Protestant students before 1954, the
founding of Glencraig Special Schools (Camphill). They may well
exist, so feel free to send the names in when you find them.
There may well be less "conflict" in areas like Holywood and Craigavad,
its neighbor, but schools were sectarian none-the-less.
The "All Children Together" movement sounds great; however 1974
is twenty years after 1954.
This discussion is a good example of the usual WC wish to denigrate
WE merely for the satisfaction of denigration -- without a factual base.
Just because Glencraig may not be mentioned in articles about
integrated schools does not alter the reality that it was founded in
1954 and was, in fact, an integrated school from the beginning.
That is, if facts matter at all to you.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:07:45 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Gosh, Serena, the Waldorf vanguard ought to hire you as their flack. You post story after story about these schools.
Instead of just posting, why don't you comment? You obviously are trying to make a point. Shall I make a point about the quality of non Waldorf schools and how great some of them are by posting stories from newspapers? I could do that, too.
I also could post (and will, if you give me time!) the story done by, I think, the Guardian, about how David Gilmore of Pink Floyd finally yanked his kids out of Michael Hall because they couldn't read, and one could barely speak. (I think the article said the kid was grunting to communicate.) Gilmore talked to the paper to warn other people what happened to his kids, who were examined (as I recall) by educational psychologists and found to be above average in intelligence but were way low achieverws by virtue of what I can only call a "teaching deficit" at Michael Hall.
On the survivors list, we also heard for more than a year the horrible stories told about that school from a woman who attended it for years. She struggles with spelling and grammar, still, because her dyslexia went undiagnosed. Add to that the various kinds of abuses she suffered (she says) while there, and the pictures is not quite a pretty and rosy as the one this reporter painted.
Lisa
PS: Those kids are not in class because Waldorf doesn't value academic success in the same way mainstream schools do. I am daily thankful that we pulled our daughters out in time.
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:10:49 EDT
Subject: Why aren't those kids in class?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://image.guardian.co.uk/Ads/MPU/arrow9x7.gif
Why aren't those kids in class?
Steiner schools have been criticised for their far-out teaching techniques.
But, says Lucy Mangan, after spending a day with some of their happy,
confident pupils, it's easy to see why they have so many devoted fans
Wednesday May 18, 2005
The Guardian
Bread-making, basketweaving, organic apple-pressing, a soupçon of eurhythmic
dancing and early-morning chanting ... No, it's not a snapshot of life in
the Guardian office (we don't have an apple press), but a day in the life of
a Waldorf-Steiner school student. Specifically, in this case, the Michael
Hall students in East Grinstead, Sussex, whose school is set in 50 hectares
of rolling parkland and partly based (you need a lot of space for baking and
dancing) in an 18th-century Palladian mansion. It enables the school to
offer all the activities that the Steiner approach to education demands.
"We're aware," says education administrator Ewout Van-Manen with a wry
smile, "how lucky we are to have such a setting."
[.................]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:25:03 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 12:03:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Serena, I apologize if I seemed to minimize, in any way, the courage it took
to open such a school to kids on both sides of that horrible ideological
divide. I did not mean to do that.
Certainly the school ought to be given credit for that. No question about it.
However, I am now confused. You said that the kids were Catholics and
Protestants, and then you tell me (in the same breath!) that these kids were from
Camphill.Did the kids have some kind of disabilities or learning issues, etc.? If
not, why were they in Camphill? Or, perhaps the "they" you refer to was the
parents. Were the parents workers at Camphill? Either way, it changes the
picture a little bit. Camphill seems to me a more natural siphon into Waldorf than
most other elementary, etc. schools. Then you bring a third element into the
mix when you say some of the other parents were involved in the Maharishi
movement. Catholics in the Maharishi movement? It just doesn't follow. Unless they
were New Agers, which is what I suspect.
Lisa
Sorry if I was not clear enough:
Co-workers in Camphill (Glencraig) sent their children to the Holywood
RS School. The children with special needs go to school in Glencraig.
Before the mid-1970's when the Holywood school was founded, most
co-workers' children were enrolled in W schools in England. The Holywood
School has a mixture of Camphill kids and local children who are P or C
or NOS (not otherwise specified). In the mid-70's there were also many
local followers of the Maharashi in the area who sent their kids to the
Holywood school. I don't know if this group is still active: this may have
changed in the last 30 years, of course!
It can't be too hard to imagine a mixture that includes Camphill co-worker
children, children from local residents who may be C or P or other
faiths or practices.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:40:20 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Thanks, Akua (gay issues)
Yarngal, Diana and all,
I do not think my answer was in-depth but you're welcome. The
karma-reincarnation bit does sound weird but there are aspects to it
that are not too far from other more mainstream kind of perceptions on
the matter. People can be sympathic to the course of gay rights or may
even be supportive in one way or the other, yet that does not mean we
are talking about radically liberating concepts of gender roles /
relations and community living. For the most issues such as lgbt rights
for the most remain to be the concern of the "other", not one of the
entire community. The lack of inclusiveness does not only make an
assumed majority (mainstream) define those outside this assumed majority
as "other", it also makes the one outside embrace this concept of
otherness which often results in the desire to stay separate. That
neither new nor unique to lgbt people. Where inclusiveness is practice
separation will wane (not disappear). One such example is that of deaf
people. In America where signing has been mainstreamed to a considerable
extent hardly anyone would ask why someone signs at a theatre or even a
pop concert. Acceptance of signing as a means of communication has made
it easier for deaf and hearing people to interact which has resulted in
less isolation for the deaf as the "other". I am not saying deaf people
in the States do no longer face problems specific to them but in
comparison to Germany it becomes clear deaf people in the US do not feel
the need to separate themselves from "mainstream" culture as much as
they do in Germany where mixed theatre groups and "integrated" classes,
university courses etc etc are still an exception to the rule, mostly
because hardly anyone can sign over here. Of course, this is a rather
exclusive analysis solely focusing on deafness, not any other grounds of
isolation a deaf person might be confronted with due to specifics of
her/his background. But I guess you do get an idea of what I am trying
to get at. The need to point to lgbt rights is a clear indicator we
still are on the way to see them fulfilled. Once their are a reality
rainbow flags, gay marches etc will have lost their relevance.
It may seem strange to you when I say that I do say some aspects of the
SWA karma-reincarnation concepts are not too far from other more
mainstream perceptions on homosexuality (male and female), bisexuality
and transgendered identification. One thing most have in common is their
need to explain lgbt, the courses that is, an indicator these specific
expressions of attraction / sexuality and gender identification are not
viewed within normal ones. While some anthroposophists may explain
homosexuality as an attraction to another person's etheric body I know a
great many non anthroposophists who think there are what they perceive
as (more) "feminine" and "masculine" homosexuals, both male and female,
and that much of the attraction towards what appears to be traits of the
opposite sex / gender, a definition along the lines of "traditional"
(acceptable) arrangements / relationships. Many selectively point to
relationships which seem to prove these perceptions ignoring those that
counter them. For most what constitutes "feminine" and "masculine"
behaviour, appearance etc are linked to somewhat stereotypical images of
wo/manhood and thus gender roles, no matter how liberal or radical they
may appear to be. Christoph Kranich's does point to the difference
between man / woman and masculine / feminine pairs but then both root in
similar forms of division based on traits ascribed to either.
Homosexuality and bisexuality are not the same as transgendered
identification but of course they are linked, our expectations in
someone else's demeanour and appearance. It is difficult to challenge
while we use terminology / descriptions which reinforce old perceptions
through the backdoor. Transgendered identification is predominantly
defined along these stereotypical images of gender roles. In Germany a
transidentical person who wishes to have his/her gender/sex changed
officially by undergoing the necessary surgery (which is covered by
health insurances once approved of) needs to live the life of the
opposite gender before being given the go ahead. To some this may make
sense but in effect this means a male to female transidentical person is
expected to run around in skirts and dresses, wear make up, speak in a
specific way etc, a role / appearance the majority of women outside the
conservative / Christian fundamentalist arena would take the freedom not
to be forced to adhere to these days. It is thus possible to support the
rights of transidentical / transgendered individuals and not stray an
inch from often suffocating gender roles. The same is true in regard to
lesbians, gays and bisexuals (given one ascribes to labels of this kind).
Some Waldorfers / anthroposophists may be sympathic to the lgbt issues
but it remains to be seen what that means to them and if and how this
translates into anything meaningful. I on my part suspect political
correctness plays a role as is the case in the wider society, certain
issues being temporarily en vogue surely also play a vital role in
attracting attention and sympathy. I think SWA communities surely are
not exception to this phenomenon and of course the way these issues are
treated surely differ from place to place. Christoph Kranich though
pointed to a certain pattern within SWA communities including Waldorf,
and that is silence, as if people were afraid the mere mention of
lesbigays (and transgendereds) could cause others to turn lgbt
themselves [his words, not mine]. Tolerance is a term I personally do
not link to an admirable social setting as tolerance has amounted to
indifference more than a willingness to deal with the ones commonly
defined as "others". Live and let live does not create a community where
we are part of eeah other's lives, in arrangement where each other's
well being is of our interest and where we challenge each other to grow.
Besides, what others do in bed indeed is and isn't my business. I am not
really surprised to hear Waldorfers / anthroposophists around your area
support gay marriage rights, after all marriage is a traditional
arrangement. A gay / lesbian person's wish to have access to these kind
of arrangements may well be seen as a recognition of its validity, not a
fundamental challenge. Do keep in mind that being married is not only
socially acceptable, it also has financial advantages over living in non
wed relationships with or without children, clearly a recognition of the
high value accorded to property rights.
The history of bias against lgbt people in Germany is a long and complex
one but I do not see where it is fundamentally different to that in
other western countries including the US. It is a common misconception
to think things have gradually improved. Up to roughly the 13th century
homosexuality was often frowned upon but not persecuted. From then on
measures targetting homosexuals been stepped up slowly but surely until
finding a temporarily climax in the burning of gays etc. It took until
the late 18th century for Prussia to reform its statues and change
punishment from the death penalty to imprisonment. In the 19th century
Bavaria (to many Germans still the perfect place for conservatism) and
Prussia been among the first to attempt another liberation of the penal
code. Magnus Hirschfeld, still a widely accepted gay icon, did indeed
play a role in all this but no matter what his ideas were anything but
in support of equal rights for gays (the main focus of the penal code
had always been on gay men). Nazis with their history of gay persecution
though had not been the first to step up the gear against homosexuals
once again, their cruelties only been the temporary culmination of a
long historical development. While other laws been reversed after the
official fall of Naziism the modifications Paragraph 175 underwent under
Naziism were left perfectly intact in the Federal Republic of Germany
(west Germany) until 1969 when the first reforms did away with some of
the legal threats gays faced in this country. A second one followed in
1973. The remainder (the age of consent) fell in 1994. The German
Democratic Republic of Germany (East Germany had returned to the
pre-Nazi statues after its formation. During Naziism a gay man's
position pretty much been the decisive factor where Nazi policy would
take them. A considerable number of gay Nazis supported the public
policy of homophobia, most married to women with whom they had children,
thus fulfilling their responsibilities along traditional lines. Except
for being gay these Nazis were (mostly) in full support of Nazi doctrine
including elitism, gender roles / inequality and extermination policies.
Many gays in this country themselves believe Naziism only targetted
homosexual men, not women as the pink triangle was reserved for gay men.
The approach indeed was different but the persecution of gay men in part
is visible due to the pink triangle the persecution of lesbian women is
less documented since the majority of them been classified as "Asoziale"
(antisocials), only if papers are available or the victims stepped
forward to speak up is the fate of lesbians during Naziism known and
documented. Naziism did not operate on a uniform level thus not every
Jew ended up in a concentration camp with a "Star of David" on his/her
chest, in the early years of Naziism many were incarcerated for
political reasons, the same is true for other targetted groups and of
course much of this was linked. A certain historical amnesia in regard
to historical developments can still be felt here among the general
population, gay and straight alike. I thus am little surprised lgbt
organizations in this country still embrace Magnus Hirschfeld as gay
activist, a role model and shining example and as can be seen on the
homepage of anthroposophy's bi-sophia group they too are not exception
to this common perception. If lgbt rights remain to be seen as an
isolated issue I doubt we'll see radical changes any time soon. We will
continue to see those with access to the media able to promote their
version of gay emancipation which may well be sexist, elitist and racist
as in the case of Rosa von Praunheim who like so many others in his
position simply refuses to acknowledge other people's rights. For quite
some time he outed all sorts of people and not once came to admit it is
not his right to do so. Besides, in communities of colour the concept of
coming out does not play the same important role as it does within the
white gay and lesbian communities. In regard to SWA I think lgbt people
with the "right" set of mind will be accepted within its ranks as long
as they do not cause too much of a stir, e.g. play along its main
fundaments. The anthro home I spent 2 years of my childhood at it was
absolutely taboo to speak about sexuality in general, children punished
severely if they did, if not caught to speak about it the threat was
constantly in the air whether or not you did mention a word or not. It
was used as a form of intimidation. From what I gathered talking about
sexuality is still something of a taboo within SWA communities. But as
we all know taboos do not protect anyone, so rhetoric is one thing,
action though speaks louder than words, in and outside SWA.
Homosexuality will surely not play any important role within
anthroposophy, maybe a seeming acceptance will get the issues settled
for the time being to keep the integrity of the community and its
fundamental ideas (the majority of adherents and sympathisers agree
upon) blossoming.
As I said I do not view some of the concepts within anthroposophic
understandings too far from mainstream. On a more general basis SWA
surely would not appeal to so many "mainstream" people if some of these
concepts were not compatible with mainstream ones one way or the other.
The varying concepts of reincarnation / karma as put to us by a number
anthroposophists may sound weird but upon closer inspection they too are
closely linked to those upheld by "mainstream". The church may have used
and in some cases may still continue techniques of exorcism to chase
satanic allegedly being at the root of homosexuality, others who think
its cause is in social developments of an individual may use psycho
(aversion) therapy, scientists may see its causes in a physical
disposition and thus open the door to genetic testing, anthroposophist
may "subtly" help gays to work on their karma to make sure it won't
happen again during a next reincarnation. All are damaging on different
levels as they clearly define lgbt life outside the acceptable norm.
Persecution and harrrassment indeed does cause harm but it also has a
tendency to makes a considerable number of people resist. A pc approach
which suggests acceptance in turn can paralyse people because it makes
exclusion and harrassment more difficult to point out. From my
observation you'd find a lot more lesbians among Waldorf / anthro
sympathizers than you'd actually find inside Waldorf and other
anthroposophic communities.
I know that some of it is somewhat off topic but I do hope it does make
you understand what I personally make of SWA's position on
homosexuality. Other than that I do not think I am in the position to
explain some of the concepts anthroposophy seems to hold in regard to
the issue. Luckily, I no longer live in these kind of surroundings.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:57:27 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 12:09:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Gosh, Serena, the Waldorf vanguard ought to hire you as their flack. You post
story after story about these schools.
Instead of just posting, why don't you comment? You obviously are trying to
make a point. Shall I make a point about the quality of non Waldorf schools and
how great some of them are by posting stories from newspapers? I could do
that, too.
I also could post (and will, if you give me time!) the story done by, I
think, the Guardian, about how David Gilmore of Pink Floyd finally yanked his kids
out of Michael Hall because they couldn't read, and one could barely speak. (I
think the article said the kid was grunting to communicate.) Gilmore talked
to the paper to warn other people what happened to his kids, who were examined
(as I recall) by educational psychologists and found to be above average in
intelligence but were way low achieverws by virtue of what I can only call a
"teaching deficit" at Michael Hall.
On the survivors list, we also heard for more than a year the horrible
stories told about that school from a woman who attended it for years. She struggles
with spelling and grammar, still, because her dyslexia went undiagnosed. Add
to that the various kinds of abuses she suffered (she says) while there, and
the pictures is not quite a pretty and rosy as the one this reporter painted.
Lisa
------------
First I am taken to task because I wrote about biodynamics. Akua
(and others) are not taken to task because they write about LGBT
issues and anthroposophy.
So then I send in an article on WE -- and you take me to task for
this! Unbelievable! But actually pretty typical. Predictable, even.
Gilmore made his complaints known. And now this article informs
the public about positive aspects of Michael Hall. Does this mean
that MH is perfect? No. Does this mean that many children benefit
from WE at Michael Hall? This does appear to be true. If you have
facts that contradict this, please bring them forward.
This reporter was there and spoke to the kids and teachers, and
attended classes. I would be inclined to give his report some credibility
-- perhaps more than I would to an anonymous complainant. And if
her story is true, where were her parents in all of this?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 13:03:49 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Why aren't those kids in class?
)I would be inclined to give his report some credibility -- perhaps more
)than I would to an anonymous complainant. And if her story is true, where
)were her parents in all of this?
You sure don't want to know the answer to THAT!!
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:33:57 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Here's Pete's remarks. He said: "Basically, I think Waldorf gives
) NO incentives to becomming productive citizens in our society."
)
) And a few other nonsensical things as well as one (among many)
) example of how he brings his children into the discussion.
)
) Serena Blaue
)
)
And from "Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive citizens
in our society."
you derive:
"Pete said he didn't think that W students were much good to the world."
This speaks for itself Serena. Let me guess - you can't see any
difference - right?
Pete
) In a message dated 5/17/2005 2:21:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
) pkcompany netzero.net writes:
)
)
) ) I also posted this because some time ago, Pete said he didn't think that
) )
) ) W students were much good to the world or some sort of nonsense
) ) to that effect.
)
) Serena, if you can't show where I said that, then please retract your
) statement. The only nonsense here is what comes out of your mouth.
)
) Pete
) ========================
)
) Subject Re: Propaganda
)
) In a message dated 3/12/2005 6:00:21 PM Eastern Standard Time,
) pkcompany netzero.net writes:
)
) SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) )
) )
) ) Pete:
) )
) ) "Waldorf schools often undermine family relationships and the
) ) philosophy, deceit and financial issues sometimes tears families apart."
) )
) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) ) citizens in our society."
) )
) ) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
) )
) ) "I don't think they teach children to be kind or considerate, in fact
) ) bullying is a huge problem at Waldorf schools."
) )
) ) "Bull! It (WE) teaches all the things that separate man."
) )
) ) "Waldorf schools are breeding grounds for Anthroposophists - plain and
) ) simple."
) )
) )
) ) Serena:
) )
) ) Just a few examples of the propaganda Pete spews. Does he have evidence
) )
) )
) ) that the 800 plus Waldorf schools in the world promote any of the above?
) )
) )
) )
) ) Of course not.
)
) Are you asking me to provide evidence or just asking and answering your
) own questions?
)
) ) "Waldorf schools often undermine family relationships and the
) ) philosophy,
) ) deceit and financial issues sometimes tears families apart."
)
) Many, many people have described this to me. The undermining of family
) relationships comes in many forms - sometimes in "counsel" where
) children are asked to reveal secrets, sometimes in other ways. My
) personal experience has been horrible - one teacher fraudulently turned
) me in to Child Services in an attempt to cause problems for me. The
) same teacher told my daugher she wanted to adopt her. I could talk for
) hours about the horrors of my personal experience. Does this kind of
) thing happen in all 800 Waldorf schools? I really can't say - any more
) than you can honestly say it doesn't. I'd love to see how the divorce
) rate among Waldorf families stacks up to the national average.
)
) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) ) citizens in our society."
)
) No evidence required - it's what I think.
)
) ) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
)
) This is absolutely true. Waldorf kids are expected to play with other
) Waldorf kids. There are almost never children outside the Waldorf
) community invited to parties, etc. Parents who adhere to Waldorf ideas,
)
) no TV for example, are reluctant to let their kids visit with friends
) who, say, watch TV - lest they be corrupted. Kids who are pulled out of
)
) the school are immediately ostricized. My own kids, teenagers now, have
)
) NO friends outside their Waldorf school. My daughter's best friend was
) removed from Waldorf, and within weeks, my daughter didn't want to have
) any contact with her. It's an isolationist process - and horrible to
) experience for normal people.
)
) ) "Waldorf schools are breeding grounds for Anthroposophists - plain and
) ) simple."
)
) Again, this is clear in the philosophy underlying the cirriculum. Dumb
) ideas are introduced into the curriculum that are invalidated later in
) the child's education or life. This sets up a conflict that is easily
) remedied by acceptance of Anthroposophical ideas and values. Start
) throwing in a little Anthroposophical medicine at home, Christian
) Community church, and parents who are reading Steiner in order to find
) out what they've gotten themselves into, and you have a strong
) impression on children that this is their path.
)
) )But facts don't matter to propagandists. When they hate,
) ) their hate is justification alone. Emotion is their substitute for
) ) facts.
)
) No, the fact is, my view of Waldorf changed when I became aware of what
) Waldorf REALLY is.
)
) ) Their own
) ) personal theories should and _must_ be truth for everyone -- and for
) ) ever.
)
) What, only Anthroposophists are allowed to do this? LOL!!!
)
) )
) ) Just take one:
) )
) ) Pete, how have you proven that the 800 + Waldorf Schools "breed" (such a
) )
) )
) ) nice word!) Anthroposophists?
)
) Can't prove it - and certainly not for 800+ Waldorf schools. I don't
) think anyone anywhere can say anything that applies to all 800+ Waldorf
) schools. Certainly, Serena, you can't say anything that applies to all
) of them.
)
) )Make it nice and concrete for us and bring
) ) on the details as well as the citations of objective, neutral
) ) authorities.
)
) The problem in providing "proof" is that nobody keeps records that
) indicate how many Waldorf students begin studying and are eventually
) drawn into Anthroposophy. I can draw from my own experience - and from
) common sense. In my experience, it is absolutely true. Propaganda
) would imply that there is no truth. Again, in such a closed community,
) based on a religious philosophy, the conditions are pretty fertile for
) kids accepting the religious philosophy they have grown up with. Can
) you prove otherwise Serena?
)
) Pete
) ----------------------------------
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 19:47:53 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In response to Serena's praise of WS Lisa wrote:
"I also could post (and will, if you give me time!) the story done by, I
think, the Guardian, about how David Gilmore of Pink Floyd finally
yanked his kids out of Michael Hall because they couldn't read, and one
could barely speak. (I think the article said the kid was grunting to
communicate.) Gilmore talked to the paper to warn other people what
happened to his kids, who were examined (as I recall) by educational
psychologists and found to be above average in intelligence but were way
low achieverws by virtue of what I can only call a "teaching deficit" at
Michael Hall."
The school I attended during my 2 year stay at an anthro home was a
public one, not a WS, yet it seemed to be a given fact for teachers and
pupils alike that children from said anthro home generally been under
achievers. The self explanatory argument used by teachers and pupils
alike was to say "Ah well, they are from up there" (the home sits on a
hillside of the village). Interestingly a caretaker (who grew up in the
village) regularly visiting my ailing parents still says the same thing
30 years after I have left the place. No one ever asked questions as to
why these children's performance been so poor, especially since none of
the kids been in need of special needs training.
In regard to the Maharishi movement I am not surprised they too had
their kids in Waldorf. It is pretty much in line with what I observed in
Germany where plenty of New Agers find Waldorf just as attractive as for
a considerable number of adherents of Scientology who themselves have
acknowledged they stand in the same tradition as SWA.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 13:59:31 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 1:34:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
pkcompany netzero.net writes:
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Here's Pete's remarks. He said: "Basically, I think Waldorf gives
) NO incentives to becomming productive citizens in our society."
)
) And a few other nonsensical things as well as one (among many)
) example of how he brings his children into the discussion.
)
) Serena Blaue
)
)
And from "Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive citizens
in our society."
you derive:
"Pete said he didn't think that W students were much good to the world."
This speaks for itself Serena. Let me guess - you can't see any
difference - right?
Pete
==================
Are W students much good to the world if, according to Pete, they
1. never received any incentive to becoming productive citizens in
our society
2. are isolated and separated (from the people and world around them
I assume -- if this is not correct, I hope Pete will clarify)
3. are neither kind nor considerate, but tend to be bullies
4. only learn that which separates man (I assume Pete means human
beings)
These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks about W students.
) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) ) citizens in our society."
) )
) ) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
) )
) ) "I don't think they teach children to be kind or considerate, in fact
) ) bullying is a huge problem at Waldorf schools."
) )
) ) "Bull! It (WE) teaches all the things that separate man."
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:05:16 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 1:49:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lioncell gmx.net writes:
The school I attended during my 2 year stay at an anthro home was a
public one, not a WS, yet it seemed to be a given fact for teachers and
pupils alike that children from said anthro home generally been under
achievers. The self explanatory argument used by teachers and pupils
alike was to say "Ah well, they are from up there" (the home sits on a
hillside of the village). Interestingly a caretaker (who grew up in the
village) regularly visiting my ailing parents still says the same thing
30 years after I have left the place. No one ever asked questions as to
why these children's performance been so poor, especially since none of
the kids been in need of special needs training.
So the teachers clearly were prejudiced -- and did not recognize your
obvious high intelligence. Was this true of the other children in the home?
Were they treated as less intelligent by the teachers in the public school
who assumed that kids from the anthro home were "under achievers"?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:13:01 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Frankly, I did not mean to take anyone to task. I just wanted to direct the conversation to Waldorf ed.
You use a newspaper article as "proof" that something good is going on at Michael Hall. Maybe that's true. But maybe it is not. Heck, I myself did a very flattering story (or two) about our local Waldorf school when I was a newspaper reporter. Like many people who just visit these schools, I was enamored of the lovely colored walls, the natural toys, the beeswax modeling and all the seemingly "old fashioned" things about the whole Waldorf environment. I sat in on classes and talked to teachers for hours, and came away absolutely smitten with this very different school approach. I couldn't wait to enroll my children, and I did.
What I saw from inside (a rigid, anti intellectual, authoritarian, religious education ordered according to the tenets of Anthroposophy!) was very different from what I was shown from the outside.
In other words, reporters skate over the pretty surface of Waldorf. And the surface *is* pretty. But the story is superficial, at best. It proves nothing.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:57:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPhb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 12:09:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Gosh, Serena, the Waldorf vanguard ought to hire you as their flack. You post
story after story about these schools.
Instead of just posting, why don't you comment? You obviously are trying to
make a point. Shall I make a point about the quality of non Waldorf schools and
how great some of them are by posting stories from newspapers? I could do
that, too.
I also could post (and will, if you give me time!) the story done by, I
think, the Guardian, about how David Gilmore of Pink Floyd finally yanked his
kids
out of Michael Hall because they couldn't read, and one could barely speak. (I
think the article said the kid was grunting to communicate.) Gilmore talked
to the paper to warn other people what happened to his kids, who were examined
(as I recall) by educational psychologists and found to be above average in
intelligence but were way low achieverws by virtue of what I can only call a
"teaching deficit" at Michael Hall.
On the survivors list, we also heard for more than a year the horrible
stories told about that school from a woman who attended it for years. She
struggles
with spelling and grammar, still, because her dyslexia went undiagnosed. Add
to that the various kinds of abuses she suffered (she says) while there, and
the pictures is not quite a pretty and rosy as the one this reporter painted.
Lisa
------------
First I am taken to task because I wrote about biodynamics. Akua
(and others) are not taken to task because they write about LGBT
issues and anthroposophy.
So then I send in an article on WE -- and you take me to task for
this! Unbelievable! But actually pretty typical. Predictable, even.
Gilmore made his complaints known. And now this article informs
the public about positive aspects of Michael Hall. Does this mean
that MH is perfect? No. Does this mean that many children benefit
from WE at Michael Hall? This does appear to be true. If you have
facts that contradict this, please bring them forward.
This reporter was there and spoke to the kids and teachers, and
attended classes. I would be inclined to give his report some credibility
-- perhaps more than I would to an anonymous complainant. And if
her story is true, where were her parents in all of this?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:15:09 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Yes. Read Akua's other posts on this matter. It was assumed that if the kids came from the anthro home, they were less able than other kids to do high level work.
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:05:16 EDT
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 1:49:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lioncell gmx.net writes:
The school I attended during my 2 year stay at an anthro home was a
public one, not a WS, yet it seemed to be a given fact for teachers and
pupils alike that children from said anthro home generally been under
achievers. The self explanatory argument used by teachers and pupils
alike was to say "Ah well, they are from up there" (the home sits on a
hillside of the village). Interestingly a caretaker (who grew up in the
village) regularly visiting my ailing parents still says the same thing
30 years after I have left the place. No one ever asked questions as to
why these children's performance been so poor, especially since none of
the kids been in need of special needs training.
So the teachers clearly were prejudiced -- and did not recognize your
obvious high intelligence. Was this true of the other children in the home?
Were they treated as less intelligent by the teachers in the public school
who assumed that kids from the anthro home were "under achievers"?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:31:50 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) But you are minimizing the courage it took to stand up to the
) sectarian nature of N Ireland in 1954 when Glencraig first opened
) its doors. From the beginning in 1954, Glencraig's board members
) were both C + P -- no small feat in a country where bombs going off
) were an everyday fact of life during the time I lived there.
Bombings were not an everyday fact of life in 1954 in Northern Ireland.
The 50s were a relatively quiet time; the IRA's only activity was a
derisory border campaign (ie not in Belfast); at the end of that
campaign it effectively ceased to exist. Loyalist tub-thumpers like Ian
Paisley were still seen as cranks by most Protestants.
Sectarianism in Northern Ireland in the 50s was characterised, as it had
been for centuries, by anti-Catholic discrimination in jobs and housing,
gerrymandered election boundaries, property qualifications for voting
(which discriminated against Catholics), and the casual urban violence
which is found in any apartheid regime: the powderkeg had not yet
exploded.
Your remarks about the Camphill school's board make it sound as if
Catholics and Protestants hardly ever met: that 's misleading. Right at
the beginning of the Troubles, liberal Protestants came together with
Catholics to form the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association, who
used civil disobedience to protest discrimination against Catholics.
Many were beaten by police and some shot dead for their efforts. I'm
sure the legend of the brave Camphill pioneers standing up against
sectarianism was very comforting in 70s Holywood as hippie ideals were
torn to rags by the shrapnel from the city centre, but in actuality, the
opening of the Camphill community was precisely a 'small feat'.
That period was so safe, in fact, that the Queen visited Belfast in
1952, which would have been unthinkable in the 70s when you lived there
in one of the less bullet-scarred areas. Tell me, how often were you
stopped and searched by army patrols in Holywood? How many of your
neighbours were murdered? (The Queen did 'visit' Belfast in 1977, but
did not leave the Royal Yacht, which stayed out of range of the city.)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:11:03 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 1:05:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Diana.Winters verizon.net writes:
)I would be inclined to give his report some credibility -- perhaps more
)than I would to an anonymous complainant. And if her story is true, where
)were her parents in all of this?
You sure don't want to know the answer to THAT!!
Diana
Yes, I would like to know the answer to why her parents were oblivious
to her distress.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) http://image.guardian.co.uk/Ads/MPU/arrow9x7.gif
)
) Why aren't those kids in class?
)
) Steiner schools have been criticised for their
) far-out teaching techniques.
) But, says Lucy Mangan, after spending a day with
) some of their happy,
) confident pupils, it's easy to see why they have so
) many devoted fans
)
) Wednesday May 18, 2005
)
) The Guardian
)
) Bread-making, basketweaving, organic apple-pressing,
) a soupçon of eurhythmic
) dancing
The usual journalist inaccuracies: We all know it's
not "dancing" and for most children I knew at Waldorf
eurythmy classes seemed like anything but a "soupcon."
) and early-morning chanting ...
The Guardian reporter didnt notice the red flag that
screams "cult!"
Margaret
) No, it's not
) a snapshot of life in
) the Guardian office (we don't have an apple press),
) but a day in the life of
) a Waldorf-Steiner school student. Specifically, in
) this case, the Michael
) Hall students in East Grinstead, Sussex, whose
) school is set in 50 hectares
) of rolling parkland and partly based (you need a lot
) of space for baking and
) dancing) in an 18th-century Palladian mansion. It
) enables the school to
) offer all the activities that the Steiner approach
) to education demands.
) "We're aware," says education administrator Ewout
) Van-Manen with a wry
) smile, "how lucky we are to have such a setting."
)
) [.................]
)
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:55:14 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
I wrote:
"The school I attended during my 2 year stay at an anthro home was a
public one, not a WS, yet it seemed to be a given fact for teachers and
pupils alike that children from said anthro home generally been under
achievers. (snip)"
Serena replied:
"So the teachers clearly were prejudiced -- and did not recognize your
obvious high intelligence. [Are you trying to flatter me?] Was this true
of the other children in the home? Were they treated as less intelligent
by the teachers in the public school who assumed that kids from the
anthro home were "under achievers"?"
Lisa in turn responded:
"Yes. Read Akua's other posts on this matter. It was assumed that if the
kids came from the anthro home, they were less able than other kids to
do high level work."
It is quite common for teachers and social workers alike to accept
children living at homes to be under average academically. This is not
only reserved for children at anthro homes. The teachers at our school
probably did not give considerations in regard to our intelligence much
thought. "Help" at the children's home amounted to little more than
intimidation and at times outright physical violence. I have written
about this before, so do not intend to go back into exactly what
happened. But it is more than clear to me that our poor performance
clearly was the result of circumstances first within our families and
then at the home. Children forever told how bad they are, children
subject to emotional and physical abuse, especially around that age, for
the most are unable to excel academically. The teachers' indifference
added up to that. No one asked any questions, even when specific
situations should have raised eyebrows among teachers, such as a kid
constantly falling asleep during school hours and/or clearly displaying
symptoms of emotional distress (I barely talked back then etc). My
sports teacher did not even know I was a girl, he never once addressed
me using my name, in a way I was lumped together with the rest of the
"pack". Teachers at the public school do not have to worry too much
about children from the home since the it now runs its own school for
those with special needs. Not no intellictually challenged kids, no,
it's rather those some would call social misfits. I see this children on
a regular basis since an acquaintance of mine lives right next to the
school and am under the impression I too would have ended up in there
had the school been in place while I stayed at the children's home. Once
they leave the school they'll be left without any degree whatsoever and
I suggest they will struggle with similar kind of problems we struggled
with back then. When I changed to a regular school after leaving the
home my teacher thought I could not even write a single meaningful
sentence telling my parents I am not fit for any higher form of
education. And, believe it or not, I had a host of problems
academically. I see similar patterns with other anthro homes and
schools. At one of them children are expected to get up at 4 - 4:30 a.m.
to go about their chores before being permitted to eat and then go to
the home's own school. Have a guess what their academic performance
looks like. Given the circumstances I doubt academic training is among
the home's priorities.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 13:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
(snip)
) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks
) about W students.
)
) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives
) to becomming productive
) ) ) citizens in our society."
Serena, your first sentence above is about Waldorf
"students." Pete's remark that you quoted is about
"Waldorf." Can you see the sloppy thinking that is
involved in labeling a criticism of Waldorf as a
criticism of children who happen to attend Waldorf?
Fortunately, children have many other influences in
their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Another possibility is that you are deliberately
trying to paint Pete in a bad light to sloppy thinkers
who might not see the discrepancy between what you say
Pete said and what he actually said.
Margaret
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:38:06 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 4:17:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com writes:
Fortunately, children have many other influences in
their lives, not least of which are their parents.
---------
And that is why I'd like to know why you do not fault the
parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
attended her WS.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:42:04 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 4:17:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com writes:
--- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
(snip)
) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks
) about W students.
)
) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives
) to becomming productive
) ) ) citizens in our society."
Serena, your first sentence above is about Waldorf
"students." Pete's remark that you quoted is about
"Waldorf." Can you see the sloppy thinking that is
involved in labeling a criticism of Waldorf as a
criticism of children who happen to attend Waldorf?
Fortunately, children have many other influences in
their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Another possibility is that you are deliberately
trying to paint Pete in a bad light to sloppy thinkers
who might not see the discrepancy between what you say
Pete said and what he actually said.
Margaret
In fact, the WC list in general says nasty things about
Waldorf students: they are bullies, don't do well in school,
don't transition well to other schools, are lackluster in many
ways. Read your own archives. No one who reads this list
will come away with a good impression of W students.
This is your collective doing and you've done it to scare
prospective parents away.
It doesn't work to now say that this was all really only about
WE and not the students.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:51:27 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 2:13:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Frankly, I did not mean to take anyone to task. I just wanted to direct the
conversation to Waldorf ed.
You use a newspaper article as "proof" that something good is going on at
Michael Hall. Maybe that's true. But maybe it is not. Heck, I myself did a very
flattering story (or two) about our local Waldorf school when I was a newspaper
reporter. Like many people who just visit these schools, I was enamored of
the lovely colored walls, the natural toys, the beeswax modeling and all the
seemingly "old fashioned" things about the whole Waldorf environment. I sat in on
classes and talked to teachers for hours, and came away absolutely smitten
with this very different school approach. I couldn't wait to enroll my children,
and I did.
What I saw from inside (a rigid, anti intellectual, authoritarian, religious
education ordered according to the tenets of Anthroposophy!) was very
different from what I was shown from the outside.
In other words, reporters skate over the pretty surface of Waldorf. And the
surface *is* pretty. But the story is superficial, at best. It proves nothing.
Lisa
-----------------
Why can't you accept that there are good things in WE? And that this
is obvious to many people? And that many people continue to have
good things to say about WE even after the honeymoon stage is over?
And that every human effort has faults and imperfections? And that,
despite faults and imperfections, students are more likely than not
very appreciative of their W school?
This reporter spoke to the kids and was interested in themes that went
below the surface to some extent. Why isn't the children's attentiveness
(observed by the reporter) of interest or value to you? Why do you dis-
count the statements by the kids themselves?
Or do we have to add another nasty category about W students:
"pretenders and liars"...?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:08:17 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) ==================
)
)
) Are W students much good to the world if, according to Pete, they
)
) 1. never received any incentive to becoming productive citizens in
) our society
) 2. are isolated and separated (from the people and world around them
) I assume -- if this is not correct, I hope Pete will clarify)
) 3. are neither kind nor considerate, but tend to be bullies
) 4. only learn that which separates man (I assume Pete means human
) beings)
That's a very good question. Why didn't you ask it of me instead of
supplying what you believe my answer would be and acting as if it was,
indeed, my answer to this question?
)
) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks about W students.
)
No, these are my nasty remarks about Waldorf SCHOOLS and what they
teach. If you can't read it correctly for yourself, perhaps you should
have someone read it to you.
Pete
)
) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives to becomming productive
) ) ) citizens in our society."
) ) )
) ) ) "It (WE) promotes isolation and separatism more than anything else."
) ) )
) ) ) "I don't think they teach children to be kind or considerate, in fact
) ) ) bullying is a huge problem at Waldorf schools."
) ) )
) ) ) "Bull! It (WE) teaches all the things that separate man."
)
)
) Serena Blaue
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1757
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By madpark nildram.co.uk
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By madpark nildram.co.uk
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Thanks Akua and &"otherness"
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By madpark nildram.co.uk
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:45:03 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 3:55:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lioncell gmx.net writes:
Serena replied:
"So the teachers clearly were prejudiced -- and did not recognize your
obvious high intelligence. [Are you trying to flatter me?] Was this true
of the other children in the home? Were they treated as less intelligent
by the teachers in the public school who assumed that kids from the
anthro home were "under achievers"?"
No, not intending to flatter you at all: it's just very obvious that you
are highly intelligent.
Our of curiosity: what are the anthro homes for children who do
*not* have developmental difficulties? I've never heard of them
and would like to know more. Or have I misunderstood what you
were saying?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:29:40 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 5:10:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
pkcompany netzero.net writes:
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPhb1dkiGbOMLeca/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) ==================
)
)
) Are W students much good to the world if, according to Pete, they
)
) 1. never received any incentive to becoming productive citizens in
) our society
) 2. are isolated and separated (from the people and world around them
) I assume -- if this is not correct, I hope Pete will clarify)
) 3. are neither kind nor considerate, but tend to be bullies
) 4. only learn that which separates man (I assume Pete means human
) beings)
That's a very good question. Why didn't you ask it of me instead of
supplying what you believe my answer would be and acting as if it was,
indeed, my answer to this question?
)
) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks about W students.
)
No, these are my nasty remarks about Waldorf SCHOOLS and what they
teach. If you can't read it correctly for yourself, perhaps you should
have someone read it to you.
Pete
------------
Nasty remarks seem to come naturally to you, Pete. You've said nasty
remarks about the students, now about me. A veritable fountain of
nasty remarks, you are.
As I said, there is little on the WC to give a reader the impression
that WC'ers think well of W students. Look at the most recent "dis"
of the Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School students.
"Walla" -- as we say on the AT.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:42:47 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) In a message dated 5/18/2005 4:17:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
) powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com writes:
) --- SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) (snip)
) ) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks
) ) about W students.
) )
) ) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives
) ) to becomming productive
) ) ) ) citizens in our society."
)
) Serena, your first sentence above is about Waldorf
) "students." Pete's remark that you quoted is about
) "Waldorf." Can you see the sloppy thinking that is
) involved in labeling a criticism of Waldorf as a
) criticism of children who happen to attend Waldorf?
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
)
) Another possibility is that you are deliberately
) trying to paint Pete in a bad light to sloppy thinkers
) who might not see the discrepancy between what you say
) Pete said and what he actually said.
)
) Margaret
)
)
) In fact, the WC list in general says nasty things about
) Waldorf students:
I don't believe you Serena.
) they are bullies,
I think if you look in the archives you will see that the complaint is
that the schools permit bullying. Please check and get back to us.
) don't do well in school,
I'm not sure what you mean here. Don't do well in Waldorf school? I'd
like a little clarification and a reference please.
) don't transition well to other schools,
Again, I think if you will look at the archives, you will see that
whenever transition problems are described, it is clearly Waldorf that
is to blame. Many students transitioning from Waldorf to public schools
are kept back a grade. Clearly it is NOT the student's fault - although
as a Waldorf supporter, I can see how you might want to blame the
individual students for this.
) are lackluster in many ways.
You ran out of things to say and your gums were still flapping. This is
too broad a generalization to be of any value. "Lackluster"?
)Read your own archives. No one who reads this list
) will come away with a good impression of W students.
Wrong. Again, you insist in blaming the Waldorf students for the
failure of Waldorf schools. NOBODY here blames the students. Waldorf
schools are the object of the criticism here - not Waldorf students. In
fact, there is really nothing that makes us happier than encountering a
Waldorf student who has survived Waldorf education relatively unscathed.
)
) This is your collective doing and you've done it to scare
) prospective parents away.
Away from Waldorf students? Oh, you mean away from Waldorf schools.
Trust me, Serena, there is plenty that Waldorf schools do that we can
talk about to scare parents away if that is our intention. Frankly, as
a parent, the irresponsible way Waldorf supporters deliberately twist
things around would be enough to scare me away - especially since this
is so common in Waldorf environments.
)
) It doesn't work to now say that this was all really only about
) WE and not the students.
Um, except that it REALLY is about Waldorf education. Waldorf education
has no trouble pointing to students and saying - look, our students are
accepted into the best colleges around the country - and then take ALL
the credit, but let critics point out that some students fall through
the cracks, and don't do so well - and suggest Waldorf education should
accept some responsibility and Waldorf says it's the student's fault,
not Waldorf education's.
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 22:04:57 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) In a message dated 5/18/2005 5:10:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
) pkcompany netzero.net writes:
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) ) ==================
) )
) )
) ) Are W students much good to the world if, according to Pete, they
) )
) ) 1. never received any incentive to becoming productive citizens in
) ) our society
) ) 2. are isolated and separated (from the people and world around them
) ) I assume -- if this is not correct, I hope Pete will clarify)
) ) 3. are neither kind nor considerate, but tend to be bullies
) ) 4. only learn that which separates man (I assume Pete means human
) ) beings)
)
) That's a very good question. Why didn't you ask it of me instead of
) supplying what you believe my answer would be and acting as if it was,
) indeed, my answer to this question?
)
) )
) ) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty remarks about W students.
) )
)
) No, these are my nasty remarks about Waldorf SCHOOLS and what they
) teach. If you can't read it correctly for yourself, perhaps you should
) have someone read it to you.
)
) Pete
)
)
) ------------
)
)
) Nasty remarks seem to come naturally to you, Pete. You've said nasty
) remarks about the students, now about me. A veritable fountain of
) nasty remarks, you are.
Sorry, but my frustration level with you putting words in my mouth that
I have not said is at its limit. Why don't you quote me instead of
paraphrasing what you think I said. Then I won't have any reason to
complain.
With regard to your comment above, you still, apparently don't
comprehend that the remarks I made are toward Waldorf schools - not
Waldorf students. I am quite sure anyone reading this can see this
clearly - even if you cannot.
)
) As I said, there is little on the WC to give a reader the impression
) that WC'ers think well of W students.
No, you are not often right, but oddly, you are wrong again. I can't,
of course, speak for all WC'ers, but I have never encountered any person
on this list who talks poorly about Waldorf students in any context
other than the education they have received and socialization skills
they have learned at Waldorf. Never. I would challenge you to find any
comment from anyone - ever - that talks poorly about Waldorf students
themselves. Just because you seem unable to distinguish between
comments about Waldorf education as it relates specifically to students
(it is an educational system after all) and comments about the students
themselves doesn't in any way mean that no distinction exists.
Pete
) Look at the most recent "dis"
) of the Pleasant Ridge Waldorf School students.
)
) "Walla" -- as we say on the AT.
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:26:26 +0100
From: madpark (madpark nildram.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
This article is really too facile, having been a parent of Michael Hall and
watched whilst we all danced around any journalist who came, set up classes
especially for them to see, had children and inner circle parents on hand to
spout the party line, happy pupils, yes maybe for the ones who arent bullied
horribly, confident I don¹t think so, certainly not when they come into
contact with the real world...yuk
Another propaganda article from serena:
Steiner schools have been criticised for their
) far-out teaching techniques.
) But, says Lucy Mangan, after spending a day with
) some of their happy,
) confident pupils, it's easy to see why they have so
) many devoted fans
)
) Wednesday May 18, 2005
)
) The Guardian
) Bread-making, basketweaving, organic apple-pressing,
) a soupçon of eurhythmic
) dancing
Margaret wrote: The usual journalist inaccuracies: We all know it's
not "dancing" and for most children I knew at Waldorf
eurythmy classes seemed like anything but a "soupcon."
) and early-morning chanting ...
Margaret wrote: The Guardian reporter didn¹t notice the red flag that
screams "cult!"
) No, it's not
) a snapshot of life in
) the Guardian office (we don't have an apple press),
) but a day in the life of
) a Waldorf-Steiner school student. Specifically, in
) this case, the Michael
) Hall students in East Grinstead, Sussex, whose
) school is set in 50 hectares
) of rolling parkland and partly based (you need a lot
) of space for baking and
) dancing) in an 18th-century Palladian mansion. It
) enables the school to
) offer all the activities that the Steiner approach
) to education demands.
) "We're aware," says education administrator Ewout
) Van-Manen with a wry
) smile, "how lucky we are to have such a setting."
)
) [.................]
)
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:44:46 +0100
From: madpark (madpark nildram.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena, you would go far at Michael Hall, this was always their party
line...if any complaint was made... just blame the parents...we parents
send our children to school to be educated, we expect the experts at school
to know if the children have unusual problems...in my case I was told in
year 10 my son maybe dyslexic (a little bit late had it been true...) so I
took him for sessions to an Œoutside¹ education expert against the advice of
Michael Hall teachers who wanted him to have some treatment they devised,
the educational expert told me he wasn¹t dyslexic he just hadn¹t been taught
properly (class 10 is 15-16yrs old).
At Michael Hall there is NO outside testing until the end of year 10 so you
don¹t find out they are massively behind until those GCSE results come in
and they are rated against all the rest of the schools in the UK, in his
year the average for all schools including special schools in the UK was
around 60% pass rate, the pass rate at Michael Hall was 34%, and we were
from a privileged wealthy area with middle class families not an inner city
sink school, (the average for private schools in our area was 90-100% pass
rate), this happened to be the absolute lowest in the County, the only other
school near it in scores was a Scientology school which was a mile or two up
the road.
) ---------
) Serena Blaue wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
)
)
)
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:49:37 EDT
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
If we are both talking about the person I think we are talking about, her
parents were heavily into Anthroposophy. So to them, it was all good, or, at
least, karmic.
Lisa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Margaret wrote:
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Serena wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
Margaret here:
Serena, if you want my opinion about someone else's
post, please either quote the post in question or
provide a link to it. I do not know to what post you
are referring.
Best,
Margaret
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:54:43 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Thanks Akua and &"otherness"
Thanks again so very much Akua for explaining about glbt people in SWA
(which you are right is really not much different than mainstream
society overall), and in fact that is probably why the local news
station and news media is always saying such GLOWING reports on the
Waldorf schools in this SW Wisconsin area, instead of calling Waldorf a
"cult" like they would do with another group.
I agree with you about the gay (glbt) issue and Waldorf.
I am not gay, bi, lesbian, or transgendered, but I do suffer from
chronic mental illnesses such as Major Depression, severe anxiety
disorders , and PTSD, for most of my life and I was horribly teased all
through grade school (for different reasons I don't have time to
explain, other than my parents were neglectful of my hygiene and my
mother's mental illnesses made her hated in the East Coast Jewish
neighborhood (I am Jewish but my family was rejected from the mainstream
JEwish people due to my mother's mental illnesses). I know what it feels
like to be outcasted! It HURTS!
That is why I am not so quick to go judge or condemn the glbt people and
others.
ANyway, I thought by being part of the new age HIPPIE culture I would be
ACCEPTED, but I found out the hard way that they are NO DIFFERENT than
the mainstream culture they decry and protest against when it comes to
those of us who suffer from chronic mental illnesses! In fact, they can
be WORSE!
I know a Bi-Polar woman who says she feels like the local new age people
treat her like a "third class citizen" (and she is a PAGAN and she
basically agrees with new age beliefs and she doesn't believe Waldorf to
be so bad--she has positive things to say about Waldorf)! SHe is NOT a
Waldorf critic. We talk about it. We both tried to "fit into" the local
(Waldorf) new age Community, but she now doesn't deal with them so much,
except for the few who do really accept her.
She did tell me she has no children so she understands why they would
turn a cold shoulder towards her for that (no involvement in the Waldorf
school) but still, they are really no different from others in the
mainstream culture who look down on mentally ill people!
This is even though some in the Waldorf/new age Community work or have
worked in the local psychiatric ward and in other social services
careers. I guess they don't want mentally ill people as FRIENDS! I am
NOT saying they are all mean to mentally ill people. They act polite
and nice in fact, but don't really want mentally ill people to socialize
much with in depth or to get deeply involved in the chronic overwhelming
PAIN and struggle of the mental illnesses (or what they term to be "too
negative" as some Waldorf people told me).
But she told me they are no different than others in the mainstream
culture when it comes to mentally ill people. So I understand what you
mean by bing treated as the "other" or as "third class citizens" even by
"liberal" new age people. Many (again, not all) conservative Christians
are the same when it comes to severe chronic clinical depression and
other major mental illnesses, so I guess they too reflect the general
public's prejudices, fear, and contempt. The Christians invite you to
church and twhen they find out you have major and chronic mental
illnesss, they reject, shun, or avoid you! So, It isn't just the
Waldorf or new age people who do that.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Margaret wrote:
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Serena wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
Margaret here:
My apologies to you, Serena for asking you to quote or
link to the post in my previous post. I was reading
the posts by following one thread at a time, but have
now read the one to which you were referring.
My comments about children having many influences in
their lives did not refer to recognition and treatment
of learning disabilities.
Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure to
identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
education. By delaying reading and the acquisition of
other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
parents were frequently told not to worry if our
children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
classmates because(we were told) there is so much
repetition of the same academic material over the
years that eventually they all catch up. So,
deferring to teachers we believed knew what they were
talking about, some parents didn't take the steps they
would have taken in any other type of school where
they would be told that their children were falling
behind and that they should get them tested for
learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
grading system makes it even harder for parents to
understand just how poorly their children might be
doing in comparison to the norm.
Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
his lack of academic progress, and he was instrumental
in our discovering the specific learning disability
that was impeding our son. From the complaints I have
heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is not
the norm and far too many families end up with the
stress and expense of remedial education.
As for the case of the anonymous person whose dyslexia
was never discovered, it's hard to make a judgment
about that specific case without knowing more details
such as whether or not her parents were
Anthroposophists, what the school communicated to her
parents about her lack of academic progress, and so
forth.
Best,
Margaret
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:37:58 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 6:45:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
Serena, you would go far at Michael Hall, this was always their party
line...if any complaint was made... just blame the parents...we parents
send our children to school to be educated, we expect the experts at school
to know if the children have unusual problems...in my case I was told in
year 10 my son maybe dyslexic (a little bit late had it been true...) so I
took him for sessions to an Œoutside¹ education expert against the advice of
Michael Hall teachers who wanted him to have some treatment they devised,
the educational expert told me he wasn¹t dyslexic he just hadn¹t been taught
properly (class 10 is 15-16yrs old).
At Michael Hall there is NO outside testing until the end of year 10 so you
don¹t find out they are massively behind until those GCSE results come in
and they are rated against all the rest of the schools in the UK, in his
year the average for all schools including special schools in the UK was
around 60% pass rate, the pass rate at Michael Hall was 34%, and we were
from a privileged wealthy area with middle class families not an inner city
sink school, (the average for private schools in our area was 90-100% pass
rate), this happened to be the absolute lowest in the County, the only other
school near it in scores was a Scientology school which was a mile or two up
the road.
) ---------
) Serena Blaue wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
To find out the answer as to why a child is not doing well, one must
look at every variable, right? The parents are one of several variables,
and as Margaret said, have a strong influence on the child (I would say
potentially both positively and negatively).
I am still wondering why you didn't notice that your child was not
doing well (I presume reading was a problem) until he was 15. I
can't imagine not knowing how my child's reading and comprehension
skills were developing. Did you have any misgivings earlier on? If
so, why didn't you act on them?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:46:38 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
In a message dated 5/18/2005 6:26:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
This article is really too facile, having been a parent of Michael Hall and
watched whilst we all danced around any journalist who came, set up classes
especially for them to see, had children and inner circle parents on hand to
spout the party line, happy pupils, yes maybe for the ones who arent bullied
horribly, confident I don¹t think so, certainly not when they come into
contact with the real world...yuk
---------------------
So here is an example of what I was describing earlier: the denigrating
of the students and their ability to deal with things.
In this case, they are described as not bullied (meaning some are bullies)
confident (not!) and have problems when they come into contact with the
real world.
Pete and Madpark seem to think that every problem the child has is the
school's fault and Margaret believes, on the other hand, that if the child
nevertheless does well, it is due to the parent's influence.
You all seem unaware of the steady stream of disrespect that you direct
not only at the schools but the students. I guarantee you: children are
quite clearly aware of what their parents respect or disrespect. And if
you disrespect their school, you put them in a very difficut situation of
having to choose their parent or the school.
What if a student loves his or her school? Do you denigrate them for
that, too?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:28:47 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
In a message dated 5/18/2005 10:02:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com writes:
Margaret wrote:
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Serena wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
Margaret here:
My apologies to you, Serena for asking you to quote or
link to the post in my previous post. I was reading
the posts by following one thread at a time, but have
now read the one to which you were referring.
My comments about children having many influences in
their lives did not refer to recognition and treatment
of learning disabilities.
Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure to
identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
education. By delaying reading and the acquisition of
other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
parents were frequently told not to worry if our
children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
classmates because(we were told) there is so much
repetition of the same academic material over the
years that eventually they all catch up. So,
deferring to teachers we believed knew what they were
talking about, some parents didn't take the steps they
would have taken in any other type of school where
they would be told that their children were falling
behind and that they should get them tested for
learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
grading system makes it even harder for parents to
understand just how poorly their children might be
doing in comparison to the norm.
Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
his lack of academic progress, and he was instrumental
in our discovering the specific learning disability
that was impeding our son. From the complaints I have
heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is not
the norm and far too many families end up with the
stress and expense of remedial education.
As for the case of the anonymous person whose dyslexia
was never discovered, it's hard to make a judgment
about that specific case without knowing more details
such as whether or not her parents were
Anthroposophists, what the school communicated to her
parents about her lack of academic progress, and so
forth.
Best,
Margaret
------------------
Margaret,
Thank you for your apology -- I did find myself wondering about
your irritation. I appreciate your clarification.
Learning disorders (about which I am the first to admit I know
very little) seem to be a weak spot in both public and private
educational systems, including WE.
Probably many in WE would agree that this is an area that
could be improved upon in general.
But it's an area where public schools can struggle, too: one
of my sibs has two children, both with learning disorders. She
worked mightily to get her local public school to help them and
ended up hiring an independent school "advocate" to help the
kids get what they need. I attended one meeting and was im-
pressed by the advocate's skill. The teachers and prinicipal
left me with two conflicting impressions: they wanted to do
what was right for the child, but were impatient and frustrated
because of their own time limitations. The child eventually
went on to a tech high school and blossomed. Teachers are
faced with learning disorders but also with kids who have very
different styles of learning. Some cannot take in verbally
communicated information but instead are more visual. Others
have a more kinesthetic way of learning: they have to touch it,
take it apart, build it again, etc. I have symapthy for both the
teachers and the kids, but especially for the kids who learn in
ways that are outside of what the mainstream considers to be
"normal".
These kids were diagnosed quite early on as having learning
disorders (and each with a different disorder, just to make it
nice and complicated). The early diagnosis was not enough
to make the right things happen: that took all the effort of the
parents and the advocate -- and for several years. And even
then, the follow through left a lot to be desired, though the
interventions did make a lot of difference, especially to the
child who had difficulty reading because of his perceptual
problems.
I guess the message here is that it is far too simplistic and
ultimately not truthful when anyone implies: WE = bad and
public schools = good in the area of working with children who
have a learning disorder.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 22:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) (snip)
) ) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty
) remarks
) ) about W students.
Serena quoting Pete:
) ) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives
) ) to becomming productive
) ) ) ) citizens in our society."
Margaret wrote previously:
) Serena, your first sentence above is about Waldorf
) "students." Pete's remark that you quoted is about
) "Waldorf." Can you see the sloppy thinking that is
) involved in labeling a criticism of Waldorf as a
) criticism of children who happen to attend Waldorf?
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
)
) Another possibility is that you are deliberately
) trying to paint Pete in a bad light to sloppy
) thinkers
) who might not see the discrepancy between what you
) say
) Pete said and what he actually said.
Serena responded:
) In fact, the WC list in general says nasty things
) about
) Waldorf students:...
Margaret:
How about acknowledging the fact that you wrongly
accused Pete of making a nasty remark about Waldorf
students when he was actually criticizing Waldorf
instead of piling up more accusations on top of the
phony one?
Serena's response continued:
) they are bullies...
Serena, would you provide the evidence to support this
accusation. And no sloppy thinking, please. Remember
that disapproving of how some Waldorf schools fail to
put a stop to bullying is a far cry from saying that
Waldorf students are bullies. Some children gravitate
toward bullying behavior in all schools. It is how
the school handles it that determines whether the
behavior will come to an end or become entrenched.
The responsibility for allowing it to continue lies
with the adults.
) don't do well in
) school,
Again, I believe the argument from some critics is
that Waldorf education is flawed in several areas.
That is not a criticism of the children themselves.
) don't transition well to other schools,
Again, not a criticism of Waldorf students but of
Waldorf schools. Most Waldorf critics and survivors
not only have children who had problems transitioning
from Waldorf to other schools but also know many other
children who have had this problem. The day we
enrolled one of our children in a non-Waldorf private
school, the director warned us that they had already
had three students from Waldorf at their school and
that while they were all very nice children they
"didn't know anything" and needed a lot of remedial
work. See a pattern here? The director didn't blame
the children; he clearly believed their education was
lacking prior to coming to his school.
) are
) lackluster in many
) ways.
This is such a generalized statement that without your
providing specifics or examples of what you mean by
this I don't think anyone could know to what you are
referring.
Read your own archives. No one who reads
) this list
) will come away with a good impression of W students.
Only sloppy thinkers would come away with a bad
impression of the students themselves.
) This is your collective doing and you've done it to
) scare
) prospective parents away.
If we have scared prospective parents away then we
have succeeded in protecting some children from
potentially harmful experiences and the possibility of
receiving the poor education experienced by our
children and others. We don't post here for fun. We
do it because we believe it's the right thing to do.
) It doesn't work to now say that this was all really
) only about
) WE and not the students.
Of course it's about WE and we wouldn't bother if we
didn't care about the students.
Best,
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:14:58 +0100
From: madpark (madpark nildram.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
)
) serena wrote:
) To find out the answer as to why a child is not doing well, one must
) look at every variable, right? The parents are one of several variables,
) and as Margaret said, have a strong influence on the child (I would say
) potentially both positively and negatively).
)
) I am still wondering why you didn't notice that your child was not
) doing well (I presume reading was a problem) until he was 15. I
) can't imagine not knowing how my child's reading and comprehension
) skills were developing. Did you have any misgivings earlier on? If
) so, why didn't you act on them?
)
Madpark replies:
He had no problem with reading, he learnt to read before he went to the
waldorf school when he was 8, his spelling was perfect, until the Œoutside¹
educational expert assessed him we had no idea he wasn¹t doing Œwell¹ other
than that he was a typical boy who didn¹t like to work, and this was sprung
on us 6 months before the first exam he would take. We got a letter saying
that he may be dyslexic.
He had started to read at age 4 and had perfect spelling so we didn¹t
believe it, and against the advise of the school (who wanted to Œtreat¹ him
in the school) we took him to an outside education expert , he was very
clear in the assessment, it didn¹t include any judgement to our parenting
skills, it was that he hadn¹t been taught, it was an education assessment.
He was then privately tutored at great expense twice a week until the exam.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 01:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Margaret wrote previously:
(snip)
)) Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure
to
) identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
) this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
) education. By delaying reading and the acquisition
) of
) other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
) learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
) late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
) parents were frequently told not to worry if our
) children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
) classmates because(we were told) there is so much
) repetition of the same academic material over the
) years that eventually they all catch up. So,
) deferring to teachers we believed knew what they
) were
) talking about, some parents didn't take the steps
) they
) would have taken in any other type of school where
) they would be told that their children were falling
) behind and that they should get them tested for
) learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
) grading system makes it even harder for parents to
) understand just how poorly their children might be
) doing in comparison to the norm.
)
) Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
) issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
) tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
) his lack of academic progress, and he was
) instrumental
) in our discovering the specific learning disability
) that was impeding our son. From the complaints I
) have
) heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
) school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is
) not
) the norm and far too many families end up with the
) stress and expense of remedial education.
Serena replied:
) Learning disorders (about which I am the first to
) admit I know
) very little) seem to be a weak spot in both public
) and private
) educational systems, including WE.
It is true that most private schools in the U.S. do
not have the financial resources to provide special ed
classes for children with serious learning
disabilities. However, in Waldorf private schools the
problem starts with lack of recognition of signs of
learning disabilities because of the reasons I
mentioned in my previous post. While teachers in
mainstream private schools are not necessarily trained
to recognize actual learning disabilities, they do
know when a child is not learning because their
students in the early years do much more independent
work in terms of demonstrating reading comprehension
and writing original sentences and/or essays while
their peers at Waldorf schools are busy copying what
the teacher has written or drawn on the blackboard.
Even if a mainstream teacher doesn't alert parents to
a child's academic lack of progress, the parents can
see it for themselves from the child's grades.
) Probably many in WE would agree that this is an area
) that
) could be improved upon in general.
I hope so.
) But it's an area where public schools can struggle,
) too: one
) of my sibs has two children, both with learning
) disorders. She
) worked mightily to get her local public school to
) help them and
) ended up hiring an independent school "advocate" to
) help the
) kids get what they need.
This is not unusual and I'm glad your sister was able
to get an advocate to help her.
) attended one meeting and
) was im-
) pressed by the advocate's skill. The teachers and
) prinicipal
) left me with two conflicting impressions: they
) wanted to do
) what was right for the child, but were impatient and
) frustrated
) because of their own time limitations.
Yup. I've seen the exact same thing. The special ed
resources are sometimes spread thin because of money
issues. The public school teachers I've known do want
to give the children all the help they need but
sometimes it means they have to break the law and
include more ld children in their special ed programs
than they are legally allowed to. When that happes,
none of the ld children get the full attention the
program was designed to give them. The ones who often
lose out are the children from poorer families whose
parents often don't know enough about the system to
fight to get their children what they need.
) The child
) eventually
) went on to a tech high school and blossomed.
I'm very happy to hear that.
) Teachers are
) faced with learning disorders but also with kids who
) have very
) different styles of learning. Some cannot take in
) verbally
) communicated information but instead are more
) visual. Others
) have a more kinesthetic way of learning: they have
) to touch it,
) take it apart, build it again, etc.
Some teachers recognize this and others,
unfortunately, don't. It's awful when one sees a
teacher who just keeps explaining the same thing over
and over in the same way to a child who doesn't
understand the explanation. My son had a math teacher
like that in public school. This is how a
conversation went in her class:
Kid: I read the explanation in the book and I don't
understand it.
Teacher: Read it again.
Kid reads it again and then: OK, I read it again and I
still don't understand it. Would you explain it to
me?
Teacher: Everyone else understood it. Read it again.
Kid reads again and then: I still don't understand it.
Teacher: Read it again.
And on and on until the kid gives up and just doodles
on the page where he is supposed to be writing out the
answers to the math problems given in the book.
) I have symapthy
) for both the
) teachers and the kids, but especially for the kids
) who learn in
) ways that are outside of what the mainstream
) considers to be
) "normal".
)
) These kids were diagnosed quite early on as having
) learning
) disorders (and each with a different disorder, just
) to make it
) nice and complicated). The early diagnosis was not
) enough
) to make the right things happen: that took all the
) effort of the
) parents and the advocate -- and for several years.
I think learning disabilities are always a complicated
issue because no two brains are alike. The best book
I've read on the subject is "A Mind at a Time" by Mel
Levine. I'd recommend it to any parent who has a
child with a learning disability or thinks that their
child might have a learning disability.
Unfortunately, I didn't come across it until my
younger child was already in 11th grade. It's a great
book for teachers to read, too.
) And even
) then, the follow through left a lot to be desired,
) though the
) interventions did make a lot of difference,
) especially to the
) child who had difficulty reading because of his
) perceptual
) problems.
I think this is often the case.
) I guess the message here is that it is far too
) simplistic and
) ultimately not truthful when anyone implies: WE =
) bad and
) public schools = good in the area of working with
) children who
) have a learning disorder.
I don't agree with you on this, Serena. I do think
this is an area where Waldorf fails badly whereas
public schools do manage to identify and help a lot of
children with learning disorders; it's just that there
are still too many who fall through the cracks even in
public schools.
Best,
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 01:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
) madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
) Serena, you would go far at Michael Hall, this was
) always their party
) line...if any complaint was made... just blame the
) parents...we parents
) send our children to school to be educated, we
) expect the experts at school
) to know if the children have unusual problems...in
) my case I was told in
) year 10 my son maybe dyslexic (a little bit late had
) it been true...) so I
) took him for sessions to an Œoutside¹ education
) expert against the advice of
) Michael Hall teachers who wanted him to have some
) treatment they devised,
) the educational expert told me he wasn¹t dyslexic
) he just hadn¹t been taught
) properly (class 10 is 15-16yrs old).
) At Michael Hall there is NO outside testing until
) the end of year 10 so you
) don¹t find out they are massively behind until
) those GCSE results come in
) and they are rated against all the rest of the
) schools in the UK, in his
) year the average for all schools including special
) schools in the UK was
) around 60% pass rate, the pass rate at Michael Hall
) was 34%, and we were
) from a privileged wealthy area with middle class
) families not an inner city
) sink school, (the average for private schools in our
) area was 90-100% pass
) rate), this happened to be the absolute lowest in
) the County, the only other
) school near it in scores was a Scientology school
) which was a mile or two up
) the road.
) ) Serena Blaue wrote:
) ) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) ) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) ) was allegedly never discovered and treated while
) she
) ) attended her WS.
)
) To find out the answer as to why a child is not
) doing well, one must
) look at every variable, right? The parents are one
) of several variables,
) and as Margaret said, have a strong influence on the
) child
I was not referring to parents as having a strong
influence inside the classroom where their children's
academic education is supposedly taking place. At our
Waldorf school parents weren't allowed to observe
classes.
) (I would say
) potentially both positively and negatively).
)
) I am still wondering why you didn't notice that your
) child was not
) doing well (I presume reading was a problem) until
) he was 15. I
) can't imagine not knowing how my child's reading and
) comprehension
) skills were developing. Did you have any misgivings
) earlier on? If
) so, why didn't you act on them?
)
) Serena Blaue
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 01:30:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
) madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
) This article is really too facile, having been a
) parent of Michael Hall and
) watched whilst we all danced around any journalist
) who came, set up classes
) especially for them to see, had children and inner
) circle parents on hand to
) spout the party line, happy pupils, yes maybe for
) the ones who arent bullied
) horribly, confident I don¹t think so, certainly not
) when they come into
) contact with the real world...yuk
Serena wrote:
) So here is an example of what I was describing
) earlier: the denigrating
) of the students and their ability to deal with
) things.
)
) In this case, they are described as not bullied
) (meaning some are bullies)
) confident (not!) and have problems when they come
) into contact with the
) real world.
)
) Pete and Madpark seem to think that every problem
) the child has is the
) school's fault and Margaret believes, on the other
) hand, that if the child
) nevertheless does well, it is due to the parent's
) influence.
Serena, you keep taking a specific statement I made
and turning it into a generality that suits whatever
argument you are trying to make. If you want to use
my statements to try to support your arguments, please
quote them verbatim along with the verbatim statements
of whomever I was responding to so that their meaning
and context is accurate. You've misrepresented what
three different people have said in your statement
above.
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1758
-- Topica Digest --
"... love the Earth and she will love you"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
By ldenike aol.com
RE: Why aren't those kids in class?
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By ldenike aol.com
The popularity of Waldorf schools
By Yarngal webtv.net
RE: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: The popularity of Waldorf schools
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By dan dandugan.com
Newton & Goethe, round 247
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?/positives&negatives - yes please!!!
By motormouth punkAss.com
Admin: Fwd: Upcoming Downtime
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:16:42 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
I post these articles because they are about anthroposphy. Steiner
and the students who worked out of his many indications have made
an impressive impact on various areas of life: education being one,
wine-making another. Those who relegate biodynamics to the "fringe"
are simply not paying attention.
Serena Blaue
------------------------
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=41551
East Valley Life
Biodynamics offer a natural new side of winemaking
By Mark Nothaft, For the Tribune
May 18, 2005
Once relegated to the world of Shirley MacLaine and "The X Files," biodynamic
wineproducing techniques have steadily shifted from full-moon mystery to
mainstream viability.
The proof is in the bottle. Sure, some weird things are going on, like
packing cow horns full of manure and burying them in vineyards, but many of these
wines are completely organic and simply stunning to drink. I recently chewed my
way through a pinot noir from Brick House Vineyards of Oregon’s Willamette
Valley and felt like a bear rummaging through a berry bush.
Look at some of these names — all well-respected even if, in some cases,
cellar work is aligned with phases of the moon: Robert Sinskey, Frog’s Leap,
Benziger and Patianna from California, Domaine Zind Humbrecht from Alsace,
Champagne Fleury, Domaine Trapet Pere & Fils in Burgundy, among others.
Biodynamics is not as mysterious as it seems. Austrian scientist Rudolf
Steiner, the creator of Waldorf education, coined the phrase in the 1920s and has
inspired legions of farmers wanting to work in tandem with Mother Nature.
Being biodynamic is akin to a heightened form of organic gardening, where
producers take a holistic approach to the vineyard — allowing the land to care
for itself, so to speak. All synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are removed,
weeding and picking is done by hand, and instead of introducing ladybugs or
owls to control pests, growers build habitat to attract them. During production,
there’s little to no filtering or fining, and all yeasts used to aid in
fermentation are local in origin.
This sounds familiar, right? The French have called this "terrior" for
centuries. Terrior and ladybugs? We don’t get it. Bear with me for a moment.
[..............]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:57:58 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Current reading research (done by Reid Lyon at NIH) shows that waiting to teach reading is a huge mistake. Huge. His research shows that even children who are behind grade level at the end of first grade have difficulty catching up, and that gap/difficulty only increases the farther along in the grades a child gets. Of course, there are exceptions to this, but it seems to be true.
I remember bringing this up at our former Waldorf school, only to be told this anecdote (by several people): there was a boy who attended this school who was not reading, even at a basic level, by the end of third grade. By fourth grade, his teachers were becoming a little concerned and took their concern to the parents. The parents said that they believed in the Waldorf philosophy (when a child is ready to do something, he will do it) and said they wanted to stay the course. In fifth grade, the boy *suddenly* began to read fluently and ended up being an honor student at a local high school known for its rigorous academic program.
Hmm. Maybe it's true. In any case, the message that came through was: don't worry if your child is not reading, even in fourth grade. It will all come out OK in the end.
As if.
Our former Waldorf school apparently instituted some kind of screening test for learning differences in the early 1990s, after it was discovered that a handful of children in the same class (in fourth or fifth grade, I cannot remember which ) had dyslexia or other learning issues. The parents apparently considered a joint-lawsuit against the school, but never went through with it. I am told they all pulled their kids out, leaving about three kids in the class. I interviewed the mother of one of the boys involved (she used to publish a local New Age newspaper) and she was extremely bitter about what had happened to her son. "They promise you that your child will learn to read, write, pursue intellectual things, and still keep his creativity intact, but that's not what happens," she told me. She reported that even with extra tutoring and expert help, her son continued to struggle outside of Waldorf. "But if I had kept him there, he would barely be able to read!" she said.
Even so, by the time my daughter reached fourth grade at Waldorf, there were still kids who were struggling to read basic Dr. Seuss-level books. I am daily grateful that Olivia learned to read on her own at the age of four. Had she not had that skill, I honestly doubt she would be as successful academically as she is today.
Delaying reading is a huge mistake.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret wrote:
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Serena wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
Margaret here:
My apologies to you, Serena for asking you to quote or
link to the post in my previous post. I was reading
the posts by following one thread at a time, but have
now read the one to which you were referring.
My comments about children having many influences in
their lives did not refer to recognition and treatment
of learning disabilities.
Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure to
identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
education. By delaying reading and the acquisition of
other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
parents were frequently told not to worry if our
children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
classmates because(we were told) there is so much
repetition of the same academic material over the
years that eventually they all catch up. So,
deferring to teachers we believed knew what they were
talking about, some parents didn't take the steps they
would have taken in any other type of school where
they would be told that their children were falling
behind and that they should get them tested for
learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
grading system makes it even harder for parents to
understand just how poorly their children might be
doing in comparison to the norm.
Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
his lack of academic progress, and he was instrumental
in our discovering the specific learning disability
that was impeding our son. From the complaints I have
heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is not
the norm and far too many families end up with the
stress and expense of remedial education.
As for the case of the anonymous person whose dyslexia
was never discovered, it's hard to make a judgment
about that specific case without knowing more details
such as whether or not her parents were
Anthroposophists, what the school communicated to her
parents about her lack of academic progress, and so
forth.
Best,
Margaret
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:59:22 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
Serena, with all due respect, everything related to Anthroposophy is "fringe." It is not a mainstream thing at all, despite the fact that some wine makers/grape growers are using biodynamics. Waldorf schools are still 'fringe' and Waldorf science is really, really "fringe." No doubt about that.
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:16:42 EDT
Subject: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover Platinum Card and get
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I post these articles because they are about anthroposphy. Steiner
and the students who worked out of his many indications have made
an impressive impact on various areas of life: education being one,
wine-making another. Those who relegate biodynamics to the "fringe"
are simply not paying attention.
Serena Blaue
------------------------
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=41551
East Valley Life
Biodynamics offer a natural new side of winemaking
By Mark Nothaft, For the Tribune
May 18, 2005
Once relegated to the world of Shirley MacLaine and "The X Files," biodynamic
wineproducing techniques have steadily shifted from full-moon mystery to
mainstream viability.
The proof is in the bottle. Sure, some weird things are going on, like
packing cow horns full of manure and burying them in vineyards, but many of
these
wines are completely organic and simply stunning to drink. I recently chewed my
way through a pinot noir from Brick House Vineyards of Oregon’s Willamette
Valley and felt like a bear rummaging through a berry bush.
Look at some of these names — all well-respected even if, in some cases,
cellar work is aligned with phases of the moon: Robert Sinskey, Frog’s Leap,
Benziger and Patianna from California, Domaine Zind Humbrecht from Alsace,
Champagne Fleury, Domaine Trapet Pere & Fils in Burgundy, among others.
Biodynamics is not as mysterious as it seems. Austrian scientist Rudolf
Steiner, the creator of Waldorf education, coined the phrase in the 1920s and
has
inspired legions of farmers wanting to work in tandem with Mother Nature.
Being biodynamic is akin to a heightened form of organic gardening, where
producers take a holistic approach to the vineyard — allowing the land to care
for itself, so to speak. All synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are removed,
weeding and picking is done by hand, and instead of introducing ladybugs or
owls to control pests, growers build habitat to attract them. During production,
there’s little to no filtering or fining, and all yeasts used to aid in
fermentation are local in origin.
This sounds familiar, right? The French have called this "terrior" for
centuries. Terrior and ladybugs? We don’t get it. Bear with me for a moment.
[..............]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:02:26 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Why aren't those kids in class?
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Pete and Madpark seem to think that every problem the child has is the
) school's fault and Margaret believes, on the other hand, that if the
) child
) nevertheless does well, it is due to the parent's influence.
No, again, and again, and again Serena, problems with the school are the
school's fault. Problems with the education they provide are the
school's fault. Problems in the children directly stemming from their
involvement in the school are the school's fault. If a child overcomes
these problems and does well, it is most likely due to influences
outside the school. You perhaps don't realize that Madpark and I are
describing two Waldorf schools with extremely dysfunctional school
environments.
)
) You all seem unaware of the steady stream of disrespect that you direct
) not only at the schools but the students.
The schools are the ones disrespecting the students Serena. The
students deserve much better than they receive at these institutions.
) I guarantee you: children are
) quite clearly aware of what their parents respect or disrespect. And if
)
) you disrespect their school, you put them in a very difficut situation
) of
) having to choose their parent or the school.
This statement is astounding. It is the parent's choice to make - not
the child's. Schools are supposed to be a tool parents can use in the
academic development of their child - they are not supposed to be a life
choice that pits school against parent with the child in the middle.
Why can't Waldorf just teach kids in a healthy environment - that's what
the parents want. Parents don't want to give up everything in their
lives to make a committment to Waldorf - they just want a good school
for their kids. And why don't Waldorf schools, being as they are a life
choice, insist that any student going to their schools must have the
full support of both parents?
)
) What if a student loves his or her school? Do you denigrate them for
) that, too?
There's a fine line between love and brainwashing at Waldorf. Most
students are, in my experinece, controlled by fear - fear of what they
don't know about other schools. And what about Waldorf students that
hate their school. Is it OK to continually ignore their pleas to be
taken out or their cries for help with a dogmatic, overly strict or
controlling teacher? Is it OK to support the kids who don't like
Waldorf, or only the kids that do?
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:02:19 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena, many parents don't "act on" things when they see their child stumbling in reading, etc. at Waldorf because, when they ask the "experts" (the teachers, supposedly), the parents are told that things are fine, just fine, that kids learn at their own rates and some kids just "aren't ready yet" to do math, read fluently, etc.
In some Waldorf schools, even when teachers notice and recommend help, the help they recommend is eurythmy.
Fat chance that moving around to a verse and throwing some copper rods from hand to hand is going to help reading.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:37:58 EDT
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 6:45:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
Serena, you would go far at Michael Hall, this was always their party
line...if any complaint was made... just blame the parents...we parents
send our children to school to be educated, we expect the experts at school
to know if the children have unusual problems...in my case I was told in
year 10 my son maybe dyslexic (a little bit late had it been true...) so I
took him for sessions to an Œoutside¹ education expert against the advice of
Michael Hall teachers who wanted him to have some treatment they devised,
the educational expert told me he wasn¹t dyslexic he just hadn¹t been taught
properly (class 10 is 15-16yrs old).
At Michael Hall there is NO outside testing until the end of year 10 so you
don¹t find out they are massively behind until those GCSE results come in
and they are rated against all the rest of the schools in the UK, in his
year the average for all schools including special schools in the UK was
around 60% pass rate, the pass rate at Michael Hall was 34%, and we were
from a privileged wealthy area with middle class families not an inner city
sink school, (the average for private schools in our area was 90-100% pass
rate), this happened to be the absolute lowest in the County, the only other
school near it in scores was a Scientology school which was a mile or two up
the road.
) ---------
) Serena Blaue wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
To find out the answer as to why a child is not doing well, one must
look at every variable, right? The parents are one of several variables,
and as Margaret said, have a strong influence on the child (I would say
potentially both positively and negatively).
I am still wondering why you didn't notice that your child was not
doing well (I presume reading was a problem) until he was 15. I
can't imagine not knowing how my child's reading and comprehension
skills were developing. Did you have any misgivings earlier on? If
so, why didn't you act on them?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPhb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:06:32 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
I completely own up to the fact that I disrespect many of the people and things associated with Waldorf schools. I very much disrespect a system (and those involved with that system) who don't tell the truth to parents when parents are enrolling their children.
Why should I respect dishonesty? Why should I respect people who put their worldview (Anthroposophy) on families and children without those families' express permission or knowledge?
I certainly respect the right of people to have their own belief system. As I have said before, if someone wants to worship a walnut and make a shrine to it, say verses to it, etc., they have that right. (I might think it is crazy, but I respect their right to it.)
What I don't respect is when that walnut-worshipper tries to put his or her worldview on me and my children, by stealth. That's disrespectful to us.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:46:38 EDT
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 6:26:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
madpark nildram.co.uk writes:
This article is really too facile, having been a parent of Michael Hall and
watched whilst we all danced around any journalist who came, set up classes
especially for them to see, had children and inner circle parents on hand to
spout the party line, happy pupils, yes maybe for the ones who arent bullied
horribly, confident I don¹t think so, certainly not when they come into
contact with the real world...yuk
---------------------
So here is an example of what I was describing earlier: the denigrating
of the students and their ability to deal with things.
In this case, they are described as not bullied (meaning some are bullies)
confident (not!) and have problems when they come into contact with the
real world.
Pete and Madpark seem to think that every problem the child has is the
school's fault and Margaret believes, on the other hand, that if the child
nevertheless does well, it is due to the parent's influence.
You all seem unaware of the steady stream of disrespect that you direct
not only at the schools but the students. I guarantee you: children are
quite clearly aware of what their parents respect or disrespect. And if
you disrespect their school, you put them in a very difficut situation of
having to choose their parent or the school.
What if a student loves his or her school? Do you denigrate them for
that, too?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:12:11 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: The popularity of Waldorf schools
A Waldorf school in La Crosse just bought a former public school
building and the local news is showing glowing reports about the local
Waldorf schools and even "advertising" contact information for
prospective parents interested in Waldorf schools as an alternative to
public schools.
SO I have decided that Waldorf IS mainstream and not some fringe group.
The new age and pagan movements are mainstream too, and that is why I
think Waldorf Education is mainstream. So, I would hope that the Waldorf
schools make their spiritual beliefs (Anthroposophy) clear to
prospective new parents just like Catholic, Jewish Muslim, mainline
Protestant Christian, and fundamentalist Protestant Christian schools do
to parents who are interested in going to their schools.
Public schools need to remain secular and non-religious because of the
DIVERSITY of the students there,a nd in this I agree with PLANS. Private
schools are VOLUNTARY and parents dissatisfied with public schools will
keep sending their children to private schools. I hope ALL private
schools based on spirituality and religion (Waldorf, Christian, Jewish,
Muslim, and others) would fully disclose ALL of their
religious/spiritual beliefs and practices to parents who are interested
in their schools. If public schools don't allow Judeo-Christian prayer,
then they also shouldn't allow Eastern style meditation, Eastern style
"relaxation exercises", yoga and such! We cannot go back to how secular
life was intertwined with religion in Puritanic times! I have no
problem with Christians (I know very kind and caring Christians) or
other religious people (including Waldorf) following their own beliefs
and teaching their beliefs to their children as they will do anyway,
like many homeschool families also do, but if parents want their
children to have a spiritual/religious based education, then either
educate them at home or enroll them in the PRIVATE school of your
choice,and I hope that ALL private schools FULLY DISCLOSE all of their
spiritual or religious beliefs right at the very beginning so parents
can make an informed choice before deciding to enroll their child(ren)
in those particular schools. The fact is the new age movement is not
on the fringes anymore (I am NOT new age by the way) and the secular
news media actively promoting Waldorf Education proves this point to me
very well.
That is my personal opinion on this matter.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:14:40 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: "... love the Earth and she will love you"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) I post these articles because they are about anthroposphy. Steiner
) and the students who worked out of his many indications have made
) an impressive impact on various areas of life: education being one,
) wine-making another. Those who relegate biodynamics to the "fringe"
) are simply not paying attention.
)
) Serena Blaue
Serena
This is a Waldorf list - and, as everyone knows, Anthroposophy is not in
Waldorf schools...
Pete
) ------------------------
)
) http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=41551
)
) East Valley Life
)
) Biodynamics offer a natural new side of winemaking
)
) By Mark Nothaft, For the Tribune
)
) May 18, 2005
)
) Once relegated to the world of Shirley MacLaine and "The X Files,"
) biodynamic
) wineproducing techniques have steadily shifted from full-moon mystery to
)
) mainstream viability.
)
) The proof is in the bottle. Sure, some weird things are going on, like
) packing cow horns full of manure and burying them in vineyards, but many
) of these
) wines are completely organic and simply stunning to drink. I recently
) chewed my
) way through a pinot noir from Brick House Vineyards of Oregon’s
) Willamette
) Valley and felt like a bear rummaging through a berry bush.
)
) Look at some of these names — all well-respected even if, in some
) cases,
) cellar work is aligned with phases of the moon: Robert Sinskey, Frog’s
) Leap,
) Benziger and Patianna from California, Domaine Zind Humbrecht from
) Alsace,
) Champagne Fleury, Domaine Trapet Pere & Fils in Burgundy, among others.
)
) Biodynamics is not as mysterious as it seems. Austrian scientist Rudolf
) Steiner, the creator of Waldorf education, coined the phrase in the
) 1920s and has
) inspired legions of farmers wanting to work in tandem with Mother
) Nature.
)
) Being biodynamic is akin to a heightened form of organic gardening,
) where
) producers take a holistic approach to the vineyard — allowing the land
) to care
) for itself, so to speak. All synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are
) removed,
) weeding and picking is done by hand, and instead of introducing ladybugs
) or
) owls to control pests, growers build habitat to attract them. During
) production,
) there’s little to no filtering or fining, and all yeasts used to aid
) in
) fermentation are local in origin.
)
) This sounds familiar, right? The French have called this "terrior" for
) centuries. Terrior and ladybugs? We don’t get it. Bear with me for a
) moment.
)
) [..............]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:15:03 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena,
We critics don't criticize the students in Waldorf schools: we feel sorry for the ones who are not getting what we consider the excellent educations they deserve.
I repeat: if we did not care about these kids, why would we bother using time on this list (and elsewhere) to make people aware of the problems we see with Waldorf?
The answer: we wouldn't.
It's the kids who pay the price for all this nonsense.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 22:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) (snip)
) ) These are the tip of Pete's iceberg of nasty
) remarks
) ) about W students.
Serena quoting Pete:
) ) ) "Basically, I think Waldorf gives NO incentives
) ) to becomming productive
) ) ) ) citizens in our society."
Margaret wrote previously:
) Serena, your first sentence above is about Waldorf
) "students." Pete's remark that you quoted is about
) "Waldorf." Can you see the sloppy thinking that is
) involved in labeling a criticism of Waldorf as a
) criticism of children who happen to attend Waldorf?
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
)
) Another possibility is that you are deliberately
) trying to paint Pete in a bad light to sloppy
) thinkers
) who might not see the discrepancy between what you
) say
) Pete said and what he actually said.
Serena responded:
) In fact, the WC list in general says nasty things
) about
) Waldorf students:...
Margaret:
How about acknowledging the fact that you wrongly
accused Pete of making a nasty remark about Waldorf
students when he was actually criticizing Waldorf
instead of piling up more accusations on top of the
phony one?
Serena's response continued:
) they are bullies...
Serena, would you provide the evidence to support this
accusation. And no sloppy thinking, please. Remember
that disapproving of how some Waldorf schools fail to
put a stop to bullying is a far cry from saying that
Waldorf students are bullies. Some children gravitate
toward bullying behavior in all schools. It is how
the school handles it that determines whether the
behavior will come to an end or become entrenched.
The responsibility for allowing it to continue lies
with the adults.
) don't do well in
) school,
Again, I believe the argument from some critics is
that Waldorf education is flawed in several areas.
That is not a criticism of the children themselves.
) don't transition well to other schools,
Again, not a criticism of Waldorf students but of
Waldorf schools. Most Waldorf critics and survivors
not only have children who had problems transitioning
from Waldorf to other schools but also know many other
children who have had this problem. The day we
enrolled one of our children in a non-Waldorf private
school, the director warned us that they had already
had three students from Waldorf at their school and
that while they were all very nice children they
"didn't know anything" and needed a lot of remedial
work. See a pattern here? The director didn't blame
the children; he clearly believed their education was
lacking prior to coming to his school.
) are
) lackluster in many
) ways.
This is such a generalized statement that without your
providing specifics or examples of what you mean by
this I don't think anyone could know to what you are
referring.
Read your own archives. No one who reads
) this list
) will come away with a good impression of W students.
Only sloppy thinkers would come away with a bad
impression of the students themselves.
) This is your collective doing and you've done it to
) scare
) prospective parents away.
If we have scared prospective parents away then we
have succeeded in protecting some children from
potentially harmful experiences and the possibility of
receiving the poor education experienced by our
children and others. We don't post here for fun. We
do it because we believe it's the right thing to do.
) It doesn't work to now say that this was all really
) only about
) WE and not the students.
Of course it's about WE and we wouldn't bother if we
didn't care about the students.
Best,
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:13:14 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Serena, you ask why the parents of the girl who attended Michael Hall and had undiagnosed dyslexia (and claims she was seriously abused in many ways by teachers while there) did nothing. I answered: because the parents were apparently devoted and ardent Anthroposophers themselves. That is why. Please note I am answering.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 23:28:47 EDT
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 10:02:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com writes:
Margaret wrote:
) Fortunately, children have many other influences in
) their lives, not least of which are their parents.
Serena wrote:
) And that is why I'd like to know why you do not
) fault the
) parents of the anonymous complainer whose dyslexia
) was allegedly never discovered and treated while she
) attended her WS.
Margaret here:
My apologies to you, Serena for asking you to quote or
link to the post in my previous post. I was reading
the posts by following one thread at a time, but have
now read the one to which you were referring.
My comments about children having many influences in
their lives did not refer to recognition and treatment
of learning disabilities.
Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure to
identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
education. By delaying reading and the acquisition of
other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
parents were frequently told not to worry if our
children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
classmates because(we were told) there is so much
repetition of the same academic material over the
years that eventually they all catch up. So,
deferring to teachers we believed knew what they were
talking about, some parents didn't take the steps they
would have taken in any other type of school where
they would be told that their children were falling
behind and that they should get them tested for
learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
grading system makes it even harder for parents to
understand just how poorly their children might be
doing in comparison to the norm.
Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
his lack of academic progress, and he was instrumental
in our discovering the specific learning disability
that was impeding our son. From the complaints I have
heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is not
the norm and far too many families end up with the
stress and expense of remedial education.
As for the case of the anonymous person whose dyslexia
was never discovered, it's hard to make a judgment
about that specific case without knowing more details
such as whether or not her parents were
Anthroposophists, what the school communicated to her
parents about her lack of academic progress, and so
forth.
Best,
Margaret
------------------
Margaret,
Thank you for your apology -- I did find myself wondering about
your irritation. I appreciate your clarification.
Learning disorders (about which I am the first to admit I know
very little) seem to be a weak spot in both public and private
educational systems, including WE.
Probably many in WE would agree that this is an area that
could be improved upon in general.
But it's an area where public schools can struggle, too: one
of my sibs has two children, both with learning disorders. She
worked mightily to get her local public school to help them and
ended up hiring an independent school "advocate" to help the
kids get what they need. I attended one meeting and was im-
pressed by the advocate's skill. The teachers and prinicipal
left me with two conflicting impressions: they wanted to do
what was right for the child, but were impatient and frustrated
because of their own time limitations. The child eventually
went on to a tech high school and blossomed. Teachers are
faced with learning disorders but also with kids who have very
different styles of learning. Some cannot take in verbally
communicated information but instead are more visual. Others
have a more kinesthetic way of learning: they have to touch it,
take it apart, build it again, etc. I have symapthy for both the
teachers and the kids, but especially for the kids who learn in
ways that are outside of what the mainstream considers to be
"normal".
These kids were diagnosed quite early on as having learning
disorders (and each with a different disorder, just to make it
nice and complicated). The early diagnosis was not enough
to make the right things happen: that took all the effort of the
parents and the advocate -- and for several years. And even
then, the follow through left a lot to be desired, though the
interventions did make a lot of difference, especially to the
child who had difficulty reading because of his perceptual
problems.
I guess the message here is that it is far too simplistic and
ultimately not truthful when anyone implies: WE = bad and
public schools = good in the area of working with children who
have a learning disorder.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 12:02:16 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: The popularity of Waldorf schools
Yarngal,
Waldorf may be mainstream in your neck of the woods, but here (in the Baltimore-DC area), they sure are not!
Our local Waldorf school is about 30 years old and I still encounter people who give a totally blank look when they hear "Waldorf school" and say "What's that?" When I tell them that there is a school that has been here for more than three decades, they gape. "How come I have never heard of it?" they say. Or else they quip something such as "I thought Waldorf was a salad."
Whether or not something is "mainstream" depends largely on context. In Viroque, Wisconsin, Waldorf is the norm. In places where there are not large communities of Anthros, it is far, far from the norm.
And please don't be swayed by superficial local TV reports and newspaper articles. As I have said here a gazillion times, when I was a newspaper reporter I, too, did the obligatory "Isn't this a wonderful alternative school?" story about Waldorf. (In fact, that is how I learned about Waldorf, though not the important fact that it was Anthroposophical!). It's very easy for a reporter to zoom in with a camera and notebook and take some cute photos of kids doing old fashioned (and thus, charming!) things like knitting and modeling with beeswax or -- be still my heart! -- making their own "textbooks." So charming, so old fashioned, so unlike those ugly public schools with their hideous cement block walls and primary colored posters all over the place! How quaint! But it's not the meat of the matter.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:12:11 -0500
Subject: The popularity of Waldorf schools
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPhb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A Waldorf school in La Crosse just bought a former public school
building and the local news is showing glowing reports about the local
Waldorf schools and even "advertising" contact information for
prospective parents interested in Waldorf schools as an alternative to
public schools.
SO I have decided that Waldorf IS mainstream and not some fringe group.
The new age and pagan movements are mainstream too, and that is why I
think Waldorf Education is mainstream. So, I would hope that the Waldorf
schools make their spiritual beliefs (Anthroposophy) clear to
prospective new parents just like Catholic, Jewish Muslim, mainline
Protestant Christian, and fundamentalist Protestant Christian schools do
to parents who are interested in going to their schools.
Public schools need to remain secular and non-religious because of the
DIVERSITY of the students there,a nd in this I agree with PLANS. Private
schools are VOLUNTARY and parents dissatisfied with public schools will
keep sending their children to private schools. I hope ALL private
schools based on spirituality and religion (Waldorf, Christian, Jewish,
Muslim, and others) would fully disclose ALL of their
religious/spiritual beliefs and practices to parents who are interested
in their schools. If public schools don't allow Judeo-Christian prayer,
then they also shouldn't allow Eastern style meditation, Eastern style
"relaxation exercises", yoga and such! We cannot go back to how secular
life was intertwined with religion in Puritanic times! I have no
problem with Christians (I know very kind and caring Christians) or
other religious people (including Waldorf) following their own beliefs
and teaching their beliefs to their children as they will do anyway,
like many homeschool families also do, but if parents want their
children to have a spiritual/religious based education, then either
educate them at home or enroll them in the PRIVATE school of your
choice,and I hope that ALL private schools FULLY DISCLOSE all of their
spiritual or religious beliefs right at the very beginning so parents
can make an informed choice before deciding to enroll their child(ren)
in those particular schools. The fact is the new age movement is not
on the fringes anymore (I am NOT new age by the way) and the secular
news media actively promoting Waldorf Education proves this point to me
very well.
That is my personal opinion on this matter.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 12:10:09 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Serena,
What makes you say that I don't think there is anything good about Waldorf? That's not true. I think there are some good things (which I will list quickly in a second!), but that the negatives outweight the positives.
Here is what I think is of value in Waldorf. Let me preface this list by saying that these things are not peculiar to Waldorf: they can and are done elsewhere. But they are associated with Waldorf:
* it's good that the children play outside almost every day, so they can get fresh air and exercise and don't spend all their time at desks.
* the art supplies are really good quality. Good paper, good paint, good beeswax crayons (though the smell of beeswax is forever ruined for me.) In the upper grades, I think Waldorf students do get good technique instruction in art
* hands-on activities to augment what they learn in math, etc. My daughter did spend time throwing around a beanbag and counting by 2s, 3s, etc. and I think it was a good thing to do
* the snacks the schools provide are usually healthy. It's nice to have an emphasis on keeping the body healthy, though I could argue that is countermanded by the Waldorf resistance to immunizations, etc. Apparently, it's good to drink organic juice but not good to be prevented from getting whooping cough.
* the community feeling that tons of "screentime" is not good for kids. Sadly, this good instinct and policy often translates into parents and kids feeling guilty if they do allow their kids to watch some TV and movies.
* many nice people who are well intentioned and mean well.
Want a list of the negatives?
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:51:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 5/18/2005 2:13:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Ldenike aol.com writes:
Frankly, I did not mean to take anyone to task. I just wanted to direct the
conversation to Waldorf ed.
You use a newspaper article as "proof" that something good is going on at
Michael Hall. Maybe that's true. But maybe it is not. Heck, I myself did a very
flattering story (or two) about our local Waldorf school when I was a newspaper
reporter. Like many people who just visit these schools, I was enamored of
the lovely colored walls, the natural toys, the beeswax modeling and all the
seemingly "old fashioned" things about the whole Waldorf environment. I sat in
on
classes and talked to teachers for hours, and came away absolutely smitten
with this very different school approach. I couldn't wait to enroll my children,
and I did.
What I saw from inside (a rigid, anti intellectual, authoritarian, religious
education ordered according to the tenets of Anthroposophy!) was very
different from what I was shown from the outside.
In other words, reporters skate over the pretty surface of Waldorf. And the
surface *is* pretty. But the story is superficial, at best. It proves nothing.
Lisa
-----------------
Why can't you accept that there are good things in WE? And that this
is obvious to many people? And that many people continue to have
good things to say about WE even after the honeymoon stage is over?
And that every human effort has faults and imperfections? And that,
despite faults and imperfections, students are more likely than not
very appreciative of their W school?
This reporter spoke to the kids and was interested in themes that went
below the surface to some extent. Why isn't the children's attentiveness
(observed by the reporter) of interest or value to you? Why do you dis-
count the statements by the kids themselves?
Or do we have to add another nasty category about W students:
"pretenders and liars"...?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 12:17:36 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Right before we took our daughter out of Waldorf, we had an educational expert test my daughter, to see where she was. It turns out she is actually gifted, but her achievement was low. We were asked "Where did that child go to school? There is apparently a teaching deficit going on." The evaluator had never heard of Waldorf, and was horrified to note how much my daughter had not learned.
Of course, until the last year or so, it had seemed normal to us. We kept being told that Waldorf kids start out more slowly than their non -Waldorf peers, but then they "soar ahead." I frankly saw precious little "soaring ahead" when we were there. The last winter fair we attended, I watched a 5th grade girl struggle to make change for $5 from a $10 bill. When my daughter emerged from Waldorf, she could name all the different kinds of fairies (undines, sylphs, etc.) but had never written a book report or done a science experiment. I am still so glad we took her out in mid fourth grade.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: madpark nildram.co.uk (madpark nildram.co.uk)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:14:58 +0100
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) serena wrote:
) To find out the answer as to why a child is not doing well, one must
) look at every variable, right? The parents are one of several variables,
) and as Margaret said, have a strong influence on the child (I would say
) potentially both positively and negatively).
)
) I am still wondering why you didn't notice that your child was not
) doing well (I presume reading was a problem) until he was 15. I
) can't imagine not knowing how my child's reading and comprehension
) skills were developing. Did you have any misgivings earlier on? If
) so, why didn't you act on them?
)
Madpark replies:
He had no problem with reading, he learnt to read before he went to the
waldorf school when he was 8, his spelling was perfect, until the Œoutside¹
educational expert assessed him we had no idea he wasn¹t doing Œwell¹ other
than that he was a typical boy who didn¹t like to work, and this was sprung
on us 6 months before the first exam he would take. We got a letter saying
that he may be dyslexic.
He had started to read at age 4 and had perfect spelling so we didn¹t
believe it, and against the advise of the school (who wanted to Œtreat¹ him
in the school) we took him to an outside education expert , he was very
clear in the assessment, it didn¹t include any judgement to our parenting
skills, it was that he hadn¹t been taught, it was an education assessment.
He was then privately tutored at great expense twice a week until the exam.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up today for a No Annual Fee Discover® Platinum Card and get…
0% Intro APR on Purchases & Balance Transfers for 8 Months, Up to
2% Cashback Bonus® reward on your purchases & 100% fraud
protection.
http://click.topica.com/caadtrVb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/DiscoverCard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 12:21:59 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
I can't speak for most private schools. But I can tell you that at the very good private school my girls now attend the teachers *can* and *do* and *have* identified kids with learning issues, and this usually happens by the end of first or second grade, at the latest. They do this by, as I understand it, using certain standardized tests that can reveal gaps between IQ and mastery of appropriate, age level material. My younger daughter has had several classmates leave when dyslexia has been revealed this way.
Other children, less severely affected, have been able to stay with supplementary assistance from tutors, etc.
The school, however, is very open about saying that it is not a school for kids with special learning issues.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 01:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret wrote previously:
(snip)
)) Nonetheless, if you want my opinion about failure
to
) identify learning disabilities, I have always seen
) this as a particular problem inherent in Waldorf
) education. By delaying reading and the acquisition
) of
) other academic skills, Waldorf sets the stage for
) learning disabilities to go unnoticed until a very
) late age. At our former Waldorf school some of us
) parents were frequently told not to worry if our
) children were lagging behind even their Waldorf
) classmates because(we were told) there is so much
) repetition of the same academic material over the
) years that eventually they all catch up. So,
) deferring to teachers we believed knew what they
) were
) talking about, some parents didn't take the steps
) they
) would have taken in any other type of school where
) they would be told that their children were falling
) behind and that they should get them tested for
) learning disabilities. The fact that there is no
) grading system makes it even harder for parents to
) understand just how poorly their children might be
) doing in comparison to the norm.
)
) Our son's Waldorf class teacher did discuss these
) issues with us, he knew we had already had our son
) tested extensively without uncovering the reason for
) his lack of academic progress, and he was
) instrumental
) in our discovering the specific learning disability
) that was impeding our son. From the complaints I
) have
) heard from other former Waldorf parents, both at our
) school and otherWaldorf schools, however, this is
) not
) the norm and far too many families end up with the
) stress and expense of remedial education.
Serena replied:
) Learning disorders (about which I am the first to
) admit I know
) very little) seem to be a weak spot in both public
) and private
) educational systems, including WE.
It is true that most private schools in the U.S. do
not have the financial resources to provide special ed
classes for children with serious learning
disabilities. However, in Waldorf private schools the
problem starts with lack of recognition of signs of
learning disabilities because of the reasons I
mentioned in my previous post. While teachers in
mainstream private schools are not necessarily trained
to recognize actual learning disabilities, they do
know when a child is not learning because their
students in the early years do much more independent
work in terms of demonstrating reading comprehension
and writing original sentences and/or essays while
their peers at Waldorf schools are busy copying what
the teacher has written or drawn on the blackboard.
Even if a mainstream teacher doesn't alert parents to
a child's academic lack of progress, the parents can
see it for themselves from the child's grades.
) Probably many in WE would agree that this is an area
) that
) could be improved upon in general.
I hope so.
) But it's an area where public schools can struggle,
) too: one
) of my sibs has two children, both with learning
) disorders. She
) worked mightily to get her local public school to
) help them and
) ended up hiring an independent school "advocate" to
) help the
) kids get what they need.
This is not unusual and I'm glad your sister was able
to get an advocate to help her.
) attended one meeting and
) was im-
) pressed by the advocate's skill. The teachers and
) prinicipal
) left me with two conflicting impressions: they
) wanted to do
) what was right for the child, but were impatient and
) frustrated
) because of their own time limitations.
Yup. I've seen the exact same thing. The special ed
resources are sometimes spread thin because of money
issues. The public school teachers I've known do want
to give the children all the help they need but
sometimes it means they have to break the law and
include more ld children in their special ed programs
than they are legally allowed to. When that happes,
none of the ld children get the full attention the
program was designed to give them. The ones who often
lose out are the children from poorer families whose
parents often don't know enough about the system to
fight to get their children what they need.
) The child
) eventually
) went on to a tech high school and blossomed.
I'm very happy to hear that.
) Teachers are
) faced with learning disorders but also with kids who
) have very
) different styles of learning. Some cannot take in
) verbally
) communicated information but instead are more
) visual. Others
) have a more kinesthetic way of learning: they have
) to touch it,
) take it apart, build it again, etc.
Some teachers recognize this and others,
unfortunately, don't. It's awful when one sees a
teacher who just keeps explaining the same thing over
and over in the same way to a child who doesn't
understand the explanation. My son had a math teacher
like that in public school. This is how a
conversation went in her class:
Kid: I read the explanation in the book and I don't
understand it.
Teacher: Read it again.
Kid reads it again and then: OK, I read it again and I
still don't understand it. Would you explain it to
me?
Teacher: Everyone else understood it. Read it again.
Kid reads again and then: I still don't understand it.
Teacher: Read it again.
And on and on until the kid gives up and just doodles
on the page where he is supposed to be writing out the
answers to the math problems given in the book.
) I have symapthy
) for both the
) teachers and the kids, but especially for the kids
) who learn in
) ways that are outside of what the mainstream
) considers to be
) "normal".
)
) These kids were diagnosed quite early on as having
) learning
) disorders (and each with a different disorder, just
) to make it
) nice and complicated). The early diagnosis was not
) enough
) to make the right things happen: that took all the
) effort of the
) parents and the advocate -- and for several years.
I think learning disabilities are always a complicated
issue because no two brains are alike. The best book
I've read on the subject is "A Mind at a Time" by Mel
Levine. I'd recommend it to any parent who has a
child with a learning disability or thinks that their
child might have a learning disability.
Unfortunately, I didn't come across it until my
younger child was already in 11th grade. It's a great
book for teachers to read, too.
) And even
) then, the follow through left a lot to be desired,
) though the
) interventions did make a lot of difference,
) especially to the
) child who had difficulty reading because of his
) perceptual
) problems.
I think this is often the case.
) I guess the message here is that it is far too
) simplistic and
) ultimately not truthful when anyone implies: WE =
) bad and
) public schools = good in the area of working with
) children who
) have a learning disorder.
I don't agree with you on this, Serena. I do think
this is an area where Waldorf fails badly whereas
public schools do manage to identify and help a lot of
children with learning disorders; it's just that there
are still too many who fall through the cracks even in
public schools.
Best,
Margaret
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOrq7Bf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 11:02:26 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Serena Blaue, you wrote:
)You all seem unaware of the steady stream of disrespect that you direct
)not only at the schools but the students.
The Waldorf movement will be respectable when it stops acting like a
cult and deals effectively with its manifest problems. Until that
happens, parents should be warned about its religious nature and its
educational failings.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 22:59:00 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Newton & Goethe, round 247
Dear Dan,
Thanks for taking time over my short optics unit. I'm going to do some work on re-mixing the colours back into white when I'm done with Shakespeare and the Class trip.
On the whiteness of the sun seen through mists, have you tried this one? Take a strong beam of light in a darkish room, and place over it sheets of tracing paper one by one. You are looking into the light source with the paper getting in the way, very close to the lens. Overall, the perceived colour as the paper thickens tends towards warm yellow, even orange. Before it goes to yellow, however, how do you describe the colour?
Storm clouds grey not red? When I tried the light going into the water (lighting up the darkness), groups of students and adults reported two sets of colour perceptions. They all agreed a lemon yellow area was visible - but beyond that, some said lilac, some said blue-ish, and some said grey.
Sideline 1. The adults were the parents of the children. I showed some prism experiments as part of a parents' evening. Please take my word for it I did not peddle an ideology outside the experiment, and here's why. I have found two very sore spots in many Waldorf parents. They suffered through their sports lessons at school, and they believe science is a hard, cold world to which they have no possible relation. I've managed to get them to a new view of competitive sports and their value for children, and with a few simple, low-tech experiments, I've managed to warm them back towards a positive view of science. And it does have a lot to do with being able to think the phenomena through for oneself.
So, with the sharpness I'm both delighting in AND fearing, your distinction between the emphasis on thinking for oneself and resting on the bases of progressive cultural achievement is right on the nail. In my own case, I wish I could get across to you how exciting it is for an arts graduate to begin to get a bridge across to science - though I acknowledge I can't too far without mathematizing beyond my abilities.
Sideline 2. The students did hypothesise the forces of the siphon for themselves based on other simple experiments we'd done the day before. I'm glad you agree the equation isn't the main event.
Back to Goethe and Newton, in relation to the scandal I caused other onlookers by not knowing enough about Newton's experiments: the students got a science lesson, not a history lesson. Their lessons and bookwork contain no references to either gentleman, nor did I set up any conflict. I did refer to the refraction of differing frequencies, and indicated that they would learn more about that in the coming years. And they did see the narrower beam producing the spectrum without the "white middle".
Again: the advantage of the prism work AT THIS STAGE is that it allowed the students to order the phenomena entirely within the range of their thinking. This is really the fundamental divide, isn't it - and you have referenced it very exactly in relation to thinking and/or culture.
I take it your epistemological credo (great that it could fit across a T-shirt) includes the achievements of culture as empirical, observable givens in the concrete world? So that, "Go and find out what Richard Dawkins thinks about genetic Darwinism" is at least approximable to "Go and do genetics." This isn't a chess move by the way: I don't have a problem accepting that. Otherwise I'd be nailed to saying, "Don't drive that car until you've built one yourself". Except there's a lot of value in that approach, too...It's exactly what Henry Ford did, and where would we all be without him? (Watching the sunset over cherry blossoms at the Kyoto agreement, perhaps..)
The bit about you can't be expected to do better in an Anthro environment was a good hard slug. I've spat out a couple of teeth, watched a couple of Sylvester Stallone movies, drunk 6 raw eggs every day, and I'm coming back in for more: I think most of what I'm posting up I have to attribute to my own stupidity.
But the move I think you SHOULD take a little more time on is whether there is a distinction to be made between "knowing" and "knowing in learning". My whole understanding of Waldorf education, at least at this stage in my experience, rests in there somewhere, and I suspect that yours does too. We can come at sect, cult, religion, academic underachievement, hidden agendas any old time.
Did you know the famous wax crayons were only "invented" a number of years after the Waldorf school started, and after Steiner's death? I think they probably drew with anything they could get their hands on before then...
I'm trying to learn to take one issue at a time: there's a whole pile of stuff pouring into my in-box.
Good wishes to all!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 23:47:05 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
Paul Georghiades wrote:
)
)So, with the sharpness I'm both delighting in AND fearing, your distinction
)between the emphasis on thinking for oneself and resting on the bases of
)progressive cultural achievement is right on the nail. In my own case, I
)wish I could get across to you how exciting it is for an arts graduate to
)begin to get a bridge across to science - though I acknowledge I can't too
)far without mathematizing beyond my abilities.
G'day Paul,
can I recommend some books especially with reference to your discussion
about various atmospheric effects. This site
http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/resource/books.htm has complete details for a
dozen or so books. I particularly like Greenler's book "Rainbows halos and
glories" for its beautiful photographs and diagrams.
)
)Back to Goethe and Newton, in relation to the scandal I caused other
)onlookers by not knowing enough about Newton's experiments: the students
)got a science lesson, not a history lesson.
I was one of those on the sideline making a criticism. My criticism was not
meant to be about the history but about the fact that you were teaching an
optics lesson about prisms and you had accepted the Steiner line that Goethe
had something more important to say than what Newton and generations of
physicists since have had to say. I think that view is plainly false, and I
was concerned that the lesson was being taught in ignorance. It is not at
all clear to me that the students did get a science lesson any more than
students at a fundamentalist christian school who might be taught erroneous
things about the hsitory of life would be getting a science lesson. I may be
criticising you too harshly, and if I am I apologise. It seems to me that
you are trying hard to do a good job and for that I congratulate you, and I
am extremely pleased to read your posts here. I hope you can stay some
distance here, particularly on the topic of teaching science and related
issues.
)
)Again: the advantage of the prism work AT THIS STAGE is that it allowed the
)students to order the phenomena entirely within the range of their
)thinking. This is really the fundamental divide, isn't it - and you have
)referenced it very exactly in relation to thinking and/or culture.
It's not obvious to me what you mean by this. When you say order, do you
mean that some phenomena are bigger or better or more important than others?
)
)I take it your epistemological credo (great that it could fit across a
)T-shirt) includes the achievements of culture as empirical, observable
)givens in the concrete world? So that, "Go and find out what Richard
)Dawkins thinks about genetic Darwinism" is at least approximable to "Go and
)do genetics."
That's not quite right in my view. Something more akin to "go an find out
what the current consensus among those apparently in authority in genetics"
is approximately equvalent to becoming able to do genetics.
This isn't a chess move by the way: I don't have a problem accepting that.
Otherwise I'd be nailed to saying, "Don't drive that car until you've built
one yourself". Except there's a lot of value in that approach, too...It's
exactly what Henry Ford did, and where would we all be without him?
(Watching the sunset over cherry blossoms at the Kyoto agreement, perhaps..)
Driving a car is a bit different to teaching others about cars. This depends
on the level and it is quite clear that a primary school teacher cannot be
expected to be expert in a wide variety of disciplines.
)
)The bit about you can't be expected to do better in an Anthro environment
)was a good hard slug. I've spat out a couple of teeth, watched a couple of
)Sylvester Stallone movies, drunk 6 raw eggs every day, and I'm coming back
)in for more: I think most of what I'm posting up I have to attribute to my
)own stupidity.
Well said!!! As I have tried to say above please come back for more.
)
)But the move I think you SHOULD take a little more time on is whether there
)is a distinction to be made between "knowing" and "knowing in learning". My
)whole understanding of Waldorf education, at least at this stage in my
)experience, rests in there somewhere, and I suspect that yours does too. We
)can come at sect, cult, religion, academic underachievement, hidden agendas
)any old time.
I agree there is some distinction here, although it is not simple. As an
example, many engineers these days come from very theoretical and
mathematically based degree programs, as opposed to very hands on and
laboratory based programs. They might not mix cement, or do the actual
construction of automobiles or bridges, nevertheless they can still design
these things. I hasten to add that I am not proposing this as an ideal state
of affairs. I believe in understanding through doing, and by having real
physical contact with stuff and how it works and fails.
How about applying the knowing through learning to what is actually known
and understood by physicists as opposed to making some near irrelevancy of
Steiner's the central point?
See you, Peter
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 22:28:18 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?/positives&negatives - yes please!!!
as a recent departee from the cult in question, i agree with all your
points. i would really love a list of the negatives.
it's always so amazing to see words put to all those weird feelings
that hanging out with waldorfians bring up...
m
On May 19, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Ldenike aol.com wrote:
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
) Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
) here to get your 30-day free supply.
) http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOB9Bda/Nexiderm
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)
) Serena,
) What makes you say that I don't think there is anything good about
) Waldorf? That's not true. I think there are some good things (which I
) will list quickly in a second!), but that the negatives outweight the
) positives.
) Here is what I think is of value in Waldorf. Let me preface this list
) by saying that these things are not peculiar to Waldorf: they can and
) are done elsewhere. But they are associated with Waldorf:
) * it's good that the children play outside almost every day, so they
) can get fresh air and exercise and don't spend all their time at
) desks.
) * the art supplies are really good quality. Good paper, good paint,
) good beeswax crayons (though the smell of beeswax is forever ruined
) for me.) In the upper grades, I think Waldorf students do get good
) technique instruction in art
) * hands-on activities to augment what they learn in math, etc. My
) daughter did spend time throwing around a beanbag and counting by 2s,
) 3s, etc. and I think it was a good thing to do
) * the snacks the schools provide are usually healthy. It's nice to
) have an emphasis on keeping the body healthy, though I could argue
) that is countermanded by the Waldorf resistance to immunizations, etc.
) Apparently, it's good to drink organic juice but not good to be
) prevented from getting whooping cough.
) * the community feeling that tons of "screentime" is not good for
) kids. Sadly, this good instinct and policy often translates into
) parents and kids feeling guilty if they do allow their kids to watch
) some TV and movies.
) * many nice people who are well intentioned and mean well.
) Want a list of the negatives?
) Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 19:15:46 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: Fwd: Upcoming Downtime
)To: dan dandugan.com
)From: Topica (tex app.topica.com)
)Subject: Upcoming Downtime
)Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 15:58:14 -0700
)
)Dear List Owner,
)
)Please note that we have scheduled system downtime for Saturday,
)June 4th to perform important upgrades to our system. We are sending
)you this notice to give you the appropriate lead time to make any
)changes to your programs you deem necessary.
)
)During this downtime, you will not be able to access your
)account, but subscription forms and unsubscribe links will be
)functional and all scheduled email messages will be queued and
)delivered shortly after service is restored.
)
)We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you for using
)Topica. We value your feedback, if you have any questions or
)concerns, please send us an email at: ownersupport topica.com.
)
)
)Sincerely,
)
)Topica Support Team
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1759
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Thanks Akua and &"otherness"
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: The popularity of Waldorf schools
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
By lioncell gmx.net
Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By Yarngal webtv.net
Thanks, Lisa (on popularity of Waldorf) for reality check
By Yarngal webtv.net
RE: Steiner students "set good example"
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: The popularity of Waldorf schools
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By ldenike aol.com
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
RE: The popularity of Waldorf schools
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By motormouth punkAss.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By motormouth punkAss.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:15:02 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Thanks Akua and &"otherness"
Hi Yarngal,
I do understand what you mean by exclusion etc due to mental illness.
Generally mental illness is treated differently than other physical
manifestations of illness. The effects in a cult can and usually are
worse because you are a lot more vulnerable. A boy who lived at "our"
home displayed severe symptoms of distress such as repeatedly cutting
himself. I guess the description would nowadays fit those of borderline.
This boy was not only excluded by some of the kids, he was constantly
mocked in sometimes open, sometimes more subtle ways. The woman in
charge of the place, let me once again refer to her as Mrs. X, saw what
happened (I had good reasons to watch what she was doing) but never once
interferred, I suppose it was another way of allowing karma to play out.
His case might have had more devastating consequences but Mrs. X's
refusal to put a stop to harrassment / bullying certainly was a systemic
one, not once did she interfere with any kind of harrassment including
threatening ones. For children suffering from serious emotional distress
that approach can indeed by devastating, it is quite likely it led to
further chronification of his suffering. Children may be more vulnerable
than adults but those with any kind mental disorder who choose New
Age/SWA circles it may be just as problematic. There is no need for open
discrimination of mentally ill people, "subtle" forms often prove to be
much more effective ways of achieving the goal. If someone does not have
any psychological problems before joining, it may well be s/he has them
ones arriving inside.
Akua
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:17:44 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: The popularity of Waldorf schools
Lisa wrote:
"Yarngal,
Waldorf may be mainstream in your neck of the woods, but here (in the
Baltimore-DC area), they sure are not!
(snip)
"Whether or not something is "mainstream" depends largely on context. In
Viroque, Wisconsin, Waldorf is the norm. In places where there are not
large communities of Anthros, it is far, far from the norm."
(snip)
I think it is not just dependent on whether something is exclusively
labeled Steiner, Waldorf or Anthroposophy, I think it also has a lot to
do with its mainstream appeal in regard to its concepts. Anthroposophy
as a distinctly identifiable ideology may not be *that* widespread in
Viroqua as it may seem (difficult to judge, I do not live there) but its
underlying concepts may easily be compatible with those a great many
people living in the area may uphold / sympathize with. The majority of
Germans still have little or no in-depth knowledge on anthroposophy but
it is likely they have been in contact with some of its teachings that
appeal to them / are compatible with their own beliefs / widely held
ones. It may not seem to be of particular interest if, I quote, "people
want to stuff an ox horn with cow poop and plant it when there is a full
moon outside" but living in Germany where organic farming incl.
bio-dynamics is not only viewed as an acceptable form of farming but
also officially supported with govt. money etc, discussing these issues
is key in exposing (the mainstreaming of) bio-dynamic absurdities. If
parents are forced to pay for expensive organic food at kindergartens
and schools (occasionally or regularly) they did not choose for its
anthro / New Age background it is important to document / expose how
mainstream SWA's concepts have become. And I certainly do not want our
children exposed to anthroposophic teachings at public schools (overtly
or covertly). If SWA did not have a broad basis of mainstream appeal in
this country it would not be such a success story, it thus need not
explicitely state SWA. In Germany anthroposophy's various assets
certainly have arrived within mainstream for quite some time now and
continues to make progress. In varying degrees this surely also is the
case in (parts of) other western countries including the UK and the US.
Akua
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:17:12 +0200
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Why aren't those kids in class?
Serena wrote:
"No, not intending to flatter you at all: it's just very obvious that
you are highly intelligent. "
Intelligence is a matter of relativity depending on what you need to
master. Under the circumstances I described considerations in regard to
intelligence were fairly irrelevant because you were expected to do
poorly, those responsible at the anthro home did little to alter that
(my take is they worsened matters) and the teachers' indifference added
to exactly that and that certainly was the case for all of us with one
single exception, a boy in our group who was the woman's (in charge)
special darling, always praised for every little thing he did, never saw
him being punished, and vive la suprise, he seemed to thrive academically.
Intelligence now only matters in regard to the reaction you'd get when
complaining about the continuity of what happened to us and the lack of
interest given the matter by social services etc.
Serena again:
"Our of curiosity: what are the anthro homes for children who do *not*
have developmental difficulties? I've never heard of them and would
like to know more. Or have I misunderstood what you were saying?"
Depends what you call developmental difficulties, deficits in the
social, psychological, intellectual, physical or emotional area. But
then you might be hitting something. In a way anthroposophists generally
seem to be under the impression something must be wrong with a child,
especially children like "us". None of the children I stayed with been
intellectually challenged in ways which required special ed classes, a
fact which is highlighted by our attending a regular public schools.
Back then it was a lot easier to get to push children into special ed
than it is now, theoretically that is. Other than that the emotional
problems many of us struggled with due to family history etc could
easily been settled in a loving and caring environment. On top of that
reading f.e. was never encouraged. Not only does punishment for lack of
reading skills not encourage reading, the same applies to being forced
to read the "right" material (I hated fairy tales). There was no library
we had access to and none of us ever sat somewhere reading (their own)
books, at a place which housed 40+ children and youth ranging in age
from roughly 5 to 19 that is worth mentioning. You would assume as place
which is unable to achieve so little for the children they "care" for
would have less children referred to them in the future. The opposite is
true. The more problems these children developed over the years, the
more likely it was for them to be kept at such places. Social services
have a tendency to see the child and its family settings almost
exclusively at the heart of the problem, and have shown alarmingly
little interest in investigating other possible factors, a fact which
has always worked in favour of such facilities. It also seems little
troubling to social services that children with little academic
achievement will inevitably find limited job opportunities in the
future, not to mention how difficult it is for children to make up for
these deficits in the future. The systematic mix of abuse, academic
neglect, indifference on behalf of teachers and other authorities alike
has had devastating consequences for quite a number of us and that's a
given fact.
Akua
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 09:17:03 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Lisa and Everyone, I like your posts here and I am NOT wanting to start
an argument. Anyway, If WE is "fringe" then why are all these new media
outlets, tv and print, all over the world writing GLOWING reports and
even PROMOTING Waldorf schools? I am not defending Waldorf, but I think
these reporters and their news outlets are certainly biased in favor of
the new age because many people are now attracted to new age beliefs
and the belief in karma and reincarnation.
I see a large rebellion against Judeo-Christian thought among most
college educated people, despite the fact that Bush won the US elections
through the support of the Religious Right, which IS now more on the
"fringe".
So most secular people are embracing new age beliefs and taking yoga
classes and are doing Eastern meditation for their "holistic health" .
It has hit the mainstream and that is why these news reporters and the
media who employ them know they will make MONEY by airing and printing
these types of stories.
It is sad the news media doesn't engage in critical thinking and just
wants to air what appeals to the most people.
So with the local news station PROMOTING the Waldorf schools without
mentioning Anthroposophy or Rudolf Steiner, I am sure many parents
will "check it out" as a result of that primetime news PROMOTION of
Waldorf schools.
It was free advertising to the Waldorf schools. Don't we just wish all
this new age stuff would just stay on the fringe? But in REALITY new age
is one of the fastest growing religions and the more the Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues continue to alienate people, the more
the new age movement will grow.
Best Wishes and with respect, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 09:28:49 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Thanks, Lisa (on popularity of Waldorf) for reality check
Thanks Lisa, for your great reply about the popularity of Waldorf. Yes
in this area of SW Wisconsin Waldorf is now popular and at least well
tolerated, but I believe you that in other areas, nobody has even heard
of Waldorf. I am just going by how it is in this area. I have lived in
other parts of the USA and coming here was the very first time I heard
about Waldorf Education.
I didn't hear about Rudolf Steiner until a friend did some vital
research into Waldorf, so you are right. Also thanks for sharing from
the perspective of a news reporter doing the obligatory "human interest"
story about the "cool alternative school".
I just wish the news reports weren't so one-sided and act like
"everything is so positive!" when it comes to their human interest and
"education" stories!
Do many news reporters even bother to ask groups like PLANS about WE?
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:56:59 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner students "set good example"
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Barnaby --
)
) I see that you have not found any examples of private schools that
) accepted both Catholic and Protestant students before 1954, the
) founding of Glencraig Special Schools (Camphill).
I don't think that's necessary. For the last time: Camphill schools are
anthroposophical, therefore religious, therefore not non-sectarian
schools. Maybe that's why journalists writing on integrated education
don't mention Camphill or Waldorf.
) The "All Children Together" movement sounds great; however 1974
) is twenty years after 1954.
So you'd never heard of it before, despite living in Northern Ireland at
the time it began its work. I thought not. It's done far more to secure
a peaceful future in Northern Ireland than Waldorf and Camphill, despite
the latter's twenty-year head-start.
) This discussion is a good example of the usual WC wish to denigrate
) WE merely for the satisfaction of denigration -- without a factual
) base...That is, if facts matter at all to you.
Those are ad-hominem arguments and particularly silly ones coming from
someone who had never heard of the main integrated-education
organisation in Northern Ireland, nor the physically-dangerous
campaigning of the NASUWT on this issue, and who carelessly implied that
the political situation in Northern Ireland in 1954 was the same as in
1974.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 08:41:01 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: The popularity of Waldorf schools
Also, "mainstream" is relative. I think Americans would be astounded by how
mainstream Waldorf and anthroposophy are in Germany compared to the middle
class American communities most critics live in. (Except, of course, for
California, where there is apparently a Waldorf school on every other
corner.)
Diana
Lisa:
)Waldorf may be mainstream in your neck of the woods, but here (in the
)Baltimore-DC area), they sure are not!
Akua:
)I think it is not just dependent on whether something is exclusively
)labeled Steiner, Waldorf or Anthroposophy, I think it also has a lot to
)do with its mainstream appeal in regard to its concepts.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:43:06 -0400
From: ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Yarngal, disagreeing or challenging something someone else says is not starting an argument. It is the purpose of this list!
I can tell you why newspapers, etc. are doing more stories about Waldorf: because it IS fringe, and therefore, interesting and different.
You have probably heard the old saying that if a dog bites a man, it is not considered a story for most newspapers, magazines, radio or TV stations. Why? Because it is not news. Dogs bite people. (I am not talking about cases where a dog mauls a kid to death. That certainly is news, of the worst kind!)
But if a man bites a dog, then news it is.
Waldorf is, in a way, a man bites dog story. For instance, Waldorf's "teach kids to write before they learn to read" is a very intriguing and interesting to most people, reporters included. That makes it a story. Ditto the fact that Waldorf schools generally don't use computers and other technology, and preach against TV watching. All out of the ordinary.
You ask if it bugs me that these superficial stories come off as free promotions for Waldorf. You bet it does! It irritates me beyond belief, not because I am so anti Waldorf but because it is sloppy reporting. These kinds of stories provide only the quickest snapshot of a day or a week at a Waldorf school. (In the name of fairness, most newspapers stories that we read on a daily basis are on the same superficial level. It's not juststories about Waldorf. It's the nature of the beast: reporters have deadlines and not every paper has the resources to do an indepth piece.) I own up to the fact that I did my own piece of Waldorf fluff way back when. (In fact, that is how I came to learn about Waldorf.)
The public needs to learn to be discriminating, to ask question and use critical thinking skills when they read stories in the paper or see them on TV.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Sent: Fri, 20 May 2005 09:17:03 -0500
Subject: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOrq7Ba/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa and Everyone, I like your posts here and I am NOT wanting to start
an argument. Anyway, If WE is "fringe" then why are all these new media
outlets, tv and print, all over the world writing GLOWING reports and
even PROMOTING Waldorf schools? I am not defending Waldorf, but I think
these reporters and their news outlets are certainly biased in favor of
the new age because many people are now attracted to new age beliefs
and the belief in karma and reincarnation.
I see a large rebellion against Judeo-Christian thought among most
college educated people, despite the fact that Bush won the US elections
through the support of the Religious Right, which IS now more on the
"fringe".
So most secular people are embracing new age beliefs and taking yoga
classes and are doing Eastern meditation for their "holistic health" .
It has hit the mainstream and that is why these news reporters and the
media who employ them know they will make MONEY by airing and printing
these types of stories.
It is sad the news media doesn't engage in critical thinking and just
wants to air what appeals to the most people.
So with the local news station PROMOTING the Waldorf schools without
mentioning Anthroposophy or Rudolf Steiner, I am sure many parents
will "check it out" as a result of that primetime news PROMOTION of
Waldorf schools.
It was free advertising to the Waldorf schools. Don't we just wish all
this new age stuff would just stay on the fringe? But in REALITY new age
is one of the fastest growing religions and the more the Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues continue to alienate people, the more
the new age movement will grow.
Best Wishes and with respect, Yarngal
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOrq7Bf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New
threads are always welcome.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:27:56 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
I am sitting in my office with a standard college text (and notes) on
philosophies of education. No mention of Steiner or Waldorf. Not being
recognized by authorities in the field would define a movement as fringe
IMHO.
----- Original Message -----
From: "yarngal yarngal" (yarngal webtv.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 10:17 AM
Subject: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOBvpHa/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa and Everyone, I like your posts here and I am NOT wanting to start
an argument. Anyway, If WE is "fringe" then why are all these new media
outlets, tv and print, all over the world writing GLOWING reports and
even PROMOTING Waldorf schools? I am not defending Waldorf, but I think
these reporters and their news outlets are certainly biased in favor of
the new age because many people are now attracted to new age beliefs
and the belief in karma and reincarnation.
I see a large rebellion against Judeo-Christian thought among most
college educated people, despite the fact that Bush won the US elections
through the support of the Religious Right, which IS now more on the
"fringe".
So most secular people are embracing new age beliefs and taking yoga
classes and are doing Eastern meditation for their "holistic health" .
It has hit the mainstream and that is why these news reporters and the
media who employ them know they will make MONEY by airing and printing
these types of stories.
It is sad the news media doesn't engage in critical thinking and just
wants to air what appeals to the most people.
So with the local news station PROMOTING the Waldorf schools without
mentioning Anthroposophy or Rudolf Steiner, I am sure many parents
will "check it out" as a result of that primetime news PROMOTION of
Waldorf schools.
It was free advertising to the Waldorf schools. Don't we just wish all
this new age stuff would just stay on the fringe? But in REALITY new age
is one of the fastest growing religions and the more the Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues continue to alienate people, the more
the new age movement will grow.
Best Wishes and with respect, Yarngal
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOBvpHf/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 01:38:12 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Any basic course in pedagogies will include both Waldorf and Montessori
approaches. That is hardly unusual and has been the state of affairs, in
Europe at least, for the last twenty years. That no university touches
Steiner is rather a token of pride given that the garbage that
universities teach has NOTHING to do with education.
nanette blank wrote:
)
) I am sitting in my office with a standard college text (and notes) on
) philosophies of education. No mention of Steiner or Waldorf. Not being
) recognized by authorities in the field would define a movement as fringe
) IMHO.
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "yarngal yarngal" (yarngal webtv.net)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 10:17 AM
) Subject: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
)
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
) reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
) http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOBvpHa/Nexiderm
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) Lisa and Everyone, I like your posts here and I am NOT wanting to start
) an argument. Anyway, If WE is "fringe" then why are all these new media
) outlets, tv and print, all over the world writing GLOWING reports and
) even PROMOTING Waldorf schools? I am not defending Waldorf, but I think
) these reporters and their news outlets are certainly biased in favor of
) the new age because many people are now attracted to new age beliefs
) and the belief in karma and reincarnation.
) I see a large rebellion against Judeo-Christian thought among most
) college educated people, despite the fact that Bush won the US elections
) through the support of the Religious Right, which IS now more on the
) "fringe".
)
) So most secular people are embracing new age beliefs and taking yoga
) classes and are doing Eastern meditation for their "holistic health" .
) It has hit the mainstream and that is why these news reporters and the
) media who employ them know they will make MONEY by airing and printing
) these types of stories.
) It is sad the news media doesn't engage in critical thinking and just
) wants to air what appeals to the most people.
) So with the local news station PROMOTING the Waldorf schools without
) mentioning Anthroposophy or Rudolf Steiner, I am sure many parents
) will "check it out" as a result of that primetime news PROMOTION of
) Waldorf schools.
) It was free advertising to the Waldorf schools. Don't we just wish all
) this new age stuff would just stay on the fringe? But in REALITY new age
) is one of the fastest growing religions and the more the Christian
) churches and Jewish synagogues continue to alienate people, the more
) the new age movement will grow.
) Best Wishes and with respect, Yarngal
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without painful injections with Nexiderm SP.
) Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to reduce wrinkles by 68% Click
) here to get your 30-day free supply.
) http://click.topica.com/caadvf5b1dkiGbOBvpHf/Nexiderm
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) ==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how
) basic.
) New threads are always welcome.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 01:53:00 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: RE: The popularity of Waldorf schools
I simply wonder what the "meat of the matter" is.
I wonder if colour is of no significance, but a theory on socialization
in this year’s sociology course is significant. Should WE be less
colourful and more standardized? Are the teachers well intentioned
however cruelly incompetent. I think the duty rests on each parent to
define for themselves what it is that they are looking for for
themselves. Perhaps the only answer many come up with is “I need to be
angry with someone and WE will suit my needs.”
So charming, so old fashioned, so unlike those ugly public schools with
their hideous cement block walls and primary colored posters all over
the place! How quaint! But it's not the meat of the matter.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 23:03:30 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
On May 20, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Why Not wrote:
)
) Any basic course in pedagogies will include both Waldorf and Montessori
) approaches. That is hardly unusual and has been the state of affairs,
) in
) Europe at least, for the last twenty years.
not true. in sweden for instance, it is only included as an example of
private "fringe" schools. it is very clear to most that it is a cult
or a religion in the making.
in america there are teachers and principals that have phd's in early
childhood education that do not know about waldorf or rudolf steiner.
he was no piaget, he was more of an edgar cayce ; ) - another
charismatic figure in history that will not be studied in medical
school just because he was a proponent of eating three almonds a day
and other "alternative healthcare" ideas.
it is a cult, a cult - A CULT - and the "small little tiny miniscule
group out in the sf area" is growing and growing and growing and we
are in every town where there is a waldorf school and we are all
wounded because of how our children were mistreated or angry for how we
were duped and lied to and basically ripped off by these schools - and
we might not "make waves" on an individual level but we are organizing
and we will "out" this organization - it's just a matter of time.
*fist in the air*
m. rosso
) That no university touches
) Steiner is rather a token of pride given that the garbage that
) universities teach has NOTHING to do with education.
)
ps - HA!
)
)
) nanette blank wrote:
))
)) I am sitting in my office with a standard college text (and notes) on
)) philosophies of education. No mention of Steiner or Waldorf. Not being
)) recognized by authorities in the field would define a movement as
)) fringe
)) IMHO.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 23:22:40 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
speaking of which - why are dr seuss books not good for the children?
anybody?
m
On May 19, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Ldenike aol.com wrote:
) Even so, by the time my daughter reached fourth grade at Waldorf,
) there were still kids who were struggling to read basic Dr.
) Seuss-level books. I am daily grateful that Olivia learned to read on
) her own at the age of four. Had she not had that skill, I honestly
) doubt she would be as successful academically as she is today.
) Delaying reading is a huge mistake.
) Lisa
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1760
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By motormouth punkAss.com
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By motormouth punkAss.com
re: purpose of education/was "Is Waldorf ed fringe?"
By Ldenike aol.com
Is WE "fringe"?
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By jfk3 sprint.ca
RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Dan Dugan helps train UK Waldorf Teachers!
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:53:58 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
Peter Farrell wrote:
) G'day Paul,
) can I recommend some books especially with reference to your
) discussion about various atmospheric effects. This site
) http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/resource/books.htm has complete
) details for a dozen or so books. I particularly like Greenler's book
) "Rainbows halos and glories" for its beautiful photographs and
) diagrams.
I love that site: there are lots of beautiful photos throughout. When I
ws kid, I saw what looked like a small rainbow high in the sky; a couple
of years ago, thanks to that site, I discovered it was probably a
circumzenithal arc.
http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/halo/cza.htm
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 12:05:59 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
G'day Barnaby,
If you love the site you'll love Greenler's book. I've looked at a few of
the other books recommended there as well and they were great too. The point
is that the colours and appearance of the sky during storms and so on is
well understood by modern optics. The understanding has grown as a direct
descendent of Newton's work.
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:24:06 EDT
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Well, let me assure you that most education courses/tracks in the States
either does not mention Steiner/Waldorf, or does so in a very cusory way.
Lisa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:32:38 EDT
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
They are good for children. Children love them and the books make them want
to read.
Lisa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 13:31:01 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
I never heard that one. Could you elaborate?
----- Original Message -----
From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
speaking of which - why are dr seuss books not good for the children?
anybody?
m
On May 19, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Ldenike aol.com wrote:
) Even so, by the time my daughter reached fourth grade at Waldorf,
) there were still kids who were struggling to read basic Dr.
) Seuss-level books. I am daily grateful that Olivia learned to read on
) her own at the age of four. Had she not had that skill, I honestly
) doubt she would be as successful academically as she is today.
) Delaying reading is a huge mistake.
) Lisa
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caaduFNb1dkiGbOBvpHf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 14:06:30 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
you never heard that one? i'm sure there's someone here from "the other
camp" that knows and could explain it.
at our mom & tot program a couple of years ago i heard some moms
talking about that their three year olds liked having dr seuss read to
them and as i turned to join the discussion, the teacher furrowed her
brow and said that dr seuss is not appropriate for the children. she
then showed us what was recommended (a lot of elsa beskow of
course...).
none of the moms were astute enough to ask WHY. another parent took me
aside and said that she had heard that dr seuss wasn't recommended
because it has nonsensical characters and words and that it might
promote early reading.
but i would love to hear it from a "believers" pov.
m
On May 21, 2005, at 1:31 PM, Nanette Blank wrote:
)
) I never heard that one. Could you elaborate?
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 11:22 PM
) Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
)
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
) http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) speaking of which - why are dr seuss books not good for the children?
) anybody?
)
) m
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 14:05:48 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
I actually went to a nearby college and checked the idexes on the basic ed
philosophy course. At the time( about 5 yrs ago) I want to show the
recruitment committee at my school how much public education needed to be
done.
Along with the educational phychologist ( ex. Piaget, Maslow, Skinner),
there were individuals who began different movement (ex. Montessori, Holt,
Neil, Rosseasu) but not WE or Stiener. I reported to the committee that the
school had a long way to go to educating the community and that ASWNA should
do more to get into standard texts and college courses. I know nothing about
the Europe, but in the U.S. it is outside the mainstream, therefore "fringe"
I am not surprised that you believe that everyone studies Steiner and WE in
a basic pedogogy class. (Homeschoolers are often surprised when I tell them
that Charolette Mason is not in a standard figure either.) And like a cult I
found that teachers at the school knew alot about WE and Steiner, but little
about current studies in best practice.
Interestingly, I find nothing wrong with being outside the mainstream. (I
only experience the mainstream word on visits to my family :) My
disagreement with Waldorf is that the education is often lacking because of
inherent problems that continue in the school. Many people are paying for
education and not getting sound education because of the anthroposphical and
Stiener baggage that keeps school from improving.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 14:19:02 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
That is interesting.
I have to admit that watercolor paintings making me happy (very Waldorf).
But I also have a soft spot for charcoal illustration ( awfully black for
Waldorf(smile)). I think I may have blatantly ignored some advice telling
stories to young children instead of reading. I tend to do thing like that
when the advice is unfounded and lacks common sense.
----- Original Message -----
From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
you never heard that one? i'm sure there's someone here from "the other
camp" that knows and could explain it.
at our mom & tot program a couple of years ago i heard some moms
talking about that their three year olds liked having dr seuss read to
them and as i turned to join the discussion, the teacher furrowed her
brow and said that dr seuss is not appropriate for the children. she
then showed us what was recommended (a lot of elsa beskow of
course...).
none of the moms were astute enough to ask WHY. another parent took me
aside and said that she had heard that dr seuss wasn't recommended
because it has nonsensical characters and words and that it might
promote early reading.
but i would love to hear it from a "believers" pov.
m
On May 21, 2005, at 1:31 PM, Nanette Blank wrote:
)
) I never heard that one. Could you elaborate?
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 11:22 PM
) Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
)
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
) http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) speaking of which - why are dr seuss books not good for the children?
) anybody?
)
) m
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 19:27:31 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
A cult?
Why are we educating ourselves? If we answer”To get jobs”, then we need
only look at the high number of unemployed in the world to find that
this is classic class warfare. No, education has to serve a higher
principal than simply outbidding fellow workers and eventually
exploiting the third world. From an anthroposophical perspective
education exists to allow people to be free. Free of conventional
thought and present paradigm. Instead of continuing to exalt the
intellect, free people see the intellect as one of many faculties we as
HUMANS enjoy, thanks to God or evolution. Is this “alternative”?
Absolutely. Is it radical? One would hope so. Dangerous? What isn’t
dangerous in life. Is WE aim to promote human development? Definitely.
Is WE a cult or religion? No, but it is built on a philosophy, or call
it religion, that is very influential. (Anthroposophy has to be
available to parents and parents have to be open to receive it.) Is it
"fringe"? Sure. But then all “approaches” are built on preconceptions,
some consciously, most unconsciously. Every PH.D, every respectable
finding, is built on prepositions that we take for granted. WE wants to
question the absolute nature of those prepositions, because only then
are students free. How can any modern person criticize this modern
thought?! Finally, about being “duped” into going to Waldorf: Grades and
other outward recognition are irrelevant if they enslave students.
Socrates was trying to say that while they were burning him to the
stake!
motormama wrote:
)
)
) On May 20, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Why Not wrote:
)
) )
) ) Any basic course in pedagogies will include both Waldorf and Montessori
) ) approaches. That is hardly unusual and has been the state of affairs,
) ) in
) ) Europe at least, for the last twenty years.
)
) not true. in sweden for instance, it is only included as an example of
) private "fringe" schools. it is very clear to most that it is a cult
) or a religion in the making.
) in america there are teachers and principals that have phd's in early
) childhood education that do not know about waldorf or rudolf steiner.
) he was no piaget, he was more of an edgar cayce ; ) - another
) charismatic figure in history that will not be studied in medical
) school just because he was a proponent of eating three almonds a day
) and other "alternative healthcare" ideas.
)
) it is a cult, a cult - A CULT - and the "small little tiny miniscule
) group out in the sf area" is growing and growing and growing and we
) are in every town where there is a waldorf school and we are all
) wounded because of how our children were mistreated or angry for how we
) were duped and lied to and basically ripped off by these schools - and
) we might not "make waves" on an individual level but we are organizing
) and we will "out" this organization - it's just a matter of time.
)
) *fist in the air*
) m. rosso
)
) ) That no university touches
) ) Steiner is rather a token of pride given that the garbage that
) ) universities teach has NOTHING to do with education.
) )
)
) ps - HA!
)
)
)
) )
) )
) ) nanette blank wrote:
) ))
) )) I am sitting in my office with a standard college text (and notes) on
) )) philosophies of education. No mention of Steiner or Waldorf. Not being
) )) recognized by authorities in the field would define a movement as
) )) fringe
) )) IMHO.
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 15:50:37 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
i'm sorry but after deep immersion in the cult i had to back out - the
"fodder for the cannons" mentality that the teachers had vs the
children and even more - the parents is frightening. we are all there
to serve a purpose - to get new converts.
only funny thing is that if it WAS a philosophy or even a religion then
the anthros would actually be able to relay some sort of knowledge or
information - now you couldn't even get a simple answer to a simple
question because "steiner is difficult". (accompanied with a patient
"holier than thou" smile - my favorite)
a waldorf school is stifling young children's urge to learn, they
scare them with gnomies and various incarnations of the devil instead
of helping them to learn about the world around them.
it's all very very sad.
parents do have a feeling that there is something weird going on but
then they look at the other parents and think, well the Ryan's they
send their kids to that school, he's a teacher at a regular school,
she's intelligent, in academia - there is no way that it could be a
cult if they send their kids... and the Ryan's look at the Smiths and
see that well, we think it's a bit weird but the Smiths send their kids
there and ... they are "normal" so it must just be my paranoia....
humans, fortunately or unfortunately, do assimilate to the strangest
situations very easily - and we forget that the waldorf concept of
"individuality" and "freedom" is not compatible with the original
meaning of those words.
there's more freedom in a public school classroom than in a lockstep
waldorf environment.
On May 21, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Why Not wrote:
)
) A cult?
)
) Why are we educating ourselves? If we answer”To get jobs”, then we
) need
) only look at the high number of unemployed in the world to find that
) this is classic class warfare. No, education has to serve a higher
) principal than simply outbidding fellow workers and eventually
) exploiting the third world. From an anthroposophical perspective
) education exists to allow people to be free. Free of conventional
) thought and present paradigm. Instead of continuing to exalt the
) intellect, free people see the intellect as one of many faculties we as
) HUMANS enjoy, thanks to God or evolution. Is this “alternative”?
) Absolutely. Is it radical? One would hope so. Dangerous? What isn’t
) dangerous in life. Is WE aim to promote human development? Definitely.
) Is WE a cult or religion? No, but it is built on a philosophy, or call
) it religion, that is very influential. (Anthroposophy has to be
) available to parents and parents have to be open to receive it.) Is it
) "fringe"? Sure. But then all “approaches” are built on preconceptions,
) some consciously, most unconsciously. Every PH.D, every respectable
) finding, is built on prepositions that we take for granted. WE wants to
) question the absolute nature of those prepositions, because only then
) are students free. How can any modern person criticize this modern
) thought?! Finally, about being “duped” into going to Waldorf: Grades
) and
) other outward recognition are irrelevant if they enslave students.
) Socrates was trying to say that while they were burning him to the
) stake!
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 16:39:26 EDT
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: re: purpose of education/was "Is Waldorf ed fringe?"
Of course education should elevate the human mind and heart. Agreed. But in
the practical world, people need to be able to survive, which means that most
will need to be gainfully employed. That means being articulate, literate, and,
in many cases, knowledgeable. It means knowing about the world we live in and
about other cultures and "worlds," and by that, I don't mean the "beyond the
threshold" world of Rudy and company. It means being able to express oneself
at least adequately in writing and better than average (it would be hoped) in
discussions/talking/interviews.
It is only the very wealthy who don't have to worry about how their children
will make it in the world once they grow up. That group does not include (I
wouldn't think) most of us here. It sure doesn't include most people in the
world.
That is why we had a discussion here some months ago about how delaying
reading is a luxury that only very few kids can afford. Perhaps children from quite
well to do homes with educated parents would not be unduly harmed by holding
them back from reading until they are 9 years old. Do that to a child from a
deprived background, and you are really setting that young person up for
failure.
Lisa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 16:57:35 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Is WE "fringe"?
Thanks Lisa and All here for answering my posts. I truly am sorry that
your families and children have been deeply hurt in WE. Like you already
know, I was deeply hurt and re-traumatized (after earlier childhood
trauma to begin with).
Thanks, Lisa, for telling me that to challenge or disagree with others'
statements is NOT starting an argument and for reminding me about
needing critical thinking skills.
Now I understand your and others' statements about WE being "Fringe",
and how news media encourages reporting of "unique and different"
people, institutions, and events because that interests people and it
sells.
I still believe that new age CONCEPTS like organic farming and also
certain kinds of Eastern meditation techniques etc.., have become
mainstream.
In my own area there are Anthroposophic health care workers practicing
and appealing to some "mainstream" people, they don't call themselves
"Anthroposophic" but instead they use the Complementary and Alternative
health care" label, and that is quickly becoming very mainstream. I
understand many hospitals are "jumping on board" of the Complementary
and Alternative Medicine bandwagon due to it's popularity among
mainstream culture nowadays. If people want to use it, fine: as long as
it doesn't prevent people from getting effective and adequate health
care or cause any harm or death that's their choice, but I don't want
to be FORCED and pressured to use it! I don't want to be accused of "not
wanting to heal" when I refuse "alternative" medicine!
I found out from a local friend that many of the CAM doctors are also
Anthroposophic in their beliefs.
Thanks for your great posts here.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 23:16:19 -0400
From: "James" (jfk3 sprint.ca)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Why Not wrote:
"Socrates was trying to say that while they were burning him to the
stake!"
Are you serious???
James
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 08:25:51 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Newton & Goethe, round 247
Peter Farrell wrote:
)
) G'day Barnaby,
) If you love the site you'll love Greenler's book.
I'm sure I'll get round to it one day; thanks for the tip.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 10:37:30 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
I've heard that every morning every schoolchild in the United States is forced to stand up facing a piece of cloth and chant to it. Is this really true? Imagine what deep, unconscious indoctrination must be going on there. Or maybe the fish doesn't notice the water till after it's piled a few naked Iraqis into a pyramid, e-mailed the snapshots home to Mom, and found out the rest of the world wasn't laughing?
I don't like post-modern relativism either, but once you want to look at brainwashing, you have to look at what passes for the norm all around.
For clarity: it's love hate for me and the World's Biggest Cult. I love your poetry, your musics, I even have a soft spot for your penchant for having World Championships in sports only you compete in.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 10:21:12 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Dr. Seuss? I squirm to recall telling the parents of my class that I didn't
think the great man's works were great for kids - and then going back to
them (the works) and then going back to them (the parents) and saying I was
wrong, I DID like green eggs & ham. I still detest the artwork, but I love
the mix of spelling variations and humourous chaos - and struggling readers
especially don't get much that tickles them.
On delaying reading - most of Europe waits for formal literacy work until
the child is rising 7 years old. In this Waldorf Education is not especially
different. I'm not aware of an expectation that the children should be
further delayed after this age. In fact, at my Waldorf school we carry out
whole class assessments at age 8, precisely to be sure who needs extra
support. What's the normal reading start age in mainstream American
schooling?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nanette Blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 7:19 PM
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is clinically proven to
reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day free supply.
http://click.topica.com/caadslIb1dkiGbOVyTGa/Nexiderm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
That is interesting.
I have to admit that watercolor paintings making me happy (very Waldorf).
But I also have a soft spot for charcoal illustration ( awfully black for
Waldorf(smile)). I think I may have blatantly ignored some advice telling
stories to young children instead of reading. I tend to do thing like that
when the advice is unfounded and lacks common sense.
----- Original Message -----
From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
you never heard that one? i'm sure there's someone here from "the other
camp" that knows and could explain it.
at our mom & tot program a couple of years ago i heard some moms
talking about that their three year olds liked having dr seuss read to
them and as i turned to join the discussion, the teacher furrowed her
brow and said that dr seuss is not appropriate for the children. she
then showed us what was recommended (a lot of elsa beskow of
course...).
none of the moms were astute enough to ask WHY. another parent took me
aside and said that she had heard that dr seuss wasn't recommended
because it has nonsensical characters and words and that it might
promote early reading.
but i would love to hear it from a "believers" pov.
m
On May 21, 2005, at 1:31 PM, Nanette Blank wrote:
)
) I never heard that one. Could you elaborate?
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "motormama" (motormouth punkass.com)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 11:22 PM
) Subject: Re: Steiner students "set good example"
)
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
) Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
) http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
) -------------------------------------------------------------------
)
) speaking of which - why are dr seuss books not good for the children?
) anybody?
)
) m
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
http://click.topica.com/caadtaGb1dkiGbOBvpHf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPhb1dkiGbOVyTGf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 10:46:17 +0100
From: "Paul Georghiades" (paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk)
Subject: Dan Dugan helps train UK Waldorf Teachers!
The Waldorf Education students at Plymouth University get to listen to Dan Dugan's talk at the teacher-training college in America (Sunbridge, was it), and are invited to get on to Waldorf Critics. The aim is for them to reflect on which criticisms seem to them accurate - given that they have spent time in Waldorf schools during their 3 years' study - and on how they and the schools should improve in order to benefit from those criticisms.
Dan, if you want more info on that, come through on private e-mail & I'll give you contact details for the tutors on that course.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
==^================================================================
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 1761
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: *** SPAM *** RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By nmfoss2004 hotmail.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By nmfoss2004 hotmail.com
Re: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By Ldenike aol.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By kmlightseeker yahoo.com.au
Re: *** SPAM *** RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: *** SPAM *** RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By paul paulgeorghiades.wanadoo.co.uk
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By madpark nildram.co.uk
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: *** SPAM *** RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: *** SPAM *** RE: Aspects of the World's Biggest Cult
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner students "set good example"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Waldorf in the universities
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By motormouth punkAss.com
RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By kmlightseeker yahoo.com.au
Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
By motormouth punkAss.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 10:24:49 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
OhhhKay.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Why Not" (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 3:27 PM
Subject: RE: Is Waldorf Education "fringe"?
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take movies and games anywhere with a Free Playstation Portable!
http://click.topica.com/caadwPbb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A cult?
Why are we educating ourselves? If we answer"To get jobs", then we need
only look at the high number of unemployed in the world to find that
this is classic class warfare. No, education has to serve a higher
principal than simply outbidding fellow workers and eventually
exploiting the third world. From an anthroposophical perspective
education exists to allow people to be free. Free of conventional
thought and present paradigm. Instead of continuing to exalt the
intellect, free people see the intellect as one of many faculties we as
HUMANS enjoy, thanks to God or evolution. Is this "alternative"?
Absolutely. Is it radical? One would hope so. Dangerous? What isn't
dangerous in life. Is WE aim to promote human development? Definitely.
Is WE a cult or religion? No, but it is built on a philosophy, or call
it religion, that is very influential. (Anthroposophy has to be
available to parents and parents have to be open to receive it.) Is it
"fringe"? Sure. But then all "approaches" are built on preconceptions,
some consciously, most unconsciously. Every PH.D, every respectable
finding, is built on prepositions that we take for granted. WE wants to
question the absolute nature of those prepositions, because only then
are students free. How can any modern person criticize this modern
thought?! Finally, about being "duped" into going to Waldorf: Grades and
other outward recognition are irrelevant if they enslave students.
Socrates was trying to say that while they were burning him to the
stake!
motormama wrote:
)
)
) On May 20, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Why Not wr