return to WCA Archive Index
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 10:27:15 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
EAA15500; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 04:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id EAA27088; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 04:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id EAA15451 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 04:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708011144.EAA15451 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Human Rights
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:25:10 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
"Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that
shall
be given to their children."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 26 Part 3
Governments which limit that right by selective funding are
morally in
breach of that declaration; i.e. they limit that right to the
wealthy.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:57:04 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA07661; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA22936; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 12:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA01290 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 12:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708011917.MAA01290 lists1.best.com)
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Science & WE
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:09:58 +0000
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199708010148.SAA15323 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
On 31 Jul 97 , spike netshel.net wrote:
) Steve Premo Posted:
)
) )This is a limitation of science, but it is not something from
which
) )science must be redeemed.
) )
) I very much like your reply to Rigby's post. It mirrors my
thoughts and
) attitude toward scientific study and the scientific method (not
the one
) Anthroposophical/Steiner proponents adhere to). However, I am
wondering how
) you align your stated views on science with the Anthroposophical
stance
) toward science.
I don't align my attitude toward science with the Anthroposophic
stance.
I see them as quite different. I dislike the anthroposophic
stance, but
we all must make choices among available alternatives.
) You are choosing to educate your child in a school in which
) the teachers are aligned with Rigby in regard to their stance
toward modern
) science. Do you want your child to be taught pseudoscience or do
you
) believe this will not occur?
Of course I do not want my child to be taught pseudoscience.
Do I believe that this will not occur? Well, it's not supposed to.
My
son is just going into first grade, and I plan to be diligent
about that.
Some on this list would say that I was naive, based on their
experiences.
Others would say that those who teach anthroposophic concepts to
the kids
are the exception, not the rule. This is similar to public
schools, where
the teachers are not supposed to teach Christian-based
pseudoscience
(e.g., creationism), and those who do so are the exception. But
there are
a lot of teachers out there who believe in creationism.
Remember, we're talking here about grade school teachers, not
high-school
teachers who specialize in science.
Now, if I understand correctly, the main distinction between the
teaching
of science at Waldorf and at other schools is that at Waldorf,
they
emphasize the observation of natural phenomena without
preconceptions.
I have no problem with this; it is a valuable skill.
And it seems to me that in other schools, at the grade school
level, kids
are taught basic scientific concepts (e.g., the names of the
planets, the
composition of the interior of the earth, etc.), but the
scientific method
is not explained, generally, until later. Correct me if I'm wrong.
As
far as I know, this stuff is taught at Waldorf too.
) It is my experience that Anthroposophists and Waldorf educators
confuse
) spiritual pursuits with scientific pursuits.
As do fundamentalist Christians, new-agers, and the followers of
various
other religious or spiritual philosophies.
In secular schools, generally, it is unlawful to discriminate
against
prospective teachers based on religion. You can't weed out
believers in
pseudoscience; all you can do is prohibit them from teaching it to
the
kids.
Steve Premo ------ Santa Cruz, California
--
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 12:34:00 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA08221; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 11:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA03924; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 11:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA14856 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 10:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708011729.KAA14856 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Camphill
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 10:28:23 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Jurgen Schon wrote me:
)In your last round-letter you asked about if there is anyone
associated
)with Camphill on the list.
)Well, there was. I have been following the activities on the list
for some
)time now, and I really dislike the language and sugestive writing
)techniques used in particular in your articles. Please get me of
this list.
)Consider renaming the list to "The Waldorf National Inquirer"
)
)Your "keeper" Jurgen Schon
)Camphill prison PA
I'd like you to stay on the list, Jurgen. Please respond to the
points
raised, rather than reacting to attitudes you dislike. I'm sure
your
experience could help us understand much about Camphill.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:57:14 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA09535; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA28871; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 12:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA08180 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 12:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708011933.MAA08180 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: does this sound familiar?
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:33:12 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
LOS ANGELES (AP) - At least three public school teachers are
using Scientology teachings in their classrooms and one of them is
hoping to establish a separate tax-funded ``charter school'' using
the same methods.
District officials say they want to make sure using texts by the
late L. Ron Hubbard, the controversial founder of the Church of
Scientology, wouldn't violate the city's policy on religion in
schools.
``I think we need to get more information on what this
educational philosophy is so that we feel comfortable that it
doesn't have religious overtones,'' said board president Julie
Korenstein.
The teacher who wants to lead the new school, Linda Smith,
contends the materials developed by the late Hubbard are
nonsectarian learning techniques appropriate for students of any
faith.
She and two other teachers who also describe themselves as
Scientologists said last week that they have been using Hubbard's
methods - called Applied Scholastics - in their classes.
Among their techniques: having pupils look up words in
dictionaries. Only they call it ``word clearing.''
The three said that one of the most significant barriers to
learning is the ``misunderstood word,'' and that Hubbard sought to
alleviate students' confusion by having them use dictionaries.
Ms. Smith's proposal has drawn attention because of
Scientology's legal status as a religion and the questions raised
by critics who call it a cult that exploits members by charging
for
many services. The Church of Scientology won tax-exempt status
from
the Internal Revenue Service several years ago after a lengthy
court fight.
As a charter school, Ms. Smith's campus would get some support
from tax funds but would be allowed to operate outside many state
and district rules that constrain curriculum and budgets. Her
proposed school would have have about 100 students.
Ms. Smith's proposal, which made no mention of the Hubbard
materials when it was unveiled before the school board last week,
is scheduled for its next hearing Aug. 20.
In a recent recommendation letter, Ms. Smith's principal, Rowena
Lagrosa, praised her teaching, saying that her methods are
``pedagogically sound,'' and that she uses ``effective strategies
that any other teacher would employ.''
Ms. Lagrosa said she was unaware Ms. Smith was using the Hubbard
techniques.
posted by Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:57:36 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA05301; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 14:19:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA20357; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 14:17:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA10982 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 13:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708012045.NAA10982 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Lunar (was: Camphill)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:43:19 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 12:49 PM 30/7/97 -0700, Dan Dugan wrote:
)For those who don't know, Camphill is one of the major activities
of
)Anthroposophy. "Camphill villages" are semi-isolated communities
where
)developmentally disabled people live and work supervised by
)Anthroposophical "co-workers."
)
)Is there anyone associated with Camphill on the list?
I am not really associated with Camphill. However, I can tell you
about
someone who might have been.
A few months ago, I spoke at a meeting in Nijmegen, in the east of
The
Netherlands. The meeting was hardly about Anthroposophy. It was
mainly about
James Redfield's book The Celestine Prophecy, and about the
Findhorn New Age
community in Scotland (a subject which deserves an Internet
critical
discussion list of its own).
I travelled back by train after the meeting. Opposite to me sat a
woman from
Utrecht, in the middle of The Netherlands. She had also been at
the meeting.
She told me that as a qualified nurse, she had read about a job
vacancy at a
Dutch 'Camphill', some years ago. She had applied, knowing
practically
nothing about Anthroposophy, like the great majority of people in
The
Netherlands (and in other countries, I suspect).
The management invited her for an interview. Then, she said: "The
manager
looked at my black hair. He looked at my dark brown eyes. Then, he
looked at
the chain with the Star of David around my neck. Then, he said: "I
think you
are too lunar". I did not get the job. I was puzzled. Only later,
I happened
to read about Anthroposophists associating Judaism with the moon,
in their
theories of 'planetary qualities' of nations."
Did things like this also happen elsewhere? I certainly hope not!
I hope
that many Anthroposophists reject this type of behavior. Will it
make them
more critical of 'planetary qualities' type theories?
Greetings,
Herman de Tollenaere
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:57:54 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
PAA18609; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 15:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA09430; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 15:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id PAA20104 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 15:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708012209.PAA20104 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 aol.com
Subject: What's wrong with Germany?
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 18:09:26 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-07-31 20:27:32 EDT, dan dandugan.com (Dan
Dugan)
writes:
(( I think we're coming closer to it now. Waldorf is a German
franchise. ))
Well, technically, Steiner was Austrian by birth, not German,
although the
first Waldorf school was in Germany. As for Waldorf being a
"German
franchise", isn't our current public school systerm a variant of
the English
system, and does it matter what country an educational method is
from? Why
does the fact that a school has its roots in Germany make it
somehow bad?
What's wrong with Germany? From the little I have read about it,
Germany is
a beautiful land with a rich heritage in the Arts, the Sciences,
and
religion. Its history is colorful and interesting. Germany has
made its
share of mistakes, but hasn't every country? What could possibly
be wrong
with a school coming from Germany, or France, or Canada, or
anywhere? And
where's the harm of teaching children this beautiful language?
IMO, all language has beauty and value, and the fact that a child
learns
German (or *any* language, beginning at age six pleases me.
Kelly (who'd love it if schools, any schools, would teach Gaelic,
just
because she is
enchanted with the language!)
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:58:09 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
RAA28465; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 17:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA01990; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 17:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id RAA02534 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 17:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708020043.RAA02534 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Testing Steiner's Path
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 17:23:33 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Levy Posted:
)Dan - here's a direct question. You calim the existence of an
)anthroposophical fantasy land. How do you justify this. Have you
tested
)out Steiner's path of self-development for yourself.
How does one _test_ Steiner's path of self-development for
oneself? This is
the religious path of "faith." Like all religious beliefs you must
have
faith that its reality exists and you must interpret your personal
experiential phenomena as verifying your faith. There could be no
_test_ in
regard to the scientific path, ie: utilizing the scientific
method.
One of the things I find most disturbing about Anthroposophy is
the
assertion that it is scientific. Stating this is, I believe, meant
to give
it some sort of validity. Why not simply say it is a spiritual
belief
system and that some choose this particular spiritual path? Many
people,
yourself included, find that it Anthroposophy works for them in
their
lives. It lends you a sort of personal existential validity or
reality. But
it is simply _your_ reality, much the same as those that are
Jehovah's
Witness have their reality and believe just as deeply that it is
based on
spiritual truth. There is absolutely nothing scientific about this
type of
belief system. it is a religion.
(St.) Kathy
From ??? ??? Fri Aug 01 20:58:12 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
RAA01480; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 17:59:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA02893; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 17:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id RAA02543 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 17:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708020043.RAA02543 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n471
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 17:23:35 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby posted
)
)Paul, I wouldn't dignify Dan's statement as "a generalisation
based on his
)own limited experience." Dan, as usual, is deliberately making a
statement
)distorted to the point of untruth in order to provoke reaction.
)
How is this statement distorted to the point of untruth? What is
the path
taken at your school when there is dissonance in regard to the
Anthroposophical philosophy driving your curriculum? What do the
administrators do when a parent or student disagrees with Waldorf
pseudoscientific teachings?
I have a very limited experience with Waldorf, however; it is
enormously
clear to me that dissonance is _not_ accepted. You were there on
the night
of May 15, Rigby, in Sacramento, at _my_ meeting with _my_ CTA
attorney
when Arlene Monk became emotional and accused me of being
dishonest. Both
of you were not invited and had no business at this meeting.
Arlene berated
me loudly as I left and vehemently denied Waldorf education
handouts given
at Rudolf Steiner College. I have been called a liar repeatedly by
Waldorf
supporters. If this is not a method of shunning and discrediting
dissonance, what is?
I have been followed, had photos taken of me, and labeled as
emotionally
disturbed by Waldorf supporters. Yes Rigby, I will repeat this
again and
again and again. It happened; it was horrible; it was and is
inexcusable.
And it was the direct result of my dissonance with Waldorf
educational
methods.
I think Dan Dugan puts the situation mildly. Like any cult, when
dissonance
occurs in regard to the Waldorf method it is met head-on and
discredited in
a forceful manner. Even you Rigby, when you discovered that I
could not be
nicely manipulated into sharing my notes and handouts with you,
then took
the path of discreditation. Recently you have labeled me as a
Saint,
insinuating, I believe, that I have taken the role of the martyr.
So be it.
Martyrs carry a strong message.
(Saint) Kathy
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 10:19:04 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
WAA11872; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id WAA04088; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 22:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id WAA25318 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 22:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708020517.WAA25318 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Oak Ridge Registration Results
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:12:11 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Reviewing the past couple of weeks activities, I am amazed at the
break
down of the registration results at Oak Ridge school.
# of students enrolled 1997-98:
627
#students who registered during the week of July 14-18:
392* (63%)
# of students registering for a program with Waldorf methods:
K = 25
1st = 15
2nd = 12
3rd = 29
4th = 20
5th = 17
6th = 16
(2 voted were undecided)
# of students registering for a program without Waldorf methods:
K = 26
1st = 42
2nd = 47
3rd = 42
4th = 34
5th = 36
6th = 29
It seems the only full classes would be kindergarten and third
grade, _if_
the school is in a position to take advantage of the reduced
classroom
incentive program for K-3, which allows the classrooms to have
only 20
children.
It may be a good idea for the board to consider chartering the
Waldorf
program, then moving it close to Sacramento Waldorf School. That
would be a
smart move for SCUSD because the public Waldorf school may attract
private
school families who are committed to Waldorf. Instant enrollment.
SCUSD
would get to keep the federal grant money. They could bus the 134
children
[from Oak Park] who registered for Waldorf to the charter Waldorf
school,
giving them first priority for admittance, of course. But there is
_still_
that nagging church-state issue....
Deby
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 10:19:16 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
WAA22936; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id WAA07658; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 22:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id WAA04886 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 22:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708020537.WAA04886 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:17:50 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve Premo wrote:
)Of course I do not want my child to be taught pseudoscience.
)
)Do I believe that this will not occur? Well, it's not supposed
to. My
)son is just going into first grade, and I plan to be diligent
about that.
)
)Some on this list would say that I was naive, based on their
experiences.
)Others would say that those who teach anthroposophic concepts to
the kids
)are the exception, not the rule.
I fear you are naive. I hope that I am wrong. My experience,
although
somewhat limited, is the opposite. They are the rule, not the
exception.
Remember, teachers teach what they know, what they have been
taught, and
what they believe to be true. What sort of "scientific training"
do you
think the anthroposophically educated Waldorf teachers have had
that teach
at your son's Waldorf School? What will be your course of action
when they
teach your son that the four _elements_ are earth, wind, fire, and
water?
)
)Remember, we're talking here about grade school teachers, not
high-school
)teachers who specialize in science.
I have not forgotten that we are talking about grade school
teachers. The
public school teacher's training I received at RSC was for grade
school
teaching.
)
)Now, if I understand correctly, the main distinction between the
teaching
)of science at Waldorf and at other schools is that at Waldorf,
they
)emphasize the observation of natural phenomena without
preconceptions.
)I have no problem with this; it is a valuable skill.
I think observation is an invaluable tool when teaching science to
any age,
and it must be emphasized from the earliest grades - even
kindergarden.
This is the emphasis in the California State frameworks for
science at
every grade. The difference here is that in public schools and
probably
other private schools, excluding Waldorf, observation _and_
scientific
concepts are taught.
)
)And it seems to me that in other schools, at the grade school
level, kids
)are taught basic scientific concepts (e.g., the names of the
planets, the
)composition of the interior of the earth, etc.), but the
scientific method
)is not explained, generally, until later. Correct me if I'm
wrong. As
)far as I know, this stuff is taught at Waldorf too.
I am a credentialed science teacher for the elementary grades. The
emphasis
in California and what I received in my teacher training at CSU is
to teach
the scientific method from the earliest grades - even in
kindergarden. With
young children the teaching of science is designed to revolve
entirely
around their observations. As they gain in maturity scientific
concepts are
introduced, however; _always_ the scientific method is emphasized,
almost
as an unspoken mantra, if you will. All of science teaching in
California
public schools, according to the frameworks, is hands-on with the
students
observing, hypothesizing, experimenting, making conclusions, and
studying
prior knowledge.
In Waldorf education the teacher designs the experiment and
demonstrates it
for the class. The students do not conduct the experiments
themselves. They
observe the phenomena and then make their conclusions. At least
this is the
information I have received in regard to teaching science in
allignment
with the Waldorf method.
The demonstrations are designed to emphasize the anthroposophical
view of
science, ie; the _four_ elements, anti-evolution (Darwin) and
superiority
of the human, Goethe's theory of color, etc. Observation is the
emphasis -
the scientific method is ignored.
)In secular schools, generally, it is unlawful to discriminate
against
)prospective teachers based on religion. You can't weed out
believers in
)pseudoscience; all you can do is prohibit them from teaching it
to the
)kids.
You're absolutely right. But what about non-secular schools such
as
Waldorf? Not only are they _not_ prohibited from teaching
pseudoscience,
they are mandated to do so.
Steve, undoubtedly you are a diligent parent that wants the best
for your
child. Waldorf schools paint a very pretty picture, especially for
their
early elementary education. But you are likely to have a very
difficult
time removing your son from his school and peer group when you
become
increasingly uneasy with the knowledge that his education is
lacking
academically and is largely based on a spiritual belief system. He
will
probably fight you tooth and nail and will demonstrate distress
and
fearfulness about changing schools. It is not an easy task. Listen
to some
of the parents on this list - they have had an incredibly tough
time of it.
I believe McKay still has his daughter in a Waldorf school because
she does
not want to leave despite his clear knowledge that it is not
serving her
educationally.
It is easy to change schools when a child is young. When they are
older and
are rooted in their peer group it becomes a deeply traumatic
event.
If it is important to you that your son learn science as a part of
his
education, including the use of the scientific method, you need to
be very
clear that this will not happen in a Waldorf school.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 10:19:20 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA16811; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 00:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA09859; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 00:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA01859 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Fri, 1 Aug
1997 23:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708020650.XAA01859 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 23:52:26 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708020537.WAA04886 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Steve, undoubtedly you are a diligent parent that wants the best
for your
)child. Waldorf schools paint a very pretty picture, especially
for their
)early elementary education. But you are likely to have a very
difficult
)time removing your son from his school and peer group when you
become
)increasingly uneasy with the knowledge that his education is
lacking
)academically and is largely based on a spiritual belief system.
He will
)probably fight you tooth and nail and will demonstrate distress
and
)fearfulness about changing schools. It is not an easy task.
Listen to some
)of the parents on this list - they have had an incredibly tough
time of it.
)I believe McKay still has his daughter in a Waldorf school
because she does
)not want to leave despite his clear knowledge that it is not
serving her
)educationally.
)
)It is easy to change schools when a child is young. When they are
older and
)are rooted in their peer group it becomes a deeply traumatic
event.
)
)If it is important to you that your son learn science as a part
of his
)education, including the use of the scientific method, you need
to be very
)clear that this will not happen in a Waldorf school.
I wish to second Kathleen's warning, Steve. By the time we decided
that
Derrick was receiving an inferior education (5th grade, 11 yo), he
was so
attached to his peers that he protested moving to a new school.
Clearly
moving a child from a school where he felt deeply connected was to
set him
up to fail in his new school experience.
Luckily _many_long term Waldorf families came to the same
conclusion and we
were able to move as a unit (17 out of 22 students moved to a new
school
where we negotiated to have them in the same class). This event
has to be
rare, and the odds are against it ever happening again. We got the
best of
all possible options. The children stayed together. This was
especially
good because they had the same academic needs. The teacher was
able to
bring the whole class up to speed, verses Derrick transferring to
a school
where he felt like he was the only one not prepared to do the work
required
in traditional schools.
Your child is young. Check out the curriculum in the upper grades
long
before your child gets there. See if you agree with what is being
taught
now. While Waldorf proponent advertise the value and benefits of
the same
teacher remaining with the children through the grades, I would
like to see
stats on how many teachers actually remain with their students
that long.
Make the choice based on a through and studied evaluation.
My son gets in public school _everything_ Waldorf _said_ they were
about.
Public schools don't seem to preach it, they just do it. (No
dogma. No
pressure to "be" the "right kind of parent". Waldorf gave me the
gift of
recognition. Many of the families were in complete shock when we
left WE.
We were fearful of what we may find. What we found was everything
WE
claimed it was, without the crisis. A huge relief. Our kids do not
want
Saturday to come. They go to school sick if we let them. They
_love_
school. Max plays music. He knits at home. He crochets in school.
He built
a boat in school. He goes on overnight field trips. He is learning
values
at school. He is learning conflict resolution skills in school.
Even if you have no plans to move your child from Waldorf, visit
public
school classrooms with an open mind. They can be pretty awesome.
Deby
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 10:19:50 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
GAA25731; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 06:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA13991; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 06:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id GAA26438 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 06:30:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708021330.GAA26438 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Waldorf School Science
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 12:10:49 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708020537.WAA04886 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
spike netshel.net wrote:
)In Waldorf education the teacher designs the experiment and
demonstrates it
)for the class.
Yes, that happens, although not all the time.
It should be fairly obvious to anyone that a responsible teacher
does
not just let a bunch of youngsters loose with a load of lab
equipment
without giving some guidance. Appropriate lab practice is best
learned
by observing someone who is competent, not by "discovery" methods.
) The students do not conduct the experiments themselves.
That is untrue.
Pupils conduct (and design!) many experiments themselves. A common
answer to the "What would happen if..?" question is "How could you
find
out?" -- and then, once an appropriate course of action has been
decided
upon, either the pupils, or the teacher, or both (whichever is
appropriate/safe), actually doing it.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 10:20:06 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA16286; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 08:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA04394; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 08:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA09797 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 08:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708021541.IAA09797 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Drug rehabilitation therapies
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 17:41:19 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Various groups, claiming to be spiritual, religious, or
scientific, have
drug addiction therapies. Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (Osho) devotees
were very
active in this field in The Netherlands in the 1980s. Also in The
Netherlands, Anthroposophists have Arta.
Is there anything similar to Arta (maybe under different names) in
other
countries?
What are the basic ideas of Arta? Is there any direct or indirect
link to
Waldorf education?
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 19:40:54 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA14924; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 12:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA01251; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 12:54:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA11191 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 12:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708021945.MAA11191 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 AOL.COM
Subject: Who's to blame?
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:45:40 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-08-01 22:28:04 EDT, spike netshel.net
writes:
(( I have been followed, had photos taken of me, and labeled as
emotionally
disturbed by Waldorf supporters. Yes Rigby, I will repeat this
again and
again and again. It happened; it was horrible; it was and is
inexcusable.
And it was the direct result of my dissonance with Waldorf
educational
methods. ))
Any violation of one human being by another is indeed "horrible"
and
"inexcusable", of course. However, I feel that if one is violated
by Waldorf
supporters (who BTW are as guilty as anyone), it is those
individuals that
are to blame, not Waldorf, not Anthroposophists, not Steiner
himself.
Charles Manson, the mass murderer, committed the Tate-LaBianca
murders
because he believed there was going to be a black/white race war
and he was
an instrument of said war. Where did he get his info? Well, much
of it came
from the Beatles' "White Album", and specifically from several
songs on that
album (hence the name of the book "Helter Skelter". One cannot
blame all
Beatles fans, or the Beatles themselves. Many heinous crimes have
been
committed in the name of God, especially in the name of Jesus.
Shall we
blame all Christians, or Christ himself, for these crimes? No, the
fault is
with the individual.
The people who wronged you may have indeed done so for what they
believed to
be the "righteous cause" of Waldorf education. The blame, however,
goes to
THEM, not to their "cause".
another opinion from
Kelly
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 19:40:58 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA22192; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 13:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA24848; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 13:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA21384 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 13:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708022009.NAA21384 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: German in WE
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 13:11:43 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199707281455.HAA02549 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199707300626.XAA28039 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)
)) (( Why do American Waldorf elementary school students study
German?
))
)) -Dan Dugan ))
))
)) My question is, why not? Our school has over the years taught
German,
)) Spanish and French (our Eighth Grade graduates this year
finished with eight
)) years of Spanish.) I think the point you are trying to make is
that German
)) is not a useful language in the US. While it is not as
prevalent in this
)) country as Spanish, it is nonetheless a beautiful language, and
one in which
)) our language has strong roots.
)) Perhaps when one is talking about the "business world", the
language of
)) choice should perhaps learn Japanese. I personally don't know
of any
)) schools, Waldorf or otherwise, who teach it, however.
))
)) Kelly
)Japanese is taught at Camelia Waldorf School in Sacramento,
California.
)Why not elsewhere? Perhaps in the modern world, especially given
the
)burgeoning unification of Europe, it makes little more sense for
the
)North American linguist to study German than Japanese . The study
of
)language, however, is often based on more than pragmatic business
sense,
)and the reasons that a native speaker of English would study
German are
)probably quite different that the reasons that same person would
)identify as the reasons to study Japanese.
)
)Best wishes. -- Hill
Children attending WE in Applegate, Ca are exposed to Japanese.
The Yuba
River Waldorf school exposes children to German and Spanish. After
4 years
of "exposure", my oldest son can pronounce a couple of German
words
(through songs) but has no idea what the words mean. Max (our
youngest
son), thought German _was_ Spanish (after two+ years of exposure
to
German). I call WE's approach to foreign languages over exposure.
Children
should be able to communicate a little after 4 years of foreign
language
instruction.
In the beginning of Derrick's 5th grade year in WE, parents were
asked to
pay additional funds for foreign language instruction in Spanish
and
German. Parents in his class, ever the rebels, chose to support
Spanish and
not German. We asked for more academics during the German time,
and offered
to pay for that. Our wishes, while not supported, were honored.
Deby
From ??? ??? Sat Aug 02 19:41:25 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
PAA03717; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA08137; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id PAA13656 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 15:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708022215.PAA13656 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 18:14:54 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-08-02 07:52:36 EDT, Kathy Sutphen wrote:
(( In Waldorf education the teacher designs the experiment and
demonstrates
it
for the class. The students do not conduct the experiments
themselves. They
observe the phenomena and then make their conclusions. At least
this is the
information I have received in regard to teaching science in
allignment
with the Waldorf method.
The demonstrations are designed to emphasize the anthroposophical
view of
science, ie; the _four_ elements, anti-evolution (Darwin) and
superiority
of the human, Goethe's theory of color, etc. Observation is the
emphasis -
the scientific method is ignored. ))
It is interesting that Kathy can speak with such confidence about
what goes
on in Waldorf schools when by her own admission she has had very
little
experience with Waldorf. Her statements are incorrect. In
particular,
Waldorf students do conduct demonstrations for themselves.
I happened to have two Waldorf graduates in the house when these
assertions
appeared on my screen, both of whom attended public high school
after two
years of Waldorf high school. I asked them about the difference
between the
two school settings relative to their experience in science
classes. They
agreed that in Waldorf they had a better understanding of what was
happening
and why, but that the public school went more deeply into the
mathematics of
the situation. One said that in the public school he seemed to
have better
understanding of the phenomena than most students, who tended
simply to
follow the mathematical formulas.
They both said they were more strongly motivated in the Waldorf
school, but
they attributed this primarily to the smaller class size and
closer
connection with the teacher. In the Waldorf school, the major
topics in
science were handled as main lessons and the students their own
main lesson
books to document what they had learned in the demonstrations.
That process
naturally involves the students more deeply with the topic than
simple
test-taking.
I expect that the quality of science teaching in a Waldorf school
will be
more dependent on the quality of the science teachers, than is the
case in
public schools. As with all other aspects of Waldorf, it is
essential for
the parent to become acquainted with the resources and approaches
actually
used in the local Waldorf school, rather than relying on
generalizations
about Waldorf education.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 02:37:59 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
WAA05758; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 22:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id WAA04333; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 22:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id WAA15021 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 22:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030531.WAA15021 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: German in WE
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 05:52:34 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708022009.NAA21384 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby Snell (snell oro.net) wrote:
)After 4 years
)of "exposure", my oldest son can pronounce a couple of German
words
)(through songs) but has no idea what the words mean. Max (our
youngest
)son), thought German _was_ Spanish (after two+ years of exposure
to
)German). I call WE's approach to foreign languages over exposure.
Children
)should be able to communicate a little after 4 years of foreign
language
)instruction.
Generalising from the particular again, Deby?
As a counter example, my two children (just finished grades 3 and
4
respectively) converse in German when they don't want my wife and
I to
understand what they are saying (fair enough -- my wife and I do
the
same in French to them (g)). Their vocabulary is considerably more
extensive than mine.
A year or so ago when one of my German astronomy cronies came to
stay,
he had conversations in German with the children and noticed their
Bavarian accents (their German teacher is Bavarian).
Of the children from my last class who will attend the local
Comprehensive (probably our equivalent to your public) school next
year,
over half have been placed (after assessment by the Comp) in the
top set
for German -- i.e. over half are at a similar level to the top
25-ish%
in the Comp. (BTW, this is not an attempt to denigrate the quality
of
German teaching at the Comp -- I have sung the praises of that
school
here before -- I am merely stating a fact)
Whilst I wouldn't suggest that these children's experience is
necessarily general, I do suggest that the quality of language
teaching
varies from school to school and that not all children are the
same when
it comes to learning a foreign language (or learning anything
else, for
that matter). Parents considering Waldorf education may be well
advised
to ascertain the quality of teaching in the various subjects in
the
actual school their children will attend, rather than rely on Deby
or my
experiences as being representative of the whole.
)We asked for more academics during the German time, and offered
)to pay for that. Our wishes, while not supported, were honored.
Well now, surely this gives the lie to PLANS's oft-stated claim
that
parents can have no say in Waldorf education and statements such
as
Dugan's recent "Harmony is ensured, as it is in Waldorf schools,
by
throwing out anybody who doesn't cooperate."
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 02:38:04 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA18287; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:15:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA27732; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA25653 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030605.XAA25653 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Treatment of Waldorf dissidents
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 22:44:37 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Luna Posted:
However, I feel that if one is violated by Waldorf
)supporters (who BTW are as guilty as anyone), it is those
individuals that
)are to blame, not Waldorf, not Anthroposophists, not Steiner
himself . . .
)The people who wronged you may have indeed done so for what they
believed to
)be the "righteous cause" of Waldorf education. The blame,
however, goes to
)THEM, not to their "cause".
)
Kelly,
I posted my reply to Rigby as a result of his response to Dan
Dugan's
posting about the treatment of dissonance toward the Waldorf
method. His
posting was as follows:
"I wouldn't dignify Dan's statement as "a generalisation based on
his
own limited experience." Dan, as usual, is deliberately making a
statement
distorted to the point of untruth in order to provoke reaction.
Rigby"
The point I am making is that there is a pattern of extreme
"shunning" of
dissonance within Waldorf programs. It happened to Dan Dugan, it
happened
to Deby Snell, and it happened to me. These occurrences were at
three
different school sites many miles apart. We did not know each
other and had
no knowledge of the other's experiences. These occurrences also
took place
at very different times and at the hands of different people. The
common
threads: Waldorf educators and supporters were the 'actors,' the
shunning
occurred as a result of each of us questioning the validity of
Waldorf
methods, we were 'expelled' when it became apparent that we held
our
particular beliefs and questions strongly. This is a very brief
synopsis.
However, the point is clear that Dan Dugan is not making
statements
distorted to the point of untruth in order to provoke a reaction.
His
statement simply describes the truth.
Do you believe that you would be kindly and warmly listened to if
you had a
problem with the teaching of pseudoscience, religious
indoctrination, etc.,
at your children's school? I sure didn't expect the reaction that
I
received and I know that Dan Dugan and Debra Snell were taken
completely
off guard. I also know that we are not the only ones to have
experienced
this type of harassment. This is cult-like behavior.
I cannot imagine this type of reaction in a public school setting
if I had
a problem with the math curriculum or the reading program. I am
not
inferring that there are never problems or personality conflicts,
but I
don't believe that name-calling, following, shunning, and other
forms of
harassment would occur. I have certainly never witnessed it in my
many
years with the public education system and I have had several
situations in
which I disagreed with a particular facet of a program.
Rigby himself has indulged in name-calling during these summer
months. Why?
Because we criticize Waldorf. Waldorf supporters and
Anthroposophists have
a tendency to guard their beliefs and methods carefully. Remember,
they
believe that their path and methods are _the _ truth. Steiner
received it
from an angelic messenger - one of the "higher-ups" if I recall.
Anyone
that disagrees is clearly in the wrong and needs to leave and
their
dissonance needs to be silenced within the community.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 02:38:02 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA16145; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA27354; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA25631 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030605.XAA25631 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Science
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 22:44:41 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Tonkin posted:
)It should be fairly obvious to anyone that a responsible teacher
does
)not just let a bunch of youngsters loose with a load of lab
equipment
)without giving some guidance. Appropriate lab practice is best
learned
)by observing someone who is competent, not by "discovery"
methods.
I am not sure what you mean by this. Do you believe that in public
school
lab classes students are let loose in a lab without thorough
education on
lab use, materials use, and how to conduct an experiment? Do you
think they
have no say in experiment design? Of course I am speaking of
public
education in California, so perhaps you have no experience with
this.
However, I cannot imagine any teacher anywhere letting "a bunch of
youngsters loose with a load of lab equipment without giving some
guidance."
Kathy
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 02:38:09 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA25565; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA29453; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA05394 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:35:04 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030635.XAA05394 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:04:41 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708022215.PAA13656 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Rigby writes,
)I expect that the quality of science teaching in a Waldorf school
will be
)more dependent on the quality of the science teachers, than is
the case in
)public schools. As with all other aspects of Waldorf, it is
essential for
)the parent to become acquainted with the resources and approaches
actually
)used in the local Waldorf school, rather than relying on
generalizations
)about Waldorf education.
)
I find this statement interesting. Why do you feel that the
quality of
science teaching in a Waldorf school is more dependent on the
quality of
the science teachers? Why do you think it is more true in Waldorf
than
public schools?
I think AWSNA should work toward more uniform education standards
for
accredited Waldorf schools. Rigby, do you have a connection with
AWSNA?
Deby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 02:38:12 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA25883; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA29570; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA05426 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sat, 2 Aug
1997 23:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030635.XAA05426 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: German in WE
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 23:36:06 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708022009.NAA21384 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708030531.WAA15021 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen writes,
)Whilst I wouldn't suggest that these children's experience is
)necessarily general, I do suggest that the quality of language
teaching
)varies from school to school and that not all children are the
same when
)it comes to learning a foreign language (or learning anything
else, for
)that matter). Parents considering Waldorf education may be well
advised
)to ascertain the quality of teaching in the various subjects in
the
)actual school their children will attend, rather than rely on
Deby or my
)experiences as being representative of the whole.
Well stated, Stephen. I will _again_ suggest that AWSNA take a
look at
standardizing Waldorf education. Accreditation should well include
accountability for a quality education. Can anyone explain just
_what_
AWSNA's function is?
)
))We asked for more academics during the German time, and offered
))to pay for that. Our wishes, while not supported, were honored.
)
)Well now, surely this gives the lie to PLANS's oft-stated claim
that
)parents can have no say in Waldorf education and statements such
as
)Dugan's recent "Harmony is ensured, as it is in Waldorf schools,
by
)throwing out anybody who doesn't cooperate."
This happened at the public Waldorf school. As it happens,
Stephen, the
teacher responsible for allowing the parents choice _did_ leave.
It appears
that she grew tired of the constant pressure to be "more" Waldorf.
She
took tremendous heat for supporting the parents decision. The
faculty
remained adament that parents should not have a say in pedigogical
concerns. That is what I meant when I said "our wishes, while not
supported, were honored". Their only other choice would have been
to get
rid of the entire class with the teacher. They eventually did
that, but we
left at the end of the year. This example took place in the
beginning of
the year.
Deby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 10:02:16 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
FAA25265; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 05:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id FAA29717; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 05:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA03320 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 05:27:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708031227.FAA03320 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 09:47:25 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708030605.XAA25631 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
spike netshel.net wrote:
)Tonkin posted:
)
))It should be fairly obvious to anyone that a responsible teacher
does
))not just let a bunch of youngsters loose with a load of lab
equipment
))without giving some guidance. Appropriate lab practice is best
learned
))by observing someone who is competent, not by "discovery"
methods.
)
)I am not sure what you mean by this.
I mean that it is a perfectly valid activity, in _any_ form of
education, for the teacher to demonstrate how an experiment is
done. I
also contend that it is good teaching practice for a teacher to
demonstrate good experimental design, with examples of the same.
In your criticism of Waldorf science teaching, you stated: "In
Waldorf
education the teacher designs the experiment and demonstrates it
for the
class". The implication of a statement like this is that you have
a
problem with this approach -- if not, why state it?
If it were the _only_ approach to teaching, I too would have a
problem
with it, but your next statement: "The students do not conduct the
experiments themselves." has been shown to be untrue, not only
here but
also in the (presumably Californian) Waldorf school attended by
Rigby's
offspring.
) Do you believe that in public school
)lab classes students are let loose in a lab without thorough
education on
)lab use, materials use, and how to conduct an experiment?
No, I did not say that.
) Do you think they
)have no say in experiment design?
Neither did I say that.
)However, I cannot imagine any teacher anywhere letting "a bunch
of
)youngsters loose with a load of lab equipment without giving some
)guidance."
Neither can I, which is why I responded to your criticism: "In
Waldorf
education the teacher designs the experiment and demonstrates it
for the
class".
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 10:02:09 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA22466; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 02:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA22404; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 02:57:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA14984 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 02:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708030955.CAA14984 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 09:57:18 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708020537.WAA04886 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a criticism of Waldorf science teaching, spike netshel.net
wrote:
)The demonstrations are designed to emphasize the anthroposophical
view of
)science, ie;
[...]
) anti-evolution (Darwin) and superiority
)of the human,
Please could you describe that demonstration, as it occurs in a
Waldorf
school science lesson.
I ask having pondered your claim, slept on it, pondered it some
more --
my imagination must be showing signs of ageing because I am still
unable
to conceive how such a demonstration could be performed in a
Waldorf (or
any other) school science lesson.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 12:56:38 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA28542; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 11:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA26815; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 11:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA24134 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 11:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708031819.LAA24134 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 aol.com
Subject: Re: Treatment of Waldorf dissidents
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:18:54 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-08-03 02:13:37 EDT, spike netshel.net
writes:
(( Do you believe that you would be kindly and warmly listened to
if you had
a
problem with the teaching of pseudoscience, religious
indoctrination, etc.,
at your children's school? ))
I already have been treated with kindness and respect with any
questions I've
had. My experience with the school my children attend has been
mostly
positive, and I've made many friends. I've sat in on classes, and
any
questions I've had have been answered honestly and intelligently.
Our first
parent meeting this year for one of my children's classes is going
to
primarily discuss the "why's" of the curriculum and questions will
be
encouraged, as will discussion of any problems we may have with
the
curriculum.
As you see, my experience with WE education has been a good one.
I'm very
sorry some others haven't had the same experience. I can only
speak from my
own observations, and I find I like what I see.
Kelly
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 12:56:40 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA07761; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 11:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA11904; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 11:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA00855 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 11:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708031841.LAA00855 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 aol.com
Subject: hands-on science in Waldorf schools
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:41:19 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-08-03 08:39:11 EDT, sft aegis1.demon.co.uk
(Stephen
Tonkin) writes:
(( In your criticism of Waldorf science teaching, you stated: "In
Waldorf
education the teacher designs the experiment and demonstrates it
for the
class". The implication of a statement like this is that you have
a
problem with this approach -- if not, why state it?
If it were the _only_ approach to teaching, I too would have a
problem
with it, but your next statement: "The students do not conduct the
experiments themselves." has been shown to be untrue, not only
here but
also in the (presumably Californian) Waldorf school attended by
Rigby's
offspring. ))
My daughter's eighth grade class had a mini "science fair" toward
the end of
their science block (I think the block was chemistry, but the fair
included
all science). The children were given the choice of an experiment
to do,
chose a partner, and conducted the experiment at home. All
experiments
involved the building of some kind of apparatus which was used to
conduct the
experiment. In my daughter's case, she and her partner built a
telegraph
machine (which, BTW, was not only functional but beautiful as
well!). There
was a test done concerning which liquids conducted electricity
(from a
battery) most efficiently, a test involving a balloon, a beaker,
and a bunsen
burner, used to show the effect heat has on air (also done by my
daughter),
and a few others. Parents were encouraged to attend the mini-fair,
which was
put on during the main lesson. I was very impressed with what
these kids
managed to do BY THEMSELVES.
So as in Rigby's school, my children's school as well has a
"hands-on"
approach to science.
Kelly (whose daughter has to go to public H.S. this year, alas)
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 13:20:49 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA25407; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA21402; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA22835 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 12:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708031956.MAA22835 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Camphill
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 12:55:57 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Jurgen Schon wrote me:
)This is addressed to y o u and not intended for publishing on the
National
)Inquirer list.
Dear Jurgen, you signed your letter "respectfully," yet you call
our list
"National Inquirer." I remind you again that I don't have time for
personal
correspondence with Anthroposophists. I don't want you to leave
until we've
had a chance to talk a bit.
)Again, please unsubscribe me but feel free to contact me
)directly with questions you have in regards to Camphill. What is
the
)difference between Richard Goode and you? He has actually visited
Camphill
)and had his own, personal experience of it. You on the other hand
have seen
)three(wow) videos.
Richard Goode is the pianist who was so impressed with the
communal
relationship between "villagers" and "co-workers" in Camphill. I
bought the
four videos the Camphill Foundation sells and studied them
carefully. You
choose to put down this commitment. I've also read quite a few
articles
about Camphill and receive the newsletter.
) This is what I suggest: Go and walk into any of your
East-Bay-Regional
)Center sponsored programs/homes. Talk to "Inmates" and "keepers"
there,
)start a new mailing list, then come and visit Camphill and
experience the
)differences. Mr. Dugan, with all due respect, you have no idea
what you are
)talking about.
How about talking about specific issues rather than rendering
opinions on
your correspondent's knowledge?
)How about some constructive ideas on your part on how to
)create meaningful working and living arrangements for people with
)developmental disabilities. I am sure people in your nick of the
woods (see
)closing of Development Centers, Kurfelt settlement) are in dire
need of
)that sort of thing. Do something, talk to people in the field in
your
)area, find out about the problems and then change something by
doing it
)differently instead of bickering on about stuff which is far
removed from
)your own experiences. ( E.g. hire somebody with developmental
disabilities
)in your sound studio, become a program provider, live with people
in your
)home, e.t.c. )
)Be creative and just get on with it! The East Bay Regional Center
needs
)your help!
I have invited a mentally disabled person to live in my home,
Jurgen, so
perhaps I am as holy as thou.
Please explain "Kurfelt settlement." Please tell me more about the
East Bay
Regional Center. It's not listed in the international Camphill
directory at
http://www.croftcvt.demon.co.uk/. Are you a co-worker there?
Here is a very specific question: I presume that since some of the
co-workers are couples, they enjoy sexual activity. How about the
villagers? What are the rules for love and sex in Camphill?
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 13:20:58 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA27096; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA09642; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA25422 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032004.NAA25422 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:04:17 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby asked me:
(( Why do you feel that the quality of science teaching in a
Waldorf school
is more dependent on the quality of the science teachers? Why do
you think
it is more true in Waldorf than public schools?))
Two reasons. Waldorf schools usually offer lower wages than public
schools,
making it more difficult to obtain high quality teachers in any
subject.
Public schools tend to have a more "canned" curriculum, requiring
less
personal effort by the teacher. (I have been told by public school
teachers
who have adapted Waldorf methods that they require considerably
more work on
their part.) These are generalizations; obviously, the quality of
the
teacher is a predominant factor in the quality of education in any
classroom.
And Deby said: "I think AWSNA should work toward more uniform
education
standards for accredited Waldorf schools. Rigby, do you have a
connection
with AWSNA?"
I do not have any formal connection with AWSNA, but I do have
friends on the
AWSNA staff. Although AWSNA does hold the copyright on the Waldorf
name in
the USA, AWSNA does not accredit Waldorf schools. Those Waldorf
schools that
are accredited are accredited through independent accreditation
agencies.
For example, the Sacramento Waldorf School is accredited through
the Western
Association of Schools and Colleges.
Also, AWSNA does not enforce uniform standards in Waldorf schools.
The best
way to think of AWSNA is as an agency through which the
independent Waldorf
schools establish association with one another. Through that
agency the
schools do address issues of common interest, including curriculum
content,
but independence of each school is a very strong theme within
Waldorf
education. This is why it is very important for a parent
considering
enrolling a child in a Waldorf school to make a connection with
that school,
instead of relying on generalizations about Waldorf education.
Regards,
Rigby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:46:45 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA17776; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA15106; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA03811 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032029.NAA03811 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Owen Barfield
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:28:48 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve Premo-
Thanks for your comments on my recent "Owen Barfield" post.
Regarding Barfield's point that confusing scientific models with
reality is a
type of idolatry, you said: "Yes, and the scientific method itself
militates
against confusing scientific models with reality. This is why
scientists no
longer call theories "laws" (except for historical reasons, as is
the case
with Newton's laws of motion, or the laws of thermodynamics). All
theories
(and laws) are tentative, and subject to disproof. Scientists
rigorously try
to disprove them, and the rewards for doing so are great. Those
who disprove
widely-accepted theories and replace them with theories that more
closely
approach reality (or, to put it another way, are more useful in
explaining
our observations) earn a place in history."
In his well-known book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,"
Thomas Kuhn
pointed out that most scientists, most of the time, are laboring
away at the
details within some generally accepted paradigm, rather than
trying to
disprove the fundamental elements of that paradigm. Only when that
process
reaches its limits unsuccessfully is there the probability of
fundamental
change. But your point is still a good one-properly understood,
the
scientific method should always retain the consciousness that it
is working
with models (representations, in Barfield's lexicon) rather than
reality per
se.
When I talked about the redemption of science from its
materialistic,
reductionist tendencies, you commented: "Science has
"materialistic,
reductionist tendencies" because that is what works. A hypothesis
that
cannot be disproved has no scientific value (although it may be
satisfying
philosophically). So science does not deal with such questions as
whether
God exists, whether there is life after death, or whether there
are various
levels of supernatural beings.
"This is a limitation of science, but it is not something from
which science
must be redeemed."
In using the term "redemption" I was playing with words a bit,
purposely
introducing a term ordinarily associated with religion. But I
really didn't
mean that science should necessarily try to address the big issues
of
theology. The redemption has to do with acknowledging (1) the
limits of
science as it has evolved thus far (in addition to its fantastic
achievements), and (2) the role that human consciousness plays in
the
development of knowledge.
Regarding an hypothesis that cannot be disproved having no
scientific value,
Barfield notes that the hypothesis of uniformitarianism (awkward
name, left
over from the 19th century) is one of the axioms of scientific
investigation.
This is the idea that the laws of nature (if you will allow the
colloquial
use of "laws") always have been and always will be the same as
they are in
our current experience. This doesn't appear to be something that
could be
disproved. Perhaps we could say that is has meta-scientific value,
even
though by its very nature it cannot be considered susceptible to
what we
usually think of as the scientific method.
I wonder also about hypotheses that are untestable for practical
reasons,
such as theories about really small particles (or energy forms)
that would
require an accelerator the size of the solar system to
investigate. This
seems to be an hypothesis with genuine scientific value, even if
it is not
falsifiable. Perhaps this is an example of how science cannot help
but drift
into philosophy (maybe even theology) when it reaches its limits.
You said, "At the same time, science does instill a profound sense
of awe at
the elegance of the natural world, and at the grace and beauty
with which the
universe we perceive fits together. For all its "materialistic,
reductionist
tendencies," I would rate science pretty high on the "love" scale
(in
reference to your other post)."
The vision of science you present here certainly does rank high on
the "love"
scale--that is, the capability to find connections and see the
underlying
wholeness of nature. However, it seems that many practitioners and
fans of
science don't act according to that vision. A few months ago we
had some
discussion here of the quality of opposition that James Lovelock
met when he
first developed his Gaia hypothesis, a set of ideas about the
nature of
Earth's biosphere that requires a coherent, multidisciplinary
viewpoint. He
got precious little "love."
One of my favorite books is "What Is Life," by Margulis and Sagan,
a lyrical
and graphically beautiful presentation of the spectrum of life
from a
contemporary biological perspective. They note that "To the
neo-Newtonians,
the Darwinians, free will had been all but banished from the
universe because
the universe was portrayed as a mechanism and mechanisms do not
have
consciousness." Their own preference is for a largely forgotten
viewpoint
developed by Samuel Butler, a contemporary of Darwin: "The mind
and the body
are not separate but part of the unified process of life. Life,
sensitive
from the onset, is capable of thinking. The 'thoughts' both vague
and clear,
are physical, in our bodies' cells and those of other animals.
Ö Thought,
like life, is matter and energy in flux; the body is its 'other
side.'
Thinking and being are the same thing."
Sound mystical? Wait, there's more: "If one accepts this
fundamental
continuity between body and mind, thought loses any essential
difference from
other physiology and behavior. Thinking, like excreting and
ingesting,
results from lively interactions of a being's chemistry." And:
"Evolution
places us all in the stark but fascinating context of the cosmos.
Although
something odd may lurk behind and before this cosmos, its
existence is
impossible to prove. The cosmos, more dazzling than any sect's
god, is
enough. Life is existence's celebration."
This, for me, is redeemed science. It is also, for me, redeemed
religion,
even though the previous paragraph might strike many religious
people as
being sacrilegious. It's the "flower in a crannied wall" idea. We
don't
need to look elsewhere-its right in front of us and within us.
Which leads right into your next statement: "Personally, I find
science to
be a spiritual pursuit, in that understanding the world in which
we live has
great spiritual value. It's all well and good to say that the
world is the
way it is because God made it that way, but understanding *how*
God did it
can be profoundly spiritual. (Of course, what I think of as God
and what
most Christians think of as God is quite different, but that's
beside the
point.)"
A few weeks ago I attended a session with Malidoma Patrice Some,
who is from
the Dagara tribe of West Africa. The elders of the tribe sent
Malidoma into
Western culture, in order to teach about ritual and community. (He
is rather
well acculturated to our world, having a Ph.D. from the Sorbonne
and another
from Brandeis University.) Experience with the spiritual world is
commonplace in Malidoma's culture. At the session somebody asked
whether
there was conflict between Western science and his experiences. He
said,
"Not at all. Science is just another spiritual path. But not a
very
efficient one."
Not very efficient, I take his meaning, because you can spend a
lifetime
deeply involved with scientific pursuits and still not arrive at
the
perspective represented by the quotation above from Margulis and
Sagan. One
of the reasons I am intrigued by the Goethean approach of direct
conscious
participation in nature, is that it seems to offer a more
efficient path to
deep understanding of the "flower in a crannied wall."
Regarding methods like those of Goethean science, you said, "Yes,
well, I'm
not sure the latter methods would be recognized as "science" in
the generally
accepted meaning of the word, which is a specific method, and not
simply "the
acquisition of knowledge." But regardless, I agree that it is not
"anti-science" to suggest that there is more to reality than the
material
world, or that there are other ways of acquiring knowledge than
the
scientific method."
We certainly have seen resistance here on the WC list to the idea
that the
Goethean approach represents valid science, but there seems to be
an
increasing interest in it among scientists other than those
already involved
with anthroposophy. I would raise the question of why the
techniques of
Goethean science should not be admissable as part of the
scientific method.
I believe it is a common human experience, for scientists and
non-scientists
alike, to have what we call flashes of intuition, to wake up in
the morning
with the solution to a problem that had been troubling to us the
day before,
or even to have dreams that lead to new insight. I have seen
several stories
of major scientific discoveries that developed from such
experiences (e.g.:
the intertwined snakes dream that provided the clue to the double
helix
structure of DNA). If this is the way human consciousness works,
why
shouldn't it be an integral part of the scientific method? Why
shouldn't
there be effort made to school the consciousness in a manner
analogous to the
way we school the rational mind, so that these experiences would
not be so
haphazard?
There probably are those within anthroposophy--and there certainly
are those
among its critics--who view anthroposophical science as a process
of going
into the spiritual world and bringing back insights; and then
treating those
insights as having a special quality of truth because they came
from the
spiritual world. I don't see it that way at all (but you should be
aware
that I may not be much of an anthroposophist). Instead, I see it
as a
process of acquiring new insights by developing a more disciplined
and
sensitive consciousness of the world in which we participate. And
because
most of us are dilettantes at such a process, those insights need
to be
subjected to specially rigorous testing. I think this view of
anthroposophical science makes it an extension of conventional
science.
Again, I appreciate your comments. They have helped me clarify my
own
thinking.
Best regards,
Rigby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:47:39 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
RAA18151; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 17:54:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA26257; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 17:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id RAA27462 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 17:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040047.RAA27462 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: How to unsubscribe (was: Camphill)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 21:33:18 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708031956.MAA22835 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)Jurgen Schon wrote me:
DUGAN
)I don't want you to leave until we've
)had a chance to talk a bit.
)
SCHON
))Again, please unsubscribe me
Jurgen, since you have obviously lost the relevant information,
and the
list owner is being singularly unco-operative in helping you to
unsubscribe, if I recall correctly you should be able to
unsubscribe
automatically by sending an email to:
waldorf-critics-request lists.best.com
With the single line :
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.
This is now twice Mr Schon has asked Dugan, the list owner, to
unsubscribe him and twice Dugan has refused, keeping Mr Schon here
against his will.
What was it Dugan was saying in the Camphill thread about
"keepers"..?
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 14:07:01 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA04185; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA11837; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA04072 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032030.NAA04072 lists1.best.com)
From: litvas icu.com (Robert Flannery)
Subject: Re: Camphill
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:41:10 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan has posted recently about Camphill, the anthroposophic
communities for developmentally disabled people.
Dan, what does Camphill have to do with waldorf education or the
objectives
of PLANS?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:47:04 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA24191; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA16895; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:22:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id NAA09483 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 13:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032044.NAA09483 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Cognitive Dissonance
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:44:04 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy Sutphen took umbrage at my comment that Dan Dugan was
distorting to the
point of untruth when he said that Waldorf schools maintain
harmony by
evicting those who disagree.
First, let me focus on the part of Kathy's comments that I
consider to be
completely valid. I agree her unequivocally when she says of
herself: "I have
a very limited experience with WaldorfÖ" This is an excellent
point, one
that should be kept in mind when reading any of Kathy's posts.
Also, it
should be realized that when Kathy cites the wrongs that have been
done her
by "Waldorf supporters," in most instances the alleged
perpretrators were her
former co-workers at a public school. In some cases she may be
complaining
about alleged acts by Rudolf Steiner College employees. But in no
case do
they represent experience in, or associated with, a Waldorf
school.
Once we get beyond the statement about her very limited experience
with
Waldorf, I do have some problems with what Kathy had to say.
Before getting
to them, I will answer a couple of questions she raised: "What is
the path
taken at your school when there is dissonance in regard to the
Anthroposophical philosophy driving your curriculum? What do the
administrators do when a parent or student disagrees with Waldorf
pseudoscientific teachings?"
I guess "my school" would be the Sacramento Waldorf School (SWS),
where I am
a past parent and past President of the Board of Trustees. I was
also a
parent at two other Waldorf schools attended by my son-Washington
DC and
Sebastopol, California. I have also attended several conferences
and
seminars at which I became acquainted with issues at other Waldorf
schools.
(I do not have limited experience with Waldorf.)
The questions don't literally apply to SWS. I am unaware of
dissonance in
regard to anthroposophical philosophy underlying the curriculum
("driving" is
too strong a term) and we have not had pseudoscientific teachings
at the
school. I don't know of any instance in which a parent was asked
to withdraw
from the school because of a critical attitude. When I first
became a Board
member we did have several parents who were highly critical of the
school,
but it had to do with administrative performance and strategic
planning.
There were some tense and emotional Board meetings for awhile, but
never was
there the suggestion that a parent should be asked to leave the
school. Much
of the criticism was in fact valid; changes needed to be made and
were made.
)From time to time the school has asked a student not to return.
This has
always been due to behavioral problems, not to issues of pedagogy
or
philosophy. And from time to time we have declined to renew the
contract of
a teacher, but this has been due to deficiencies in classroom
performance,
not to philosophical dissonance.
Dan's statement rang untrue to me for two reasons. First,
"harmony" is not
often a dominant quality in a Waldorf school, except within the
halcyon
confines of the classroom. These are usually small organizations,
struggling
financially, unable (or sometimes unwilling) to afford an adequate
administrative infrastructure, attempting to use an unfamiliar
consensus
approach to decision-making. Under these circumstances they have
to work
hard to keep the organization together, let alone achieve real
harmony. If
the eviction of people with different viewpoints were a matter of
course
there would be no Waldorf schools.
Second, it is fallacious to think that kicking somebody out
increases
harmony. The key players in Waldorf schools are very concerned
with building
community and those who are serious anthroposophists are equally
concerned
about karmic effects of the actions they take. It is a
considerable struggle
for them to reach a decision like terminating an inadequate
employee. In my
judgment Waldorf schools are more likely to err on the side of
injuring the
school by trying to keep somebody in the community who really
doesn't belong
there.
Now, to some of Kathy's other comments, the good stuff, the
accusations:
"You were there on the night of May 15, Rigby, in Sacramento, at
_my_ meeting
with _my_ CTA attorney when Arlene Monk became emotional and
accused me of
being dishonest. Both of you were not invited and had no business
at this
meeting."
Do you have the picture clearly, dear reader? Here is Kathy,
sequestered
with her union attorney ("CTA" is the California Teachers
Association),
earnestly seeking counsel about dealing with the enormities that
her
Waldorf-supporting co-workers have visited upon her, when in
burstÖRigby and
Arline! Dreaded duo of the anthroposophical conspiracy! Arline,
unable to
control herself, points a quivering finger at Kathy and intones,
"Liar, lair,
pants on fire." (We are not told what heinous act Rigby commits on
this
occasion.)
How did Rigby and Arline find out about this private meeting
between Kathy
and her attorney? Did they follow her around, taking photographs?
Well, no,
it turns out that PLANS issued a press release about the meeting,
and posted
a copy right here, on the WC list. And in the press release they
didn't say
anything at all about Kathy and her attorney. They said it was
going to be a
meeting for Dan Dugan to present information about Waldorf
education. Isn't
that a clever way to set up a private meeting with one's attorney?
(Or perhaps this was another instance--like the infamous "transfer
to a desk
job" allegation--in which Kathy was betrayed by a PLANS press
release. If
so, her complaint to me is misdirected.)
And when Rigby and Arline arrived at the appointed time and place
(Rigby was
invited, by the way, but not by Kathy nor her attorney), what did
they find?
Deby, Dan and a group of people waiting to hear Dan's
presentation. The
group included some people from Oak Ridge Elementary School, and
some of
Kathy's co-workers, and some from Rudolf Steiner College, and some
from the
Sacramento Waldorf School--all eager to hear the true story of
Waldorf
education. Deby greeted the group warmly and welcomed them to
Dan's
presentation. She neglected to point out that this was really a
private
meeting between Kathy and her attorney. She failed even to
introduce Kathy
and her attorney.
Dan did in fact make a presentation, complete with many overhead
transparencies. And there was lively discussion afterwards. But we
never
did get to meet Kathy's attorney. Was the attorney even there? Or
does the
attorney exist on the same plane of reality as the desk job to
which Kathy
was transferred by her former employee?
I am tempted to state that Kathy has given an untrue account of
the meeting
on May 15, but that would only add me to that crowd that calls her
a liar.
Instead I will take refuge in the language of Owen Barfield, whose
ideas we
have been discussing here recently. Kathy and I do not share
collective
representations. What she experienced as a private meeting with
her lawyer I
experienced as a group of people listening to Dan make a
presentation. I am
glad I did attend that meeting since it has given me the ability
to calibrate
the extent to which my reality differs from Kathy's. I could not
have
believed it otherwise, and it is a relief to know that I don't
need to be
exercised by what she says about me; or anything else, for that
matter.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:47:13 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA26980; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA01759; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:28:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA16714 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032108.OAA16714 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Lunar (was: Camphill)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:06:51 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Herman told a story about a nurse who applied at a Dutch Camphill
institution:
)The management invited her for an interview. Then, she said: "The
manager
)looked at my black hair. He looked at my dark brown eyes. Then,
he looked at
)the chain with the Star of David around my neck. Then, he said:
"I think you
)are too lunar". I did not get the job. I was puzzled. Only later,
I happened
)to read about Anthroposophists associating Judaism with the moon,
in their
)theories of 'planetary qualities' of nations."
)
)Did things like this also happen elsewhere? I certainly hope not!
I hope
)that many Anthroposophists reject this type of behavior. Will it
make them
)more critical of 'planetary qualities' type theories?
Yes, it has happened elsewhere. A teacher who was in the San Diego
charter
training with Lilian Cooper was told her Judaism was incompatible
with
being a Waldorf teacher. [Ask Lilian, she's on the list.] Stanford
scholar
Ray McDermott reported "A Jewish professor looking for alternative
methods
of schooling was told that a Jewish person could not be a Waldorf
teacher."
[McDermott, Ray. "Racism and Waldorf Education." Research
Bulletin. Waldorf
Education Research Institute, Sunbridge College: Vol. 1 No. 2
June, 1996,
p. 4.]
Steiner explained:
"Thus we have two different races of mankind. The one consists of
the
original descendants of the Elohim, the sons of Cain, who are
called the
Sons of Fire. They are those who till the earth and create from
inanimate
nature and transform it through the arts of man ... Abel was a
shepherd. He
held firmly to what he found, he took the world as it was. There
is always
this antithesis between people. One sticks to things as they are,
the other
wants to create new life from the inanimate, through art. ... It
is the
Sons of Fire who have to work into the world the wisdom, beauty
and
goodness from the all-embracing universal throught, in order to
transofrm
the world into a temple.
"Jehovah is also called the God of created form, the God who turns
what
is living into a living force, in contrast with that other Elohim
who
creates by charming life out of what is lifeless. To which of
these does
the future belong? That is the great question of the Temple
Legend. If
mankind were to develop under the religion of Jehovah, all life
would
expire in form. ... [T]he point in time has now arrived when man
himself
must awaken the dead to life. That will happen through the Sons of
Cain,
through those who do not rely on the things around them, but are
themselves
the creators of new forms."
[Steiner, Rudolf. The Temple Legend: Freemasonry and Related
Occult
Movements: Twenty Lectures given in Berlin between 23rd May 1904
and the
2nd January 1906. (1904-1906) Trans. John M. Wood, Edited E.M.
Lloyd.
London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1985, p. 142]
"To which of these does the future belong?" Whew. We know where
that idea
ended up. And about the moon:
"You know the people of the Old Testament worshipped Jehovah - who
was an
actual Being, connected with what manifests itself in the physical
world as
Moon. It is of course more or less a figure of speech to say that
the
Jehovah-Being has his dwelling in the Moon, but at the same time
there is
reality in the expression. Everything pertaining to this
Jehovah-Being is
connected with the Moon.
"Now there are Beings who 'scorned' - if I may so express it - to
make
the journey to the Moon with the Jehovah-beings when the Moon
separated
from the Earth..."
***
"These beings have an influence upon sleeping man just as the
regular
cosmic beings have; but their influence is pernicious[I]n the
condition
between falling asleep and waking, these irregular Moon, Venus and
Mercury-beings approach him and set about persuading him that evil
is good
and good evil."
***
"These beings are identical with those I have always designated as
Ahrimanic. They set themselves the task of keeping man on the
earth by
every possible means."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Man and the World of the Stars. (1922) Trans.
D.S. Osmond. New York: Anthroposophic Press, 1963, pp. 37-39.]
And of course the exposition wouldn't be complete without the
South African
Anthroposophists chiming in:
"By the third epoch, the races had become established with the
one-sidedness which is still apparent today. As we previously
suggested,
the spiritual European consciousness soul aspirant (Aryan) is not
tied to
the one-sided racial political climate of our modern world whether
for or
against racialism; both miss the main issue.
"The Aryan can be found in any race, just as much as any race
member can be
found to have incarnated as an outward European. As we previously
suggested, racial collectiveness for its own sake is not conducive
to
cultural development in our age. The world appears to be isolating
us
[South Africa], but in reality the opposite is true. We are being
withdrawn
to preserve what Europe can no longer do.
"The Jehovah Ahriman forms are casting their light over Europe
even over
the most protected of corners and individuals. The danger lies
with
individuals when the consciousness soul is flung back into its old
moon
astrality. Then wisdom is sought for wisdom's sake and becomes to
the
dismay of their soul, enhanced information. The individual should
seek the
inner light of enquiry. But the social political sphere shows the
easier
path of moral indignation for matters outside, which the world
media
happily supply.
"What we call the news media are pictures of the nervous system of
the
being referred to above (Jehovah Ahriman). They evoke emotional
responses
for matters that have no cosmic counterpart, thus trapping the
individual
more into a web of baleful light where even anarchy can appear
artistic."
[Downer, Graham. "The South African Paleolithic Age." Invisible
Africa: A search for the Grail in Africa-Selected Essays.
Kenilworth,
Republic of South Africa: Novalis Press, 1987, p. 195.]
Just like the neo-Nazis, ranting at "Jewish news media." All these
books
were purchased from Rudolf Steiner College.
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:47:17 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA04180; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA04396; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA24858 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 14:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708032134.OAA24858 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Treatment of Waldorf Dissidents
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 17:34:40 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy said:
"The point I am making is that there is a pattern of extreme
"shunning" of
dissonance within Waldorf programs. It happened to Dan Dugan, it
happened to
Deby Snell, and it happened to me. These occurrences were at three
different
school sites many miles apart. We did not know each other and had
no
knowledge of the other's experiences. These occurrences also took
place at
very different times and at the hands of different people. The
common
threads: Waldorf educators and supporters were the 'actors,' the
shunning
occurred as a result of each of us questioning the validity of
Waldorf
methods, we were 'expelled' when it became apparent that we held
our
particular beliefs and questions strongly."
One of the three data points here is flawed. Kathy has never been
associated
with a Waldorf school. Her troubles came from co-workers and
employers in a
public school system.
Be that as it may, Kathy has advanced the proposition that Waldorf
programs
by their very nature are intolerant of disagreement. To be
scientific (which
we strive to do on all occasions on the WC list) we should
consider the
corollary proposition that Dan, Deby and Kathy share certain
character traits
that render them unsuitable for association with a Waldorf
program. If we
could define those shared character traits we could advance one of
the
missions of PLANS significantly; that is, the goal of preventing
inappropriate connection of parents with Waldorf schools.
PLANS has attempted to realize that mission by asking Waldorf
educators to
formulate a disclosure statement about the true nature of Waldorf
education.
That strategy, dependent as it is on finding Waldorf educators who
agree
with the PLANS view of the true nature of Waldorf education, has
been
unsuccessful. But now we can see a strategy that is completely
within the
grasp of PLANS.
If the shared character traits of Dan, Deby and Kathy could be
distilled into
a simple self-scoring test, the prospective Waldorf parent could
quickly
answer the question, "Am I like Dan, Deby and Kathy?" If the
answer is
"Yes," that parent should eschew Waldorf, thus avoiding
unpleasantness for
both parent and school.
I am pleased to point out this opportunity for PLANS.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:47:57 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
SAA13149; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA17043; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 18:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id SAA17469 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 18:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040146.SAA17469 lists1.best.com)
From: Jurgen Schon (camphill compuserve.com)
Subject: Re: Camphill
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 21:46:17 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Mr. Dugan wrote to me after disregarding my wish for a personal
exchange
via e-mail rather than the list:
)Dear Jurgen, you signed your letter "respectfully," yet you call
our list
)"National Inquirer." I remind you again that I don't have time
for
personal
)correspondence with Anthroposophists. I don't want you to leave
until
we've
)had a chance to talk a bit.
I don't want to wast your time, get me of the list.
Thank you
Jurgen Schon
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:48:34 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA14842; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 21:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA06674; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 21:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id UAA26929 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 20:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040340.UAA26929 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:32:12 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199707252148.OAA09255 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
This is a long comment on to two issues.
Kathy wrote:
)Stephen Wright posted:-----
)
))Can anybody here name a public school system - not just one
school, but the
))whole system (which would be analogous to the WE network of
schools) - that
))earns such high marks? If you can, I bet you it looks a lot like
a WE
))school.
)
)There are thousands of public school districts in the US that
earn very
)high marks. The ones that I have personal experience with do not
look "a
)lot like a WE school." In fact, they don't look at all like a WE
school.
)Why must WE proponents make a disparaging contrast between WE and
public
)schools? I find it disturbing that this seems to be a constant
thread that
)I have experienced since becoming acquainted with WE. It is
comparable to
)ethnocentrism, ie: what we have is the best and all else is poor
and
)inadequate in contrast.
KOPP says:
I think this arises from two sources: personal unfortunate,
dissatisfying
or disastrous histories in public education; and a personality
type which
is not content with the normal means of seeking answers in life,
and turns
to paranormal or supernatural paths.
I was talking last night to one of the founders and board of
trustees
members of our Steiner school, who reinforced this for me. He told
me he
had studied physics for five years in high school, but felt he had
never
really understood the meaning of physics, despite using it daily
as an
architect/builder.
He was scathing of the public school system, almost as if it were
evil,
certainly implying that the teaching was soulless and bereft of
any
imagination and worldview. He said the biases of individual
teachers was
responsible for a lack of uniformity and lack of meaning in his
education.
He said he had found a better way of understanding physics in the
Steiner
path of [supersensible intuition], and the integration of the
sciences with
all other aspects of life in the Steiner school was to be
preferred to the
state system's pigeonhole approach.
My question to the man was: does the Steiner way actually transmit
the same
amount and type of knowledge about physics and the scientific
method as the
state curriculum, and, if not, how does the replacement of the
standard by
the Steiner method prepare one to actually use physics in life,
either
professionally or personally. The answer was a waffle about how
wonderful
the integrated view of the world was.
He mentioned a well-liked star pupil of our school who is now
working for
him in his business, as an example of the wonders of the Steiner
education.
I asked if the young man actually knew as much about physics as
graduates
of the state system. Again the answer was a waffle about the young
man's
superior world view and general intellectual capabilities.
While I have nothing but admiration for the integration of the
arts and
sciences, and the inculcation of observance of the natural world,
in the
Steiner system, I have nothing but abhorrence of the unscientific
methods
inculcated in the children: use of intuition instead of reason and
testing
of hypothesis, and, by immersion in the Anthroposophical milieu
which is
inherent in every moment of every day and every activity in the
school, the
inculcation of the belief that ordinary science is not enough to
understand
our world, and, indeed, that the only way to such understanding is
through
"higher thought".
Rigby and Steve Premo have been discussing this, as well, and I
have
refrained from commenting directly. Let me just say that I think
that the
scientific method is capable of answering any question we can ask
about our
ken. We just don't know how to frame the questions well enough.
We're
getting better at it.
Rigby's contention that rational science is moving closer to
something
supernatural because scientists recognise that science cannot
answer all
questions does not hold water for me. His citation of Sagan and
Margulis'
near-metaphysical writings about thought as a part of the realm of
physics
and biology says to me the opposite of what he seems to hear. I
hear them
saying that thought is just another natural -- NOT supernatural --
process,
and it can be apprehended by reason.
If this is so, then the anecdotes of scientific intuition that
have led to
breakthroughs are not supersensible or supernatural, but entirely
natural.
I think that when we fully understand the nature of thought we
will realise
it is a natural phenomenon that obeys the laws (or whatever you
want to
call them) of nature. Consciousness is one of the two main
questions of
life for me; the other is what was before what now is, and how did
what now
is come to be? I assume this existence as I know it is real, and
does not
need supernatural explanation, and is not a dream or imagining.
None of my rational hardheadedness prevents me from experiencing
awe and
all the other emotions which are also a product of nature. I have
faith
that we will arrive at the answers without resort to the
supernatural --
though to us, were we transported into the perhaps distant future
where
such understanding exists, it might seem supernatural. That has
always been
the case: the pushing back of the mysterious that has been
believed to be
supernatural and its replacement with the reality of science has
always
been seen by the old order as miraculous. It is not -- it is
natural.
Believers in Anthroposophy (and those who follow Steiner and the
Waldorf
educational methods) are those who do not have faith in human
nature as a
product of the natural world, and who do not believe the natural
world is
enough of an explanation for itself. I admit that I cannot see how
there
can possibly be a natural answer to my second fundamental question
above.
But the fact that I cannot see it does not mean that it can't be.
Nor do I
need the comfort of knowing a supernatural answer that cannot be
proved but
must be believed.
It isn't science I believe in (nor do I accept the
characterisation of
science as a belief system -- it is a search engine for the
Internet of the
Universe).
If I believe in anything, it is the reality of nature.
As for WE, Anthroposophy and Steiner's path, I find them not a way
to know
more, but a way to know less. Far from expanding, they constrict.
Their
"higher knowledge" is not knowledge, but imaginative fancy.
It is a shame that this is so, for there are some aspects of the
Steiner/Waldorf method which are attractive (those not related to
Anthropsophical tenets, but more common sensical, humane and
caring,
integrative, and unpressured). These are found, unfortunately,
more in
small, close-knit groups than in large institutions like state
schools.
It was these values which attracted me -- not the esotericism of
Anthroposophy. It is a shame that the education itself is flawed
by
_inclusion_ of the religious spiritualism of Steiner and
Anthroposophy.
I do not believe it is impossible to have the good things of WE
without
Anthroposophy, as some people have said here. There are people of
goodwill
and respect for children elsewhere -- including in the state
system.
Unfortunately, because of society's problems, and the scale of
public
education, and the economic pressure on students to "succeed",
state
schools have less opportunity to practise these good things. We
would still
choose an alternative to the state schools, but not on
philosophical
grounds, only pragmatic ones.
But next time we would have to be certain that we were not misled
by false
statements by a prospective school.
From ??? ??? Sun Aug 03 21:48:39 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA15252; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 21:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA23261; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 21:14:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id VAA04362 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 21:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040401.VAA04362 lists1.best.com)
From: JoAnn Schwartz (jms mich.com)
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:02:40 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy wrote (in reply to Steve Premo):
)If it is important to you that your son learn science as a part
of his
)education, including the use of the scientific method, you need
to be very
)clear that this will not happen in a Waldorf school.
My experiences at the Detroit Waldorf School lead me to the
opposite
conclusion. My advise to Steve and other concerned parents is to
ask about
the science curiculum at your local Waldorf school, ask to see
examples of
main lesson books in the upper grades for the sciences, sit in on
workshops
on teaching science at the school, go to the parent evening on the
middle
school curiculum (even if it's not set up for parents from 1st
grade, I'll
bet you wouldn't get a lot of flack for attending.) If your school
doesn't
have these sorts of events -- suggest them!
Also remember that in the early years (grades 1-3), the "science"
part of
your child's education may occur in main lesson blocks that
incorporate
geography and history as well (e.g. blocks on agriculture,
house-building,
and textiles in third grade).
Warmly,
JoAnn Schwartz, Detroit Waldorf School parent
(jms mich.com) Detroit, Michigan USA
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 01:59:14 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA17305; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 23:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA20533; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA22367 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040617.XAA22367 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Dissonance
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 22:56:50 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby posted:
Here is Kathy, sequestered
)with her union attorney ("CTA" is the California Teachers
Association),
)earnestly seeking counsel about dealing with the enormities that
her
)Waldorf-supporting co-workers have visited upon her, when in
burstÖRigby and
)Arline! Dreaded duo of the anthroposophical conspiracy! Arline,
unable to
)control herself, points a quivering finger at Kathy and intones,
"Liar, lair,
)pants on fire." etc., etc.
I am wondering why you are so sarcastic. How does it serve you to
respond
in such a rude manner?
In fact the CTA attorney, Diane Ross, was there. Before the
meeting even
began I asked of the entire group that she identify herself and
she did so.
She was in the back of the room. She was very upset with the fact
that so
many uninvited people were there.
Rigby, your continued sarcasm does nothing to put you in a good
light. You
are very aware of the manner in which Arline Monk spoke to me and,
in fact,
you acknowledged it to me and apologized for her.
My understanding of that meeting was that it was to meet with my
attorney
and CTA representatives. You and the other many non-Union members
that
attended that meeting did so with the direct intent to discredit
those of
us that were having problems with Waldorf inclusion in the public
arena.
The bottom line here Rigby is that I am a CTA member, you are not.
Nor were
any of the attendees from Rudolf Steiner College or the public
school
teacher that found it appropriate to take my photograph in order
to
intimidate me. She was sitting with Rudolf Steiner staff when she
did so. I
personally cannot imagine barging into someone else's Union office
or any
other meeting of another person's private organization. And then,
once
done, calling that person a liar, insulting that person, and
taking
photographs of that person. This was an inexcusable incident.
Please don't
attempt to make it appear to be anything else.
The point I am making here is this: Waldorf has been illegally
funded in
public schools. When dissonance occurred at the hands of several
public
school teachers and many parents this type of intimidation and
discreditation occurred. The treatment of Oak Ridge parents by Oak
Ridge
administrators and Rudolf Steiner staff is nothing short of
horrific. It is
far worse than anything that has been done to me. There is no way
to paint
a pretty picture of it.
Your continued sarcasm and name-calling in response to me only
serves to
underline my point. You do yourself dishonor when you communicate
with me
in a rude manner. I believe you can do better.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 01:59:12 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA15808; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 23:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA20111; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA22375 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040617.XAA22375 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Sarcasm
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 22:56:52 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby posted:
)If the shared character traits of Dan, Deby and Kathy could be
distilled into
)a simple self-scoring test, the prospective Waldorf parent could
quickly
)answer the question, "Am I like Dan, Deby and Kathy?" If the
answer is
)"Yes," that parent should eschew Waldorf, thus avoiding
unpleasantness for
)both parent and school.
)
)I am pleased to point out this opportunity for PLANS.
)
Why are you so sarcastic Rigby? This is a pattern I have noted
recently in
response to communication that I post on this list.
How about if we simply respond to each other's postings with
respectful
criticism? The sarcasm serves only to put you in a bad light. I
find most
of your other postings to be intelligent and well thought. Please
try to do
the same when you respond to me.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 01:59:09 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA13356; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 23:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA19561; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:17:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA20687 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Sun, 3 Aug
1997 23:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040611.XAA20687 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Lunar (was: Camphill)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 07:03:04 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708032108.OAA16714 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)A teacher who was in the San Diego charter
)training with Lilian Cooper was told her Judaism was incompatible
with
)being a Waldorf teacher.
I must remember to tell that to the Jewish Waldorf teachers I know
the
next time I meet any of them.
)And of course the exposition wouldn't be complete without the
South African
)Anthroposophists chiming in:
Did you have problems with singular and plural when you were at
school,
Dan? You quoted _one_ S.A. author.
Oh -- and one of these Jewish Waldorf teachers I know is also
South
African -- I wonder what we should make of that? It suggests to me
that
it is, as usual, rather dangerous to attempt to generalise from
the
particular.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 01:59:18 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA06393; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA12769; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 00:12:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id AAA11928 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 00:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040705.AAA11928 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Come on Stephen.
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:06:49 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708032108.OAA16714 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708040611.XAA20687 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Tonkin writes,
)Did you have problems with singular and plural when you were at
school,
)Dan? You quoted _one_ S.A. author.
Come on, Stephen. You had to dig deep for that one. I'm likely the
one
poster on this list that makes myself vulnerable by mistakes. I
could
easily feel intimidated if I felt that every error I made would be
duly
pointed out. Fact is, I've seen Waldorf teachers who are
spelling/grammar
challenged. I wish more people would concern themselves less with
written
challenges. I'd like to hear from everyone, regardless of
grammatical or
spelling ability. Let's take the high road and look for the
meaning behind
the words. Most of us make mistakes now and then. Some of us more
than
others (grin).
)Oh -- and one of these Jewish Waldorf teachers I know is also
South
)African -- I wonder what we should make of that? It suggests to
me that
)it is, as usual, rather dangerous to attempt to generalise from
the
)particular.
I wonder if this person would be willing to make a statement about
Steiner's racist writings...Somehow I wonder if he/she would be
satisfied
with addressing the concern with, "Some of Steiner's writings are
difficult."? Makes me wonder how much of Steiner is covered in the
teacher
training programs. I would feel better about the Anthroposophical
movement
if they would officially denounce that part of Steiner's thinking.
Deby
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 01:59:32 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA11533; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA26933; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 00:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id AAA18204 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 00:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040717.AAA18204 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 03:17:42 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael Kopp, you wrote:
(( Rigby's contention that rational science is moving closer to
something
supernatural because scientists recognise that science cannot
answer all
questions does not hold water for me. His citation of Sagan and
Margulis'
near-metaphysical writings about thought as a part of the realm of
physics
and biology says to me the opposite of what he seems to hear. I
hear them
saying that thought is just another natural -- NOT supernatural --
process,
and it can be apprehended by reason.))
Actually, I am not trying to say that rational science is moving
closer to
something supernatural. I am trying to communicate my sense that
ultimately
the distinction between natural and supernatural is an artificial
one.
I would also say that there are limits to the ability of rational
science to
apprehend nature, if "rational" is taken to mean reliance on
quantification--mathematics, formal logic, rule-based symbol
processing, etc.
I believe there are non-rational (which is not to say irrational)
approaches
to the perception of nature that can extend the purview of
science.
You said:
(( If this [the Margulis/Sagan viewpoint] is so, then the
anecdotes of
scientific intuition that have led to breakthroughs are not
supersensible or
supernatural, but entirely natural. ))
Exactly. So let's learn how use intuition better. We might find
out that
there is much more to "nature" than conventional science has thus
far come to
recognize.
Regards,
Rigby
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:16 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
DAA20948; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 03:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id DAA04413; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 03:40:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id DAA26927 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 03:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041032.DAA26927 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Come on Stephen.
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:11:37 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708040705.AAA11928 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby Snell (snell oro.net) wrote:
)Tonkin writes,
))Did you have problems with singular and plural when you were at
school,
))Dan? You quoted _one_ S.A. author.
)
)Come on, Stephen. You had to dig deep for that one.
No I didn't. Dugan was trying to claim that "South African
Anthoposophists" -- plural -- take a particular stance on Jewish
teachers. I am pointing out that he has cited the writings of
_one_,
from which he is trying to generalise.
My experience of Dugan's previous distortions and out-of-context
quoting
leads me to believe that it was not accidental. If it was, I
apologise;
but it still needs correcting.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:44 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA03905; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA05406; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 08:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA15010 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 08:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041542.IAA15010 lists1.best.com)
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:38:47 +0000
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199708041348.GAA29076 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
On 4 Aug 97 , John Calkins wrote:
) Kopp says, "Science is counterintuitive"
)
) I believe Kopp is vastly underestimating the importance of
intuition in
) the discoveries of science. Science is simply a method for
testing
) ideas. . . .
)
) There is a common misconception that the practice of science is
rather
) cold and rational. This is true for the scientific method. The
) practice of science involves the more "irrational" and hotter
human
) characterisics of intuition, imagination, stubbornness, and
judgment in
) the forming of hypothoses and designing of experiments.
Sounds to me like Calkins and Rigby are saying that intuition and
insight
are important to science, because creative thinking is necessary
to come
up with useful hypotheses. Kopp does not disagree with this, but
responds
that this is not enough, and that logical, "materialist" thinking
is
necessary to evaluate the results of experiments to determine
whether the
hypotheses are faulty.
This appears to be more a difference in emphasis than a
fundamental
difference of approach.
On the other hand, Calkins and Rigby seem to think that Kopp
believes
intuition to have no value, but Kopp didn't say that. Kopp seems
to
think that Rigby believes intuition to be sufficient for
scientific
investigation, but Rigby didn't say that.
Steve Premo ------ Santa Cruz, California
--
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:10 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA20747; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA07891; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 02:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id BAA23482 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 01:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708040858.BAA23482 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: from John Calkins - Waldorf
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 01:58:26 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Forwarded to the list: from John Calkins -dD-
Hello Dan, and thank you for your reply.
I do not know how to send a note to your critics list. If you
could do
me the favor of forwarding this note to the list and letting me
know how
to send notes to the list. Thanks.
Since my last message, I have read through a portion of the
debates up
until June 1997, but since I am just joining, I apologize if some
of my
points are redundant.
I will only have e-mail up until August 22nd, after which I will
be
leaving Kodak. Unfortunately for this discussion, I most likely
will
not have regular access to e-mail or the internet after that date.
I would like to share my experience of meeting and talking with
roughly
40 individuals (including my wife) I have met over the past year
at
Sunbridge College. Most are aspiring to be Waldorf teachers. By
and
large it is a very diverse group from 5 continents and all sorts
of
backgrounds. A common reason why they have come to Sunbridge is
that
they are looking for a non-dogmatic alternative to the present
path our
society is taking. These are the future Waldorf teachers stressing
the
importance of independence of thought. I have observed and heard
of
strong conflicts and disagreements among these people. Given the
diversity among this group, I have a difficult time imagining that
the
Waldorf movement is as single-minded and close-minded as some
people
would believe.
Perhaps one common characteristic among these individuals is a
desire to
better understand the spiritual nature of things. I would argue
that
recognizing the spiritual nature of our world is not the same as
practicing religion, certainly not in the organized sense. It is
as
simple as recognizing the beauty of the water, the rocks, the
plants,
the sun, the seasons, the diversity of the human spirit, etc.
Virtually
anyone can appreciate the beauty in these to some degree.
)From what I observed, anthroposophy is not a religion but rather
it is a
body of thought. There are no religious ceremonies. The students
include Christians, Jews, and Bhuddists, and no person is
encouraged to
give up his religious faith. In fact, diversity of religion is
encouraged. A large group of Muslim students attend the Green
Meadow
Waldorf school in Spring Valley, New York. I can tell you that I
am a
skeptical person, and at first I had some skepticism about
anthroposophy. I do not find much evidence of religious or
dogmatic
conspiracy theories at this teacher training center.
Now there are some people who do not recognize the spiritual
nature of
the universe (I assume that a "secular humanist" would fall in
this
category). I would imagine that most Waldorf teachers do recognize
the
spiritual nature of things. It is clear that the conflict between
these
groups will not be resolved any time soon. Steiner states that
anthroposophy is not for everyone and that there are other paths
that
one may follow to find fulfillment in life. I do not know how up
front
Waldorf schools are in their development of the human spirit (I
imagine
it varies), but clearly to avoid conflict with those who do not
recognize this spirit, the schools should do so.
Now clearly anthroposophy does have a strong influence on the
Waldorf
curriculum. While anthroposophy is not taught directly is the
school,
there are aspects of it which do enter the curriculum. This is not
unlike the influence of religion in our public schools. Some
obvious
examples I can remember from my days in public schools are seeing
images
of Santa Claus and Easter rabbits, celebrations of Halloween,
singing
excerpts of Handel's Messiah, reciting the pledge of allegiance,
and
practicing Zen-like relaxation techniques. Religous references and
influences are prolific in history texts and literature. Our
culture is
inextricably influenced by religion, and it is virtually
impossible to
completely separate education and religion. Again I would
emphasize
that these influences appear in the education of our children is
not the
same as practicing religion.
I would like to now address the issue of teaching about the nature
of
things. As a professional scientiest, I do believe that science
has its
place, but the scientific method by itself is quite limited; after
all,
it is only a method to verify hypothoses. The real creativity in
understanding the physical nature of the universe is in the minds
and
imaginations of people. To paraphrase Einstein, "If you want your
children to grow up to be brilliant, then read them fairy tales.
If you
want them to be even more brilliant, then read them even more
fairy
tales." Fostering creativity and imagination is what Waldorf
education
is about.
I have read some of the debate about teaching of the "four
elements" in
Waldorf schools. Personally I think the whole debate is silly.
What
harm is there in visuallizing the world in this manner if it helps
one
to understand the nature of and interactions among things.
Furthermore,
chemistry and physics are taught as well. I find it hard to
imagine
that a reasonable person cannot make the distinction and
connection
between these views.
Dan Dugan asked me which parts of Steiner's teachings have been
discarded. Since the anthroposophical movement is a diverse group,
I
can only speak for myself. I believe that most spiritual
explanations
given to understand physical phenomenon are doomed to failure as
observation techniques improve. I reject or suspect any physical
predictions Steiner makes that are not based on the current
understanding of physical science of his time. Of course some of
his
predictions have already been proven false.
Finally, I would like to set the record straight on the use of
scientific methods for validating bio-dynamic agriculture.
Ehrenfried
Pfeiffer has written a three volume set of books entitled
"Bio-Dynamic
Gardening and Farming" available through Mercury Press. In it
Pfeiffer
reports his findings of a proper scientific study comparing
bio-dynamic
and chemical agriculture.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:17 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
EAA27572; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id EAA07831; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 04:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id DAA04142 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 03:57:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041057.DAA04142 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 22:22:11 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708040717.AAA18204 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby wrote:
)Michael Kopp, you wrote:
)
)(( Rigby's contention that rational science is moving closer to
something
) supernatural because scientists recognise that science cannot
answer all
) questions does not hold water for me. His citation of Sagan and
Margulis'
) near-metaphysical writings about thought as a part of the realm
of physics
) and biology says to me the opposite of what he seems to hear. I
hear them
) saying that thought is just another natural -- NOT supernatural
-- process,
) and it can be apprehended by reason.))
)
And RIGBY replied:
)Actually, I am not trying to say that rational science is moving
closer to
)something supernatural. I am trying to communicate my sense that
ultimately
)the distinction between natural and supernatural is an artificial
one.
)
)I would also say that there are limits to the ability of rational
science to
)apprehend nature, if "rational" is taken to mean reliance on
)quantification--mathematics, formal logic, rule-based symbol
processing, etc.
) I believe there are non-rational (which is not to say
irrational) approaches
)to the perception of nature that can extend the purview of
science.
)
)You [KOPP] said:
)
)(( If this [the Margulis/Sagan viewpoint] is so, then the
anecdotes of
)scientific intuition that have led to breakthroughs are not
supersensible or
)supernatural, but entirely natural. ))
)
And RIGBY replied:
)Exactly. So let's learn how use intuition better. We might find
out that
)there is much more to "nature" than conventional science has thus
far come to
)recognize.
KOPP says:
We already do realise that there is more to nature than
conventional
science has thus far come to "recognise". Scientists -- who once
thought
the knowledge frontier was almost closed -- freely admit there is
a huge
and apparently expanding realm of unknown. Science is an expanding
endeavour.
And why foster intuition over reason? Intuition leads astray most
of the
time in science.
Why look to the kind of spiritual revelation that you are
evidently
proposing as a replacement for "conventional" science?
In fact, intuition _is_ the only "scientific method" of Steiner,
Anthroposophical "science" and WE.
It is the main method of science teaching in my children's school,
and
leaves out the two most important parts of the scientific method:
the
making and testing of hypotheses after observations and before
conclusions.
It is also completely counter to scientific rationality. Science
is
counterintuitive: in fact many scientific discoveries have had to
await the
more rational thought and experimentation of cooler heads after
notables
had predefined principles on the basis of intuition.
Experiments in our school are carefully set to give children
maximum
opportunity to observe simple events -- not _experiments_, and
then they
are asked merely to write up what they saw and what seemed to
happen. There
is no scientific method as science knows it.
Along the way there is talk about such things as elemental earth,
air, fire
and water, and children are asked to use their breath and natural
chemical
acids and bases and rocks and minerals.
All this I would not quarrel with -- if it were not the only way
of
teaching science in my children's school. (Science in the kitchen,
as we
have practiced it in the home since the kids were toddlers, can be
fun and
profoundly enriching -- if it is really science.)
Only in the top two grades -- after the Anthroposophical mumbo
jumbo has
had time to infiltrate the children's minds, as per the Waldorf
design --
is there some semblance of real science and the scientific method.
And even
then it is not backed up by enough facts.
Wonderment? Integration with the arts and philosophy? Questing
minds?
Sure.
Intuition instead of rationality? Mumbo jumbo?
No thank you.
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:28 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
GAA02886; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 06:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA10300; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 06:22:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id GAA20630 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 06:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041318.GAA20630 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 97 12:18:42 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael:
)I assume this existence as I know it is real, and does not
)need supernatural explanation, and is not a dream or imagining.
Just out of sheer curiousity, are you a fan of Ayn Rand and
'Objectivism'?
James
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:37 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
GAA14168; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 06:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA14315; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 06:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id GAA29076 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 06:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041348.GAA29076 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 09:46:10 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kopp says, "Science is counterintuitive"
I believe Kopp is vastly underestimating the importance of
intuition in
the discoveries of science. Science is simply a method for testing
ideas. Commonly the word "science" is often used to mean
"understanding
of nature". In this sense, science is counterintuitive only to
those
who do not have a deep understanding of the physical nature of
things.
It is more intuitive for those that have more of an understanding.
Presumably one with a deeper understanding of nature will more
easily
predict the correctness of hypothoses.
Let me give an example. Einstein's intuition told him that the
force
experienced by a photon of light moving in an elevator in free
space is
indistinguishable from the force of gravity acting on a similar
photon.
This assuption led to the development of his special theory of
relativity. Without this creative insight and imagination, it is
unlikely that the theory would ever be proposed.
There is a common misconception that the practice of science is
rather
cold and rational. This is true for the scientific method. The
practice of science involves the more "irrational" and hotter
human
characterisics of intuition, imagination, stubbornness, and
judgment in
the forming of hypothoses and designing of experiments.
It is my view that students should be encouraged to use and
develop
their intuition, imagination, and creativity so that they are able
to
make new contributions to the understanding of nature. A student's
initial discovery of the current understanding of the nature of
things
is truly a wonder. While this is occurring, it is important for
her to
develop her sense of intuition so that nature of things does
indeed
become intuitive to her. She will find herself better able to make
new
scientific discoveries.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:41 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA06303; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA25511; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 08:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA24596 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 08:03:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041503.IAA24596 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Intuition & Science
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 07:42:44 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby posted:
) I believe there are non-rational (which is not to say
irrational) approaches
)to the perception of nature that can extend the purview of
science.
Of course there are non-rational or should I write non-scientific
approaches to the perception of nature. This has been evident for
centuries, particularly in literary works that describe nature
from a
subjective basis. These approaches have immeasurable value to our
artistic
expression. But they are not science - they are art encompassed in
its
variety of forms.
Your views on this subject affirm my perception of Waldorf
education as
being designed to develop this type of "intuition." This is all
well and
good, however; it is not appropriate in a public school setting.
The
history of human "intuition" regarding the "non-rational"
perception of
nature has been extremely varied over history. It is what is
commonly
referred to as religious or spiritual belief.
I think it is a good idea to combine subjects, ie: science, art,
literature, etc., within the curriculum. This is my approach to
teaching
and the reason that I was attracted to the Waldorf method
initially. It
gives a student a variety of ways to look at a given subject and
combines
them within the same class. This is particularly valuable in the
elementary
years. However, to infer that observing nature from an artistic,
subjective
standpoint is somehow part of a scientific viewpoint in terms of
coming to
a testable hypothesis and/or accepted scientific fact completely
bypasses
and ignores what science is. "Spiritual science," as referred to
by
Anthroposophists, is religious belief. Attaching the word
'science' after
'spiritual' does not somehow make it so. I consider the coupling
of these
words to be an oxymoron.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:08 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA24588; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA17805; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA11994 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041911.MAA11994 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 97 18:03:03 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
John (beautiful post, BTW):
)Let me give an example. Einstein's intuition told him that the
)force experienced by a photon of light moving in an elevator in
free
)space is indistinguishable from the force of gravity acting on a
)similar photon. This assuption led to the development of his
special
)theory of relativity. Without this creative insight and
)imagination, it is unlikely that the theory would ever be
proposed.
It's also worth dwelling a moment on the importance of the
'thought
experiment' in modern physics. Many of Einstein's propositions
were
the result of thought experiments - as were Bohr's and later David
Bohm's. To my mind, the thought experiment is a marvellous
concatenation of imagination, reason and intuition - and shows how
elastic the scientific method has had to become to accommodate the
tenets of theoretical physics.
Art Zajonc's book 'catching the light' gives a fascinating insight
into the role of thought experiments in the development of
contemporary understanding of light. Interesting how Zajonc
manages
to be a world-class scientific populariser (plaudits from Gleick,
Sacks and Penrose) and an eminent Anthroposophist...
James
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:57:56 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
KAA21878; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:50:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id KAA14401; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 10:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA17798 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 10:05:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041705.KAA17798 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 19:04:22 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 09:11 AM 4/8/97 +0100, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)Dugan was trying to claim that "South African
)Anthoposophists" -- plural -- take a particular stance on Jewish
)teachers. I am pointing out that he has cited the writings of
_one_,
)from which he is trying to generalise.
This refers to Graham Downer, "The South African Paleolithic Age."
Invisible
Africa: A search for the Grail in Africa-Selected Essays.
Kenilworth,
Republic of South Africa: Novalis Press, 1987.
Is Stephen Tonkin suggesting that Graham Downer is, or was in
1987, isolated
among South African Anthroposophists?
If Downer would really be _one_ isolated person, then how could
the South
African Anthroposophical publishers Novalis publish his book,
containing the
pro-Apartheid and anti-'lunar Jehovah' (supposedly controlling
anti-Apartheid media), statements? This needs not just _one_
author, but
also at least _one_ director of the publishing firm, very probably
more than
_one_ printer, etc. Downer's book was purchased from Rudolf
Steiner College
in the USA. _One_?
regards,
Herman
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:10 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA00133; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA19357; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA11494 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041909.MAA11494 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 97 18:13:35 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve:
)Sounds to me like Calkins and Rigby are saying that intuition and
)insight are important to science, because creative thinking is
)necessary to come up with useful hypotheses. Kopp does not
disagree
)with this, but responds that this is not enough, and that
logical,
)"materialist" thinking is necessary to evaluate the results of
)experiments to determine whether the hypotheses are faulty.
You're right to point out that good science *must* be a
combination
of intuition/inspiration and rigourous analysis (Goethe would say
that the intuition/inspiration should be rigourous, too). And I
think
you're right to point out that nobody is actually disagreeing with
this.
However, it is by no means established that the analysis phase has
to
be "materialist". Rigour in analysis has to do with a preparedness
to
seek uncomfortable - even unattainable - truth over convenient
falsehood. It also has to do with attention to methodology -
making
sure that one's methods are internally consistent, watertight and
comprehensive. It doesn't require any committment to a particular
position - let alone a materialist one. As an example, Bohm's
'implicate order' is both analytically rigorous and
methodologically
sound - but doesn't come anywhere close to substatiation by a
materialistic perspective.
James
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:11 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA07174; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA20288; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:41:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA11832 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:10:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041910.MAA11832 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Intuition & Science
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 97 18:30:02 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy:
)Your views on this subject affirm my perception of Waldorf
education
)as being designed to develop this type of "intuition." This is
all
)well and good, however; it is not appropriate in a public school
)setting. The history of human "intuition" regarding the
)"non-rational" perception of nature has been extremely varied
over
)history. It is what is commonly referred to as religious or
)spiritual belief.
The value of 'human reason' is even more varied. Let's not forget
that the 'age of enlightenment' - of Rousseau, Jefferson and Paine
-
gave us the French Revolution, the guillotine and the terror. Even
most of the excesses of the religious mind - the inquisitions and
pogroms (whose toll of casualties amounted to far fewer than the
scientific materialism of Hitler, Stalin and Mao) - owe more to
the
voice of supposed reason, than to genuine intuition.
Religious 'intuition' gave us the Gothic Cathedrals, the mosques
of
Sinan, the paintings and sculptures of the Renaissance, the epic
poems of Hafiz, Saadi and Rumi, the gardens of Kyoto etc. etc. -
scientific materialism has given us the motor car, television and
inter-continental ballistic missiles. That's no reason to diminish
the contribution of the latter - even as we splutter through smog,
our brains befuddled by the pointless prattle and mind-numbing
jingles of daytime TV. But it does give a sense of perspective...
James
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:01 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA29918; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA09887; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 11:46:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA23367 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 11:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041824.LAA23367 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 14:25:20 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Premo says:
)Sounds to me like Calkins and Rigby are saying that intuition and
)insight are important to science, because creative thinking is
)necessary to come up with useful hypotheses. Kopp does not
disagree
)with this, but responds that this is not enough, and that
logical,
)"materialist" thinking is necessary to evaluate the results of
)experiments to determine whether the hypotheses are faulty.
I disagree with Kopp's statement, "Science is counterintuitive."
Perhaps I should be more clear. The scientific method is the best
tool
we have yet developed for verifying physical hyposthoses. But it
is
only a tool. It is a mechanical-like procedure that anyone with
enough
patience and thought can do, much like driving a car or using a
computer. I believe that there is much greater value in developing
creative intuition to form new ideas. These ideas are uncommon and
lead
to new discovery.
Premo is right that where Kopp and I differ is on emphasis;
however,
the emphasis is so important. More often too much emphasis is
given to
the scinetific method rather than to the development of creative
thinking.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:02 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA03573; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA11156; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 11:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA01305 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041845.LAA01305 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 19:32:44 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708041705.KAA17798 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl) wrote:
)Is Stephen Tonkin suggesting that Graham Downer is, or was in
1987, isolated
)among South African Anthroposophists?
No, I don't recall saying that -- *do* read what I _actually_
said,
Herman.
I am stating that he is _one_ person, he represents one of a
spectrum of
points of view, and that it is fallacious to generalise from the
particular.
He does not represent *all* S.A. anthropops (Dugan's phrase:
"*the* [my
emphasis] South African Anthroposophists" is, by default, an
_inclusive_
phrase) -- it is patently obvious that there are others who do not
take
Mr Downer's stance, and it is therfore fallacious to characterise
"the
South African Anthroposophists" as Dugan did.
To repeat it for those who are a tad slow on the uptake: To
generalise
from the particular is a fallacious form of argument.
I'm sure that someone with a PhD could have worked all that out
for
himself, _if_ he'd bothered to try.
BTW, Herman, to completely change the subject (I think), have you
ever
read Karl Popper's _The Poverty of Historicism_?
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Mon Aug 04 13:58:15 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA09747; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:46:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA08392; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA23185 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 12:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708041933.MAA23185 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:33:42 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve Premo, you wrote:
(( On the other hand, Calkins and Rigby seem to think that Kopp
believes
intuition to have no value, but Kopp didn't say that. Kopp seems
to
think that Rigby believes intuition to be sufficient for
scientific
investigation, but Rigby didn't say that.
))
As far as I'm concerned, you got it right--almost. I do recognize,
and the
appreciate the fact, that Kopp sees intuition as a natural aid to
scientists.
You are quite right that I don't propose intuition as an
alternative to
reason, but as a supplement during the process of discovery.
I think Kopp and I are actually in very close agreement in this
area, which
may be somewhat confusing to those who know our history. Calkins
is a
welcome new voice who likely will help us find more areas of
agreement.
Regards,
Rigby
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 01:24:59 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
SAA28224; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 18:18:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA22157; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 18:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id SAA03714 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 18:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708050107.SAA03714 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 07:36:29 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708041318.GAA20630 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Michael:
)
))I assume this existence as I know it is real, and does not
))need supernatural explanation, and is not a dream or imagining.
)
)Just out of sheer curiousity, are you a fan of Ayn Rand and
)'Objectivism'?
)
)
)James
No. Why?
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 01:24:25 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
QAA20466; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 16:38:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id QAA28615; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 16:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id QAA12774 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 16:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708042331.QAA12774 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 aol.com
Subject: Re: Science in CA Public Schools
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 19:30:56 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 97-08-03 16:13:08 EDT, RigbyL aol.com writes:
(( Waldorf schools usually offer lower wages than public schools,
making it more difficult to obtain high quality teachers in any
subject. ))
I agree on this one, in part. Yes, it is often difficult to get
someone to
work for barebones wages with no union support, no matter how
dedicated.
However, I have found that those who feel a strong dedication to
WE (as well
as other lower-wage nonunion private schools) often are the ones
who move
heaven and earth to MAKE it financially possible. This being the
case, the
teachers at these schools are often extremely dedicated to their
careers and
their students.
This is not to imply that public school teachers aren't dedicated.
I know
several wonderful P.S. teachers personally, and their dedication
is not to be
denied.
regards,
Kelly
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 01:25:04 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
TAA03963; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id TAA04580; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 19:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id SAA03893 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Mon, 4 Aug
1997 18:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708050108.SAA03893 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural (Premo, Rigby posts)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:02:02 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708041348.GAA29076 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708041542.IAA15010 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve Premo tries to synthesise several arguments and finds not
much
difference. I disagree: there is every difference, particularly
where
Steiner, Anthroposophy, Anthroposophical "science", and WE are
concerned.
And Rigby tries to move us towards more agreement between
Anthroposophy and
science on the basis of apparent agreement on the role of
"intuition".
We are lost in semantics here, and losing focus. We are NOT in
agreement.
We are mushing the argument and watering down the propositions
regarding
intuition, reasoning, and the tuition of science in WE schools.
There is a fundamental antipathy between science and superstition.
The two
cannot ever meet on any common ground, nor share anything
meaningful.
I was led to believe that Anthroposophy as the foundation (not the
substance it really is) of WE, was a human-centred (humanistic)
naturalistic approach to the _natural_ part of the human mind that
is the
human "spirit".
Instead I found -- with difficulty and over a long time -- that
Anthroposophy is a mystical, esoteric, spiritualistic approach to
the
_supernaturalistic_ view of the human "spirit", governed not by
natural
principles but by an ethereal world.
PREMO:
)On 4 Aug 97 , John Calkins wrote:
)
)) Kopp says, "Science is counterintuitive"
))
)) I believe Kopp is vastly underestimating the importance of
intuition in
)) the discoveries of science. Science is simply a method for
testing
)) ideas. . . .
))
)) There is a common misconception that the practice of science is
rather
)) cold and rational. This is true for the scientific method. The
)) practice of science involves the more "irrational" and hotter
human
)) characterisics of intuition, imagination, stubbornness, and
judgment in
)) the forming of hypothoses and designing of experiments.
)
PREMO:
)Sounds to me like Calkins and Rigby are saying that intuition and
insight
)are important to science, because creative thinking is necessary
to come
)up with useful hypotheses. Kopp does not disagree with this, but
responds
)that this is not enough, and that logical, "materialist" thinking
is
)necessary to evaluate the results of experiments to determine
whether the
)hypotheses are faulty.
)
)This appears to be more a difference in emphasis than a
fundamental
)difference of approach.
KOPP says:
No. It IS a very fundamental difference in _approach_, not a
difference in
emphasis.
First, what do we mean here by "intuition"? (I think we are
confusing the
_issues_ by confusing the _definitions_.)
To Premo (and probably to those who would have the argument
watered down
instead of clarified, for the benefit of the Steiner,
Anthroposophical and
Waldorf Education people) the "intuition" being talked about is a
system of
"hunch", informed guess, or inspritation, which is useful to the
scientific
process which sees things too plainly and rationally.
In other words, "intuition" is a useful, if non-scientific,
adjunct to the
scientific process. Kopp has no problem with this kind of
"intuition".
But to KOPP, that's NOT the intuition we are concerned with in
science vs.
superstition, or Anthroposophy, or WE.
"Intuition" in Anthroposophy and WE means exactly what it says,
and what
Steiner (and every other guru) means when they say the answers are
within
ourselves if we abjure the rational, empirical approach to the
world, and
develop "higher mental abilities".
Steiner used "clairvoyance" and communications from spirits. In
other
words, spiritualism and the creation of a world view based
entirely on
inward vision and hearing messages. This is not reasoning as the
Western
mind understands it because reason requires reference to the
physical
evidence with which we are all presented.
This "in-tuition", to KOPP, is NOT a good thing to use in place of
-- or
even as an adjunct to -- the scientific method. It is, in fact,
what people
used since thinking began, up until the development of the modern
scientific method after the age of enlightenment.
The present century's fascination with spiritualism and the
supernatural is
an attempt by some -- malcontents? wooly thinkers? visionaries?
opportunitsts? -- to turn the clock back and say that science is
wrong
because it denies the spiritual and intuitional path to
enlightenment.
As has been elucidated here before, the difference is that one
system can
be subjected to external methods of empirical, evidential proof
accessible
to all; the other depends entirely on what is inside of every
mind, and
which can never be verified externally as being consistent from
individual
to individual.
Arguments about the philosophy of science and epistemology to the
contrary
notwithstanding, this is still the fundamental problem.
Science is a means of achieving that consistency.
THIS is how science is counter-intuitive. It is not that science
refuses to
listen to the hunch, the guess, the inspiration. They must be
proven by the
scientific method, or they remain conjecture. As I said before,
intuition,
in apprehension of the physical world, is almost always wrong.
The problem for parents of students in WE schools is that WE
_replaces_ the
scientific method with this spiritualistic in-tuition method of
making
sense of the world. It does this only stealthily, in my
experience,
probably because it does not wish to admit that its purpose is the
inculcation in the children of spiritualism (more than a personal
spiritual
development, as is often claimed).
Children taught by this method may indeed have qualities that are,
at first
glance, admirable, as has been pointed out here many times. But
they will
lack precision and incision of thought, particularly where science
and
rationality are concerned.
And they will be open, as many people on this list have
demonstrated, to
the most outrageous beliefs that have not been tested by rational
science.
If they are not taught the critical, skeptical thinking skills of
the
scientific method (which is useful in many other areas of
scholarship and
life) they may return to a type of belief prevalent in the middle
ages.
I personally do not see a means of reconciling spirituality and
science in
a single mind. This does not mean it is impossible. But I do not
think that
Rudolf Steiner and his belief system, Anthroposophy, did it
either. He
replaced science with mysticism. Not for me, not for my kids.
I have no objection to WE teaching this way -- in its place, or
openly. I,
like PLANS, object to the teaching of such a system in the public
schools
of America, because of the Constitution. Unfortunately, there is
no such
prohibition here in New Zealand; in fact there is an "integration"
law
which promotes it, or my children's Steiner school would not be
affordable
to us. (The NZ integration act was passed in order to give state
money to
the Catholic and Protestant private schools.)
I object to spiritual science being taught to my children, and
they will,
belatedly, have to leave an otherwise pleasant and helpful
environment just
because of this rejection of reason and inculcation of unreason. I
was
misled, despite more than casual investigation. This is
unconscionable.
PREMO:
)On the other hand, Calkins and Rigby seem to think that Kopp
believes
)intuition to have no value, but Kopp didn't say that. Kopp seems
to
)think that Rigby believes intuition to be sufficient for
scientific
)investigation, but Rigby didn't say that.
KOPP:
I am happy to embrace hunches, informed guesses, inspiration. I do
not
think they derive from the metaphysical, as Steiner believers do.
I _do_ believe that "in-tuition", as I have described it above
from the
Steiner view, has no value to rational, scientific thought.
Ordinary
thinking about data that I acquire is enough for me. I do not
believe that
answers to problems come from somewhere else; they come from
thought, even
if we are not aware of it, and it presents itself in perhaps semi-
or
unconscsious ways.
I do not need "in-tuition" to deal with my world. Perhaps I will
regret
that someday (just as perhaps I will roast in hell someday for not
believing in "God"). I'll take that chance.
Now comes a post from RIGBY about Premo's statement, above, which
I might
as well include here:
RIGBY:As far as I'm concerned, you got it right--almost. I do
recognize, and
appreciate the fact, that Kopp sees intuition as a natural aid to
scientists.
You are quite right that I don't propose intuition as an
alternative to
reason, but as a supplement during the process of discovery.
I think Kopp and I are actually in very close agreement in this
area, which
may be somewhat confusing to those who know our history. Calkins
is a
welcome new voice who likely will help us find more areas of
agreement.
KOPP:
Sorry, Rigby, I don't think Calkins is useful in finding areas of
agreement
between science and reason, and superstition, which is the nature
of the
argument between Waldorf Education (WE) and Waldorf Criticism
(WC). There
can be no agreement, in my opinion, on this fundamental.
Despite his claim above, which may refer to the "hunch" intuition,
I do
think that Rigby believes "in-tuition", as he understands the
Steiner/Anthroposophical method, to be sufficient for scientific
investigation. If not, he certainly defends tenaciously a system
which I
believe does so.
Further, I believe the teaching of "spiritual science" is a
fundamental
goal of WE. It includes regular science only because it would seem
too far
out not to.
As I said in my earlier post, Steiner-Anthroposophy-WE believers
and
defenders are not satisfied with reason; they _want_ to believe
there is
something more than the physical and natural. They seem to need a
supernatural. I believe they think that IS sufficient for their
world view,
and they don't need science.
An aside:
PREMO:
)"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen
from
)falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
)government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
KOPP:
I find a curious inconsistency between Premo's extremely sharp and
rational
legal thinking, principles and philosophy, and his openmindedness
to the WE
science teaching and other spiritualistic aspects.
What is going on here, Stephen? Why are you so keen to have we who
are so
diametrically opposed to each others' world views meet on shared
ground?
The same enlightened thinking led to the Constitution AND to
modern science.
It would be as if you empbraced the Constitution (as you obviously
do) but
also believed in some other legal system -- say, one-party
parliamentary
dictatorship, or a parliamentary theocracy where the priests pass
the laws
-- which could decree at any time an abrogation of the fundamental
human
rights embodied in (but not originating in) the Constitution. (As
happens
regularly around the world.)
This is much like Anthroposophy's intuition replacing reason and
evidence
with the supernatural and ethereal, is it not?
(This is not an exaggeration: many of the fundamental tenets of
Anthroposophy, and therefore its scientific world view, are so
ridiculous
to rational thought as to be like ravings of lunatics. But so, of
course,
are most religions' tenets. I am not denigrating people's rights
to believe
nonsense; but that does not mean that I should not call a spade a
spade.
Otherwise such received wisdom becomes common belief, and comes to
rule all
our lives, as it once did. Beware the new dark ages.)
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 09:59:14 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
JAA26437; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 09:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA23648; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 09:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA04225 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 08:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051553.IAA04225 lists1.best.com)
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 08:45:49 +0000
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199708040340.UAA26929 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708051249.FAA03522 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
On 5 Aug 97 , Stephen Wright wrote:
) Name at least one **system** or **
) pedagogical approach** not just individual schools that across
the board
) achieve has high a result as WE schools on all levels, i.e. that
don't just
) teach to achieve good standardized tests to justify the demand
on taxes.
By what system is this to be measured, if not with standardized
tests?
What studies have been done on Waldorf education to show that they
have
acheived a "high result on all levels?"
What levels, specifically, are you referring to?
If you are not willing to consider standardized tests (academic or
psychological), and not systematic studies have been done on
Waldorf
education, you are setting up a challenge that is impossible to
meet.
Until the acheivements of Waldorf education are quantified, there
is no
way to show how *any* other system compares, and thus no way to
show that
any other system has acheived as high a result as WE.
If you're looking for precision in response to your challenge,
you'd
better define your challenge more specifically.
Steve Premo ------ Santa Cruz, California
--
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 15:28:59 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA29717; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA20897; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 14:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA12144 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 11:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051809.LAA12144 lists1.best.com)
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural (Premo, Rigby posts)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 11:00:03 +0000
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199708041542.IAA15010 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708050108.SAA03893 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
On 5 Aug 97 , Michael Kopp wrote:
) We are lost in semantics here . . . .
Indeed.
) There is a fundamental antipathy between science and
superstition. The two
) cannot ever meet on any common ground, nor share anything
meaningful.
I agree.
) First, what do we mean here by "intuition"? (I think we are
confusing the
) _issues_ by confusing the _definitions_.)
)
) To Premo . . . the "intuition" being talked about is a system of
) "hunch", informed guess, or inspiration, which is useful to the
scientific
) process which sees things too plainly and rationally.
Right. I use the term "intuition" to refer to non-linear thinking,
e.g.,
thinking based on pattern recognition. Right-brain stuff.
I do not, though, believe that the scientific process "sees things
too
plainly and rationally."
) "Intuition" in Anthroposophy and WE means exactly what it says,
and what
) Steiner (and every other guru) means when they say the answers
are within
) ourselves if we abjure the rational, empirical approach to the
world, and
) develop "higher mental abilities".
)
) Steiner used "clairvoyance" and communications from spirits.
If, by "intuition," Rigby is referring to a channel for receiving
information from a spiritual realm, i.e., clairvoyance, I can see
that
Kopp's position is wholly inconsistent with Rigby's. If this is
what
Rigby means by "intuition," I agree with Kopp that it has no place
in
science.
This is not to say that it does not exist; only that there is no
scientific basis for believing that it exists. Many people have
had
strong spiritual experiences, and I do not know whether those
experiences
are entirely the product of imagination, or reflect a spiritual
reality
external to the individual.
Perhaps, when we better understand the function of the brain and
the
nature of consciousness, there will be an entirely materialistic
explanation for spiritual experiences. As of now, though, this is
not a
question which science can answer, and it appears to me to be
outside the
realm of science altogether.
) I _do_ believe that "in-tuition", as I have described it above
from the
) Steiner view, has no value to rational, scientific thought.
Ordinary
) thinking about data that I acquire is enough for me. I do not
believe that
) answers to problems come from somewhere else; they come from
thought, even
) if we are not aware of it, and it presents itself in perhaps
semi- or
) unconscsious ways.
I agree. Spiritual experiences often have subjective value in
giving
meaning to one's life, and in clarifying one's values. They have
little
or no value in understanding the physical world. (And I
distinguish
between intuition, in the sense of non-linear thinking, and
spiritual
experiences. To me they are two quite different things.)
) RIGBY: I do recognize, and
) appreciate the fact, that Kopp sees intuition as a natural aid
to scientists.
) You are quite right that I don't propose intuition as an
alternative to
) reason, but as a supplement during the process of discovery.
)
) KOPP:
) Despite his claim above, which may refer to the "hunch"
intuition, I do
) think that Rigby believes "in-tuition", as he understands the
) Steiner/Anthroposophical method, to be sufficient for scientific
) investigation.
Well, Rigby? Is that what you believe?
) KOPP:
) I find a curious inconsistency between Premo's extremely sharp
and rational
) legal thinking, principles and philosophy, and his
openmindedness to the WE
) science teaching and other spiritualistic aspects.
)
) What is going on here, Stephen? Why are you so keen to have we
who are so
) diametrically opposed to each others' world views meet on shared
ground?
I'm not. It sounded like Kopp and Rigby were saying more or less
the same
thing, so I pointed that out. I was seeking clarity, not
agreement.
Thanks for clarifying your position.
) The same enlightened thinking led to the Constitution AND to
modern science.
)
) This is much like Anthroposophy's intuition replacing reason and
evidence
) with the supernatural and ethereal, is it not?
Yes, it is.
I do believe you, and others, when you say that you were deceived
as to
the teaching which occurred at your school. But I also believe
those
who say that Anthroposophy is not taught at their schools, and I
have not
come to the conclusion that the students at the Santa Cruz Waldorf
School
are taught to believe in the supernatural and ethereal.
If I do come to that conclusion, you will hear about it (assuming
you and
I are still on this list).
Also, as I'm sure you realize, I have never embraced the Waldorf
approach
to science. As I've said before, WE has its good points and its
drawbacks, and so far, the good has outweighed the bad. Again, if
that
changes, you will hear about it.
Steve Premo ------ Santa Cruz, California
--
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 09:58:49 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
GAA11655; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 06:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA21677; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 06:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA00233 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 05:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051245.FAA00233 lists1.best.com)
From: Neil Faiman (faiman zko.dec.com)
Subject: Check early, check often
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 08:34:39 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Greetings.
In the discussion on "Science in CA Public Schools", Deby Snell
advised Steve Premo:
) Your child is young. Check out the curriculum in the upper
grades long
) before your child gets there. See if you agree with what is
being taught
) now. ... Make the choice based on a through and studied
evaluation.
This is excellent advice, not only to Steve, but to every
prospective Waldorf parent. It should not be all that difficult. At
the very least, you should be able to get an opportunity to look at
collected main lesson books from the various upper grade blocks.
Depending on the particular school, there may be opportunities to sit
in on upper grade classes. (On the one hand, visitors can be
disruptive; on the other hand, classroom visits can be valuable to
prospective parents, current parents, and the school. Different
schools balance these concerns differently. Years ago, the school
that my daughter attended did not allow classroom visitors; more
recently, they have had regularly scheduled classroom visitation
days.) Attend talks about the curriculum. Talk to a variety of
parents with children in the upper grades, or with graduates.
My own experience was that the representations of the school with
regard to the sort of education my daughter would receive were highly
accurate, that the quality of the education was excellent, and that
anthroposophical "doctrine" was not present in the education. Some
Critics here haved reported diametrically opposite experiences. Each
parent will make this determination for himself or herself in the
end, and will be doing himself or herself a service by beginning to
make it sooner rather than later.
Regards,
Neil Faiman, alumni Waldorf parent
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 09:58:48 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
FAA09425; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 05:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id FAA26432; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA03522 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 05:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051249.FAA03522 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Wright (atllaw mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 08:49:32 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199707252148.OAA09255 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708040340.UAA26929 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 03:32 PM 8/4/97 +1200,
Kathy wrote:
)
))Stephen Wright posted:-----
))
))Can anybody here name a public school system - not just one
school, but the
))whole system (which would be analogous to the WE network of
schools) - that
))earns such high marks? If you can, I bet you it looks a lot like
a WE
))school.
))
)There are thousands of public school districts in the US that
earn very
)high marks. The ones that I have personal experience with do not
look "a
)lot like a WE school." In fact, they don't look at all like a WE
school.
Please don't switch and bait. Name at least one **system** or **
pedagogical approach** not just individual schools that across the
board
achieve has high a result as WE schools on all levels, i.e. that
don't just
teach to achieve good standardized tests to justify the demand on
taxes.
Such system will look a lot like WE even if they treat spiritual
issues
under the guise of "self-esteem" or other similar term. In all
such
systems, the whole child must be addressed, not just the cognitive
test-taking portion.
Kathy, name some of the "thousands" that you personally know of
and
describe any marked contrasts to WE.
Stephen L. Wright
atllaw mindspring.com
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 09:59:01 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
HAA12848; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 07:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA14876; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 07:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA18480 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 07:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051420.HAA18480 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:23:57 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kopp:
)I personally do not see a means of reconciling spirituality and
science
)in a single mind. This does not mean it is impossible. But I do
not
)think that Rudolf Steiner and his belief system, Anthroposophy,
did it
)either. He replaced science with mysticism. Not for me, not for
my
)kids.
Perhaps I can demonstrate the possibility of reconciling the two.
Steiner's spiritual beliefs are intended as a compliment to
physical
science. I agree that the totality of his work is not physically
consistent with what we know today (who among us is wholly
consistent?),
but that does not mean that his view of the spiritual nature of
the
universe is not useful.
Let us start on areas where I think most of us agree. There is an
inherent problem of physical verification of spiritual principles.
They
can only be verified through individual experience. For example,
it is
universally accepted among people of concious that it is wrong to
maliciously lie. Despite the unanimity of opinion, I know of no
physical experiment to perform to test this hypothesis. Somehow we
all
accept this truth on faith, largely based on our own experience.
Some of you may be familiar with the story of the three blind men
and
the elephant. The one at the trunk says it is like a snake, the
one at
the leg says it is like a tree, and the one at his body says it is
like
a great wall. All three are correct though they appear to be in
disagreement. Physical science is very useful for verifying the
physical nature of the universe, but it does have its limitations.
It
tends to be reductionist in character, understanding nature by
breaking
things down into their constituent parts. The problem with this
method
is that as we divide the world into smaller and smaller parts, the
complexity of understanding the whole from its myriad a parts
becomes
overwhelming for even the most brilliant minds.
Now we come to an area of debate. I have had personal experience
of the
usefulness and correctness of the spiritual nature of the
universe. I
agree that it is completely illogical in the scientific sense.
Even so
I know that this is true. I know that these truths are universal
from
communicating with other thoughtful people who have reached very
similar
conclusions via a path quite different from mine. While I am still
quite a beginner when it comes to studying anthroposophy, I see
that it
does embrace spiritual ideas that are in common with conclusions
that I
have reached independent of anthroposophy. I do not like making
the
distinction between supernature and nature; if something truly
exists in
spiritual _nature_ even though it cannot be physically observed,
then I
would still call it natural.
I have found through my experience that this knowledge of the
spiritual
nature of things is not something separate, but something I can
apply in
my daily life. It compliments my understanding of the physical
nature
of the universe, and I do not have a conflict between the two. I
see it
as two views of the same thing.
Kopp:
) ... Ordinary thinking about data that I acquire is enough for
me. I
)do not believe that answers to problems come from somewhere else;
they
)come from thought, even if we are not aware of it, and it
presents
)itself in perhaps semi- or unconscsious ways.
Herein lies the essence of our disagreement or perhaps not so much
so.
To me both the spiritual and physical views are both "ordinary"
thinking. They do not "come from somewhere else" but come from my
own
observation. I do not want to misinterpret or read too much into
what
you say, but perhaps there is some connection between what I see
as
spiritual and what you see as "semi- or unconcious"?
Well that is certainly food for thought. I would conclude by
saying
that as a future Waldorf teacher, I recognize that my view of the
universe is unique since one cannot enter my mind to see my
thoughts. I
respect each individual's right to have a different view of
things. I
see the role of a teacher is to help expand the students view in a
non-assuming manner. This is truly the art of teaching, to act as
a
facilitator. The students may find their own vision unobstructed
by the
teacher's prejudices, whether they are drawn to a mostly physical
(analytical) view, a mostly spiritual (artistic) view, or
somewhere in
between. So there is no misunderstanding, by allowing students to
discover their spiritual nature, I mean just that: self-discovery.
I
do not mean to teach the students anthroposophy.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 10:56:07 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
KAA17878; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 10:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id KAA16388; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 10:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA18144 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 10:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051718.KAA18144 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 10:17:09 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Herman wrote:
)Is Stephen Tonkin suggesting that Graham Downer is, or was in
1987, isolated
)among South African Anthroposophists?
)
)If Downer would really be _one_ isolated person, then how could
the South
)African Anthroposophical publishers Novalis publish his book,
containing the
)pro-Apartheid and anti-'lunar Jehovah' (supposedly controlling
)anti-Apartheid media), statements? This needs not just _one_
author, but
)also at least _one_ director of the publishing firm, very
probably more than
)_one_ printer, etc. Downer's book was purchased from Rudolf
Steiner College
)in the USA. _One_?
There are racist statements from both Picard and Downer in that
book,
that's plural. See
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Racism_general.html,
bottom of the
page.
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 15:29:03 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA04385; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA22399; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 14:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA20011 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 11:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051824.LAA20011 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 06:19:14 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708040340.UAA26929 lists1.best.com)
(199707252148.OAA09255 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708051249.FAA03522 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Wright challenges Kathy Sutphen on the evidence for
comparability
between public and Waldorf schools:
)At 03:32 PM 8/4/97 +1200,
)Kathy wrote:
))
)))Stephen Wright posted:-----
)))
)))Can anybody here name a public school system - not just one
school, but the
)))whole system (which would be analogous to the WE network of
schools) - that
)))earns such high marks? If you can, I bet you it looks a lot
like a WE
)))school.
)))
))There are thousands of public school districts in the US that
earn very
))high marks. The ones that I have personal experience with do not
look "a
))lot like a WE school." In fact, they don't look at all like a WE
school.
)
)Please don't switch and bait. Name at least one **system** or **
)pedagogical approach** not just individual schools that across
the board
)achieve has high a result as WE schools on all levels, i.e. that
don't just
)teach to achieve good standardized tests to justify the demand on
taxes.
)Such system will look a lot like WE even if they treat spiritual
issues
)under the guise of "self-esteem" or other similar term. In all
such
)systems, the whole child must be addressed, not just the
cognitive
)test-taking portion.
)
)Kathy, name some of the "thousands" that you personally know of
and
)describe any marked contrasts to WE.
KOPP says:
Point 1.
Where is the evidence -- some sort of educational normative
yardstick
acceptable to WE -- to prove that WE is so good?
It seems to me that it's all anecdotal. Over my time on this list
I have
never seen anything approaching a valid statistical study across
the
spectrum of WE schools to indicate proof of the excellence that WE
supporters claim in the product (the graduates).
The only evidence of this sort ever provided (in my memory) was
one
instance where Stephen Tonkin reported that some WE graduates had
done well
in state schools after transferring, and that state school staff
had told
him anecdotally how well prepared they thought the WE students
were.
I would challenge the WE advocates on this list to front up with
some sort
of statistical evidence to back up their claims, before they
demand that
public school advocates do so.
Point 2.
Wright wants public school supporters to show a whole school
system's
excellence to match that (unproved, unsubstantiated) view he has
of WE
excellence.
How is this either possible or fair, given the often strident
reminders
from WE supporters on this list that WE is NOT a coherent school
system?
WE supporters are fond of telling us that neither AWSNA nor any
other
national or international body of WE or Anthroposophy controls the
affairs
of individual WE schools. Despite what Waldorf critics say about
the
uniformity and pervasiveness of the Anthroposophical content of WE
curriculum, there is not, to my knowledge, a single "school
district" of
more than one Waldorf school anywhere that would be analogous to
the public
school "system" Wright demands evidence from.
Point 3.
Despite the illogic and unfairness of Wright's demand, I believe
it would
not be too difficult to show, from verified educational research
by
reputable academic authorities, many United States school SYSTEMS
which
excell in quality of product (graduates). One hears about them all
the time
in the educational and even public media. And this evidence would
be more
than the normative standardised test scores.
The question is, why should any WE critic have to resort to a
literature
search for the evidence to satisfy Wright -- who, like all other
Waldorf
supporters I have seen on this list (with the minor exception
mentioned
above) have not, and probably cannot, provide similar _evidence_
for their
claims about WE.
There is no doubt in my mind that WE schools can produce wonderful
human
beings. If they do that in any greater proportion than state
schools, I
believe it's likely because of their selective enrollment of
families
seeking a non-traditional education, and the small settings and
personalised attention to students by the teachers, in a warm,
family-like
setting.
That is certainly laudable (and it was one of the reasons we chose
to send
our kids to a Steiner school). However, there is no statistical or
validated academic research to show that graduates of any of the
four
Steiner high schools in this country (ours is the newest, and has
had only
two graduating classes) are superior in any quantifiable way to
public
school graduates. Yes, most of them are charming and reasonably
happy and
successful at what they choose to do. But many have experienced
academic
difficulty in higher education, at least initially. And many
choose not to
pursue higher education.
This is fine. I am not a sucess-driven person, and I don't want
that for my
kids, either. But one of the reasons we are in the process of
disengaging
from the Steiner educational system is that our particular school
is not,
in my opinion, doing a good enough job of _educating_ our
children. And it
is my observation that this is a result of the Waldorf curriculum
and
methods as much as any deficiencies in individual teachers. (None
of the
senior teachers, for instance, have any evidence of continuing
professional
or subject specialty development or education beyond their
original
qualifications many years ago, except for Waldorf training and
continuing
Waldorf development.)
Wright should put up or shut up before demanding anything of the
critics.
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 15:28:50 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA14679; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA04287; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 13:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA29869 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 12:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051943.MAA29869 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:42:50 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 07:32 PM 4/8/97 +0100, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl) wrote:
))Is Stephen Tonkin suggesting that Graham Downer is, or was in
1987, isolated
))among South African Anthroposophists?
)He does not represent *all* S.A. anthropops
Whom *does* (or rather: *did*, in 1987, as an historically more
relevant
question) Graham Downer represent then? And whom did he *not*
represent?
)(it is patently obvious that there are others who do not take
)Mr Downer's stance,
What documents, do I pray, make this 'patently obvious'? More
precisely:
what books or articles have other South African Anthroposophists
written,
criticizing *Graham Downer's occult racial speculations*?
Criticisms on what
point, or points? I, and presumably others on this list, would be
interested
in reading these. I presume that documents published *before* the
fall of
Apartheid would impress many spectators more, than documents
published
*after* the fall of Apartheid.
As Dan Dugan pointed out already, the South African
Anthroposophical author
Picard supported Downer.
regards,
Herman
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 15:28:45 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
NAA22700; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA17467; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 12:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA29628 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 12:43:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708051943.MAA29628 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Re: Hitler and materialism (was: Intuition & Science)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:42:54 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 06:30 PM 4/8/97 +0100, James wrote:
)the
)scientific materialism of Hitler,
Of the 'Gottgläubige' (believer in God; *his* God, of course)
Hitler,
indeed! Hitler, who kept believing in, and talking about, divine
providence!
Among the first organizations which Hitler banned already in 1933,
were all
freethinker and atheist organizations. At the universities, the
nazis sought
to replace 'materialist' 'Jewish' science with 'ídealist'
'German' science.
regards,
Herman
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 15:29:01 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA04160; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:35:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA08875; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 14:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA02799 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 14:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708052100.OAA02799 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Hitler and materialism (was: Intuition & Science)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 97 20:43:38 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Herman:
)Of the 'Gottgl=E4ubige' (believer in God; *his* God, of course)
)Hitler, indeed! Hitler, who kept believing in, and talking about,
)divine providence! Among the first organizations which Hitler
banned
)already in 1933, were all freethinker and atheist organizations.
At
)the universities, the nazis sought to replace 'materialist'
'Jewish'
)science with '=EDdealist' 'German' science.
The same Hitler, I think, who had Dietrich Bohoeffer hanged - and
the
'confessing' Lutheran church driven into persecution. What flavour
of
God exactly did he worship? He certainly seems to have liquidated
followers of most of the mainstream religions (Jews, Catholic
Poles,
Orthodox Russians, German Lutherans... etc.).
But even if you are questioning whether National Socialism was
really
esotericism that only sounded like materialism, you're surely not
disputing that Stalin's purges and Mao's 'Great Leap Forward' and
'Cultural Revolution' were rooted in pure, unadulterated
'materialist' philosophies?
James
From ??? ??? Tue Aug 05 18:36:35 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
SAA13152; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 18:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA25000; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 18:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id QAA09666 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 16:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708052327.QAA09666 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:50:41 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708051943.MAA29869 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl) wrote:
)At 07:32 PM 4/8/97 +0100, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
))(it is patently obvious that there are others who do not take
))Mr Downer's stance,
)
)What documents, do I pray, make this 'patently obvious'?
Look not at documents, Herman, but at human beings -- those who
work in
SA Waldorf schools, for example; or those who, by that work,
countered
the worst excesses of apartheid before independence.
To lay it on the line, Herman, I was in southern Africa (SA,
Mozambique,
Zimbabwe) for several periods in the late 1960s, 1970s and early
1980s.
I was, on more than one occasion, arrested, imprisoned and beaten
for
taking an active anti-racist stance. You will understand that I
feel a
tad irritated when some woolly-minded liberal starts lecturing me,
from
the cosy safety of the USA or the Netherlands, on the alleged
racism of
people who were putting themselves on the line a hell of a lot
more than
I was.
)As Dan Dugan pointed out already, the South African
Anthroposophical author
)Picard supported Downer.
Wow! Two people give grounds for a generalisation? Pull the other
one,
Herman, it's got bells on it.
I'll try again -- the point I am making is, as I have said several
times, one about the fallacy of generalising from the particular.
Now,
Herman, *do* try to pay attention this time. I'll try to take it
slowly
-- do stop me if I'm going too fast for you.
1) Dugan made a claim about what "the South African
Anthroposophists"
say about Jewish people working as Waldorf teachers and quoted Mr
Downer.
2) You then enumerated a few people who must have supported Mr
Downer,
eg publisher.
Let us now take an analogy.
1) You tell us you have a PhD.
2) Presumably a committee agreed with your thesis before awarding
the
degree to you.
If I made some statement like "Let's see what the Dutch historians
say
about it", and then quoted a passage from your thesis, does it not
occur
to you that some Dutch historians may feel that you do not
represent
their view and hence that my phrase "the Dutch historians" may be
seen
to be an unwarranted generalisation from the particular?
No? Then maybe you cannot conceive that other Dutch historians may
disagree with you, so let's try another analogy:
Let us suppose that I am posting an article on the value or
Waldorf
education. Let us further suppose that I decide to quote a bit of
support for my contention, so I say "Let's see what the parents of
Waldorf graduates have to say" and then quote a nicely selected
bit of
one of Neil's or Rigby's or Kelly's laudatory posts on the
subject. Do
you *really* think that I would be allowed to get away with
passing off
those opinions as the views of "the parents of Waldorf graduates"?
Or
might there just be a slight chance that I would be accused of
being a
tad selective and making an unwarranted generalisation?
The only difference is the side of the fence you're sitting on.
You seem
to think that it is perfectly warranted to make crass
generalisations if
they are pejorative to Waldorf education -- I really don't believe
you
would be so intentionally blind to it if favourable
generalisations were
made.
QED
BTW, I may have asked you this before, Herman: Have you ever read
Karl
Popper's _The Poverty of Historicism_?
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:24:51 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
SAA06797; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 18:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA10415; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 18:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id RAA11522 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 17:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060032.RAA11522 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Oak Ridge demagnetized
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 17:32:14 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Oak Ridge parents were successful in their bid to remove Waldorf
from their
neighborhood school.
Notes of the discussion on Oak Ridge (from memory) :
Dan, Patricia and I attended SCUSD board meeting. The board heard
an update
on enrollment figures. Thirty eight additional children
registered.
Consistent with the first registration, an additional 38 families
registered their children for Oak Ridge.
Twenty four families registered for traditional methods and twelve
voted
for Waldorf.
The board considered two proposals. Proposal "B" would create a
school
within a school at Oak Ridge. Parent testimony did not support
this idea.
The board voiced concerns about their ability to create a peaceful
situation if this proposal was adopted.
Proposal "A" required that the Waldorf magnet school move to the
currently-occupied-by-administrative-offices-only John Morse (sp)
site. The
problems/considerations with this proposal included projected
moving costs
of
$401,000. with additional transportation costs of approx.
$150,000.($1000.
each student) to bus the Oak Ridge students who registered for
Waldorf to
the new site. Since the district budget had been approved and
prioritized,
"finding" that money would likely mean that other programs in the
school
would be impacted. Counseling services, curriculum materials,
school
supplies were among the items mentioned that could be impacted by
the
decision to move the Waldorf school. The board did not seem to
waver in
their support of the Waldorf school in the least, even when it was
pointed
out by Ed Lumm that the 140 students who registered for Waldorf
registered
with the assumption that the program would be housed at Oak Ridge.
Families
who registered for Waldorf may not want their children to be
bussed out of
the neighborhood, so it seemed clear that the enrollment figures
were not
dependable.
The board seemed to agree that any decision they made would not
please
everyone. They seemed agreed that they had spent more time on the
Waldorf
issue than on any other subject since their election. They were
committed
to making a decision so they could move on to other pressing
issues.
Tom Griffin stated during the board discussion that he wants to
examine
what is being taught in the school, and felt that the program
needed more
study in the religious concerns.
President Jay Schenirer stated that he saw two issues. 1) 150 kids
whose
parents want Waldorf. And 2.) The board had already made the
decision to
keep Waldorf. Jay apologized to the minority families and admitted
that the
board had not handled their concerns well. He stated the need to
get to
know each other.
Virgil Price recognized Oak Ridge was never truly a magnet school,
it was a
neighborhood school. There was no room for new enrollment. The
parents had
not been involved in the process of conversion. She also expressed
concern
over the quality of the Newcomer School. Newcomer School site was
in dire
need of repair. The idea came up (I can't remember if it was in
the initial
proposal or if it came up later..) to move the Newcomer School
kids to Oak
Ridge. (The enrollment starts out about 30 kids, but climbs
throughout the
year.)
Jerry Sloan, a member of the new organizing Sacramento chapter of
Americans
United, sited the "Sunshine law" (correct me, Dan if I am wrong)
and
formally requested copies of all teacher training materials and
school
curriculum. It appeared that the board has to comply.
One or two people before PLANS representatives were scheduled to
speak,
president Jay Schenirer stated that the rest of the comments would
be
limited to letting the board know which option they supported,
"option 'A',
or option 'B'". The audience protested loudly, but the board
president
stood his ground. While other board members looked visibly
embarrassed, no
other board member spoke up to defend the public's right to speak.
Dan stepped up to the speakers stand. It seemed like (memory in
question
here) he was immediately asked by the board president, "Option A
or option
B, Mr. Dugan?" Dan protested the board's change of the rules. He
pointed
out that he had driven a long way to speak for two minutes. Dan
said
something to the effect that the board still had time to change
their mind
about the Waldorf program.The board president continually asked
him,
"Option A or Option B, Mr. Dugan?" Dan and the president seemed to
be
talking at the same time. The board president then began repeating
over his
loud speaker, "Debra Snell", signaling that it was my turn to
speak. After
about the sixth time of him calling my name (over the top of Dan
trying to
address the board), Dan stood back and I stepped up. Immediately I
was
asked by the board president, "Option 'A' or option'B', Ms.
Snell?" I
answered, " I choose neither. It is illegal to fund a religious
school with
public funds." Then I stepped away. The weird thing about the new
rule was
the fact that it was only enforced for about 4 people. Then it was
seemingly forgotten. The board chair did ask people what option
they felt
would work best, but most people said whatever they wanted to, in
addition
to casting their opinion.
After the public comment, the board approved option 'A'. John
Morse site
will be the home of the Waldorf Magnet School. Oak Ridge parents
were very
happy with the decision. After the meeting, I heard a couple
parents say,
"The battle is won, but the war is not over for us. We got Waldorf
out of
our school, now we can work to get it out of the district."
Time will tell.
Deby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:14 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA24319; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA19972; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id UAA24964 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 20:44:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060344.UAA24964 lists1.best.com)
From: Luna457954 aol.com
Subject: Waldorf v. public--an opinion
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:43:58 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In a message dated 8/6/97 12:02:22 AM, Mr. Kopp wrote:
((There is no doubt in my mind that WE schools can produce
wonderful human
beings. If they do that in any greater proportion than state
schools, I
believe it's likely because of their selective enrollment of
families
seeking a non-traditional education, and the small settings and
personalised attention to students by the teachers, in a warm,
family-like
setting.((
My children began their education in a very small public
school--just over
100 students, K-12. I took my children OUT of said school because
I felt
that they were not getting quality education. The Waldorf school
they now
attend has 100 students, K-8 (as of last year....this year we have
K-6 due to
a graduation and a teacher having to leave). Not that much
variation in
size, but a big improvement in educational styles and social
interaction. In
our old school, the norm with the studente were cliques, outcasts
and
"trendiness"; in other words, if you don't conform, we don't like
you. (I had
also found this to be true with the local PTA!) I'm greatly aware
of this
fact in the previous school because I am one of its graduates. I
attended
from late in my junior year of high school through
graduation--class size,
eight students. I was one of the "outcasts". My son went to this
school from
K-3, and had a similar experience, coming home crying because he
had no
friends and no-one liked him.
When I was considering Waldorf as an option, I spoke at length
with one of my
children's potential teachers, and he emphasized the fact that, in
his class
at least, there were no cliques, and he made sure that every child
felt like
a valued member of the class. I later found this to be true
school-wide.
So, Mr. Kopp, I disagree with your opinion regarding smaller, more
intimate
schools. My children went from one small school to another (which
actually
had a slightly larger student to teacher ratio), and found that
they did
better socially as well as academically (which I have not
discussed here,
but you're free to ask).
I have never said that there are no good public schools, or that
there are no
public schools as good as Waldorf (or no bad Waldorf schools, for
that
matter). My personal preference is Waldorf, and my experience my
own. My
"beef" as it were, is with those who generalize and say that WE is
"bad"
because it is some kind of crazed cult out to indoctrinate any
hapless soul
which comes across its evil path.
This is not the case with my family, and I doubt that it is the
case with
the MAJORITY of people who have dealt with WE (note the word
"majority").
Kind regards,
Kelly
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:06 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
UAA11008; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 20:58:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id UAA13480; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 20:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id UAA28150 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 20:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060349.UAA28150 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Clarification
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 20:51:20 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
I edited the date of SCUSD's board meeting right out of my post.
It was
held 8/4/97.
sorry about that.
Deby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:08 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA16394; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA00653; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id UAA04166 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 20:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060359.UAA04166 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 04:58:02 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708051718.KAA18144 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)There are racist statements from both Picard and Downer in that
book,
)that's plural. See
Look, I'll even save you the trouble of finding others by
conceding that
there may even be dozens who agree with them -- you _still_ can't
generalise from it and lump "the South African Anthroposophists"
as all
subscribing to the same point of view. See analogies given to de
Tollenaere.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:31 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA27192; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA20929; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id VAA08937 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:08:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060408.VAA08937 lists1.best.com)
From: John Suggate (j.suggate ch.steiner.school.nz)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n478
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 16:06:24 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael wrote (amongst other things):
)I have no objection to WE teaching this way -- in its place, or
openly.
)I,
)like PLANS, object to the teaching of such a system in the public
)schools
)of America, because of the Constitution. Unfortunately, there is
no
)such
)prohibition here in New Zealand; in fact there is an
"integration"
)law
)which promotes it, or my children's Steiner school would not be
affordable
)to us. (The NZ integration act was passed in order to give state
money
)to
)the Catholic and Protestant private schools.)
)
However the situation is different to what I understand of the
situation of charter schools in the US. Here, schools that integrate
are previously independent/private and already have a "special
character". The parents (and teachers) involved have chosen to send
their children to (teach in) such a school. This is very different to
the situation of a neighborhood school converting to Waldorf where it
would appear that one is forced to either conform to the waldorf
methods or else to leave. Of course this does not answer Michael's
criticisms that the school's are not upfront enough about their
educational methods, or that they teach "pseudo-science". I think
these matters vary from school to school here, just as elsewhere.
Cheers,
John.
John Suggate (j.suggate ch.steiner.school.nz)
http://www.ch.steiner.school.nz
Phone: +64 3 337 0514. Fax: +64 3 337 0515.
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:51 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA08586; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:57:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA08421; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id VAA22572 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060435.VAA22572 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n478
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:14:04 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Wright posted:
)Please don't switch and bait.
How have I done that? I simply disagreed with your assertion. And
when I
state that there are many (thousands) public schools that achieve
excellence in education _and_ do not look at all like a Waldorf
school,
this does not then negate the fact that they address the "whole
child."
What WE and supporters view as the "whole child" is not
necessarily what
many other educators and parents view as the "whole child."
Excellence in
education can be achieved without walking geometric shapes,
listening to
fairy tales for years, utilizing the WE approach to science, doing
wet-on-wet paintings, form drawings, chanting, etc., etc.
Name at least one **system** or **
)pedagogical approach** not just individual schools that across
the board
)achieve has high a result as WE schools on all levels, i.e. that
don't just
)teach to achieve good standardized tests to justify the demand on
taxes.
In order to avoid being redundant I am referring you to Stephen
Premo's and
Michael Kopp's responses to your post. Their views mirror my
reaction to
your request to a tee. I could not begin to state it as well as
they have.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:43 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA03641; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA07060; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id VAA24690 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 21:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060438.VAA24690 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural (Premo, Rigby posts)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:38:13 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
(( ) KOPP:
) Despite his claim above, which may refer to the "hunch"
intuition, I do
) think that Rigby believes "in-tuition", as he understands the
) Steiner/Anthroposophical method, to be sufficient for scientific
) investigation.
Well, Rigby? Is that what you believe?
))
Of course not.
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:56 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA12865; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA19898; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 23:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id WAA00823 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 22:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060536.WAA00823 lists1.best.com)
From: Daniel Sabsay (danielsabsay earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Oak Ridge demagnetized
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 97 22:35:51 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby, congratulations on your victory.
-- Daniel Sabsay, president
East Bay Skeptics Society
Daniel Sabsay home.earthlink.net/~danielsabsay/ebss
Macintosh Consultant Ignorance is the Ultimate Renewable Resource
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:25:59 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
XAA00114; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA12987; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 23:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA11126 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060647.XAA11126 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: CTA Meeting of 15 May 1997
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:47:03 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
I had a private e-mail from an individual who looked in the WC
archives for
the PLANS press release about the 15 May CTA meeting, but was
unable to find
it. This was the occasion on which I showed typical Waldorf
crudity by
barging into a private meeting between Kathy Sutphen and her
attorney,
according to Kathy.
I can't account for the document being missing from the WC
archives, but I do
have a copy of it. I will reproduce the beginning of it:
====Start of press release excerpt====
Subj: DRAFT press release
Date: 97-05-12 03:13:07 EDT
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-to: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
PEOPLE FOR LEGAL AND NON-SECTARIAN SCHOOLS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - MAY 12, 1997
Contact:
Debra Snell, President, (916) 273-1005 snell oro.net
Dan Dugan, Secretary (415) 821-9776 plans dandugan.com
People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) will present a
briefing on
the Oak Ridge School's "Waldorf method" program at 4:30 PM,
Thursday, May 15,
at the California Teachers Association, 1118 10th Street,
Sacramento,
California. Representatives of the CTA, the Sacramento school
board, and the
Curriculum Commission of the State Department of Education have
been invited.
====end of excerpt====
The release then had two paragraphs about the Oak Ridge program
and a final
paragraph about two school districts in other states that "avoided
entanglement" with Waldorf. Nothing more was said in these
paragraphs about
the purpose or content of the May 15 meeting.
I confess that I completely missed the point about this being a
private
meeting between Kathy and her attorney and did attend the meeting.
I guess
one needs a PLANS secret decoder ring to find the true messages in
their
press releases.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:26:09 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA06092; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA26767; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 00:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id XAA13483 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Tue, 5 Aug
1997 23:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060650.XAA13483 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: The Elusive Desk Job of Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:50:35 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
I would like to make one more effort to discover the truth behind
the PLANS
allegation that Kathy Sutphen was transferred to a desk job
because of her
opposition to the use of Waldorf methods at her school. In the
interest of
better understanding the situation I recently talked again with
Ruth
Mikkelsen, the principal at that school. It only increased the
disparity
between the PLANS version of events and the school's version.
To recap, at the end of May Deby issued a posting to the WC list
in the form
of a press release, stating that Kathy Sutphen, an award-winning
teacher, was
being transferred to a desk job. Ruth tells me that the same
information was
in a leaflet handed out when PLANS demonstrated at the school.
This was
followed by considerably more material on the WC list from Kathy,
describing
her mistreatment at the school. But at that point Kathy said
nothing that
changed the initial message of transfer to a desk job as a form of
punishment.
I checked with Ruth and learned that there had been no change in
Kathy's
assignment. After I brought this information to the WC list, Kathy
immediately identified the "transfer to desk job" idea as an
allegation of
PLANS, but not one that she herself had made. I then asked Deby on
what
basis the PLANS allegation had been made, and Dan replied that it
was his
understanding that Kathy's "Öcontract offer included, for the
first time, a
specific assignment to supervise the independent study program."
Dan gave no
explanation of the source of that understanding.
In my recent conversation with Ruth, I learned that Kathy had had
two periods
of employment with the Mathews school, between which she had
worked at
another school. When Kathy asked to be rehired at Mathews for the
1995-96
school year a position was created for her by combining what had
previously
been part-time positions. Her responsibilities were to teach
science and
independent studies. Those responsibilities did not change for the
1996-97
year and no change was proposed in the contract offer for the
1997-98 school
year (which Kathy has declined to accept).
At the time of the PLANS "press release" and demonstration, then,
Kathy's
work responsibilities had been the same for two years and there
was no
proposal by the school to change them. Kathy voluntarily accepted
those
responsibilities when she sought re-employment at Mathews. Kathy
did have a
desk, as do most teachers, but her basic job was to teach.
I reread the press release itself, to see if I had misunderstood
its message.
The document is headed with "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 27, 1997"
and the
first paragraph describes an "informational picket line" to be
established at
Thomas E. Mathews School on Mary 29. Kathy is quoted in the press
release,
so she clearly was an information source for PLANS by that time.
Kathy is
not quoted as saying that she would be transferred to a desk job,
but the
first sentence after the quotation is: "The award-winning teacher
is being
removed from classroom teaching and reassigned to a desk job next
year."
This juxtaposition gives the impression that information about the
fictional
desk job came from Kathy, but Kathy has told us that she never
made such a
charge.
So, where did the PLANS allegation come from? If not Kathy, who
was the
source of the information, or mis-information, on which the
allegation was
based? Does PLANS still believe there is substance to the
allegation?
I think these questions deserve to be answered, because the
allegation of
desk job transfer became the basis for elaborate conjectures on
the WC list
about conspiracy and malfeasance on the part of Mathews School,
the Yuba
County Office of Education and even Rudolf Steiner College. It
looks to me
like there is no more substance to those conjectures than there is
to the
allegation itself, which is to say none at all.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:26:14 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA13863; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:28:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA17714; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 00:26:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id AAA05538 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 00:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060720.AAA05538 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: The Elusive Desk Job of Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:22:08 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708060650.XAA13483 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby,
I wonder if she has permission from Mr. Teagarden to discuss
personnel
matters with you. There are laws that apply to employers when it
comes to
discussing personnel issues with members of the public.
Deby
You wrote,
)In my recent conversation with Ruth, I learned that Kathy had had
two periods
)of employment with the Mathews school, between which she had
worked at
)another school. When Kathy asked to be rehired at Mathews for the
1995-96
)school year a position was created for her by combining what had
previously
)been part-time positions. Her responsibilities were to teach
science and
)independent studies. Those responsibilities did not change for
the 1996-97
)year and no change was proposed in the contract offer for the
1997-98 school
)year (which Kathy has declined to accept).
)
)At the time of the PLANS "press release" and demonstration, then,
Kathy's
)work responsibilities had been the same for two years and there
was no
)proposal by the school to change them. Kathy voluntarily accepted
those
)responsibilities when she sought re-employment at Mathews. Kathy
did have a
)desk, as do most teachers, but her basic job was to teach.
)
)I reread the press release itself, to see if I had misunderstood
its message.
) The document is headed with "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 27, 1997"
and the
)first paragraph describes an "informational picket line" to be
established at
)Thomas E. Mathews School on Mary 29. Kathy is quoted in the press
release,
)so she clearly was an information source for PLANS by that time.
Kathy is
)not quoted as saying that she would be transferred to a desk job,
but the
)first sentence after the quotation is: "The award-winning teacher
is being
)removed from classroom teaching and reassigned to a desk job next
year."
) This juxtaposition gives the impression that information about
the fictional
)desk job came from Kathy, but Kathy has told us that she never
made such a
)charge.
)
)So, where did the PLANS allegation come from? If not Kathy, who
was the
)source of the information, or mis-information, on which the
allegation was
)based? Does PLANS still believe there is substance to the
allegation?
)
)I think these questions deserve to be answered, because the
allegation of
)desk job transfer became the basis for elaborate conjectures on
the WC list
)about conspiracy and malfeasance on the part of Mathews School,
the Yuba
)County Office of Education and even Rudolf Steiner College. It
looks to me
)like there is no more substance to those conjectures than there
is to the
)allegation itself, which is to say none at all.
)
)Rigby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:26:18 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA17767; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA29855; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 00:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id AAA12115 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 00:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060729.AAA12115 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 00:31:36 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dear Rigby and evryone,
Kathleen very recently found out that her mother was diagnosed
with cancer.
She is clearly distraught about this. I'm asking that we give her
a bit of
a break in the next few days. Likely she will be flying out of
town to be
with her mother in the next day or so.
Thanks for your consideration. I know we all wish her the best.
Deby
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:26:23 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA16242; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA02162; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 01:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id BAA28026 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 01:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060852.BAA28026 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: The Elusive Desk Job of Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 09:05:53 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708060720.AAA05538 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby Snell (snell oro.net) wrote:
)I wonder if she has permission from Mr. Teagarden to discuss
personnel
)matters with you. There are laws that apply to employers when it
comes to
)discussing personnel issues with members of the public.
Instead of trying to dodge the issue, how about PLANS explaining
the
discrepancies between its version of events and the one Rigby
posted.
Such an explanation shouldn't be a task that requires a great deal
of
time or thought if it is restricted to the truth.
There is a distict whiff of rodent in the air...
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:34:36 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA25084; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:33:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10711; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20126 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20126 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:23:38 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Tonkin wrote,
)BTW, Herman, to completely change the subject (I think), have you
ever
)read Karl Popper's _The Poverty of Historicism_?
DAN DUGAN
I recommend Popper's two-volume set "The Open Society and Its
Enemies."
Popper demonstrates a powerful discipline for rational argument:
don't
attack the weak points of the system you oppose; Present its
strongest
points, then refute them. In the first volume he demolishes Plato,
in the
second, Marx.
Steiner was a Platonist.
-Dan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:34:32 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA25081; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10600; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20114 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20114 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Admin: Ad hominems
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:23:45 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Tonkin, you said,
)I'm sure that someone with a PhD could have worked all that out
for
)himself, _if_ he'd bothered to try.
Please direct your writing to the topic of discussion, rather than
the
character of your correspondent.
-Dan Dugan
moderator
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:20:58 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA25852; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:36:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA08456; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20132 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20132 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:23:52 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)He does not represent *all* S.A. anthropops (Dugan's phrase:
"*the* [my
)emphasis] South African Anthroposophists" is, by default, an
_inclusive_
)phrase) -- it is patently obvious that there are others who do
not take
)Mr Downer's stance, and it is therfore fallacious to characterise
"the
)South African Anthroposophists" as Dugan did.
)
)To repeat it for those who are a tad slow on the uptake: To
generalise
)from the particular is a fallacious form of argument.
I agree. I could better have said "prominent South African
Anthroposophist...". He's prominent de facto when his article is
chosen for
the anthology. This still casts a veil of disapprobation on all
South
African Anthroposophists, as it should. They should be ashamed to
be
publishing that crap. And Rudolf Steiner College, too, for
promoting it.
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:20:59 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA26008; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10948; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20139 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20139 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:00 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James Souttar, you said,
)Art Zajonc's book 'catching the light' gives a fascinating
insight
)into the role of thought experiments in the development of
)contemporary understanding of light. Interesting how Zajonc
manages
)to be a world-class scientific populariser (plaudits from Gleick,
)Sacks and Penrose) and an eminent Anthroposophist...
A popularizer of "Gothean science," but not of 20th century
science. He
represents the retreat to 19th-century romanticism. Eloquently.
"When we are confronted with the black void of pure
instrumentalism, the
temptations of reactionary idolatry are very near. Having lost the
gods, we
fall in love with the beautiful idols we can raise in their
places. Atoms,
quarks, tiny black holes...they are reified, garlanded, and
dragged forward
to assume a place in the temple. Calling them real, we animate
them with
the false life of fear, our fear of the unknown being of nature."
[p. 302]
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:04 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA26011; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10969; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20143 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20143 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Intuition & Science-materialism
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:07 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James Souttar, replying to Kathy, said,
)The value of 'human reason' is even more varied. Let's not forget
)that the 'age of enlightenment' - of Rousseau, Jefferson and
Paine -
)gave us the French Revolution, the guillotine and the terror.
Even
)most of the excesses of the religious mind - the inquisitions and
)pogroms (whose toll of casualties amounted to far fewer than the
)scientific materialism of Hitler, Stalin and Mao) - owe more to
the
)voice of supposed reason, than to genuine intuition.
I've noticed Anthroposophists like to call Hitler a materialist. I
think
that is because in Anthropsophy spiritual = good and materialistic
= bad. I
think the evidence for Hitler's involvement with the occult is 99%
exaggerated, but the attitude which the Nazi party presented,
aided by
occultist symbolism, was that of a spiritual quest, involving
great
self-sacrifice from everyone, to purify the German nation and
create a
glorious future. The Nazi campaign was neither scientific nor
materialistic. Linking "scientific materialism" with Hitler
unfairly
denigrates science, and creates a false appearance of opposition
between
Anthroposophical and Nazi philosophy. There -were- significant
points of
opposition, like nationalism, but in my opinion materialism wasn't
one of
them.
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 02:34:29 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA24234; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA07346; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA19980 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA19980 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural (Premo, Rigby posts)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:15 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kudos to Michael Kopp for a masterful essay.
-Dan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:20:56 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA25697; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:35:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10836; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20129 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20129 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Why WE denigrates public education; and science
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:21 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Wright, you said to Kathy,
)Please don't switch and bait. Name at least one **system** or **
)pedagogical approach** not just individual schools that across
the board
)achieve as high a result as WE schools on all levels, i.e. that
don't just
)teach to achieve good standardized tests to justify the demand on
taxes.
)Such system will look a lot like WE even if they treat spiritual
issues
)under the guise of "self-esteem" or other similar term. In all
such
)systems, the whole child must be addressed, not just the
cognitive
)test-taking portion.
How do you know Waldorf schools achieve "high" results? Are you
aware of
any study comparing their outcomes with private schools of similar
economic
class?
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:20:52 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA25470; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA08165; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:33:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20134 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20134 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Check early, check often
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:29 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Neil Faiman, you said,
)My own experience was that the representations of the school with
regard
)to the sort of education my daughter would receive were highly
accurate,
)that the quality of the education was excellent, and that
anthroposophical
)"doctrine" was not present in the education. Some Critics here
haved
)reported diametrically opposite experiences. Each parent will
make this
)determination for himself or herself in the end, and will be
doing himself
)or herself a service by beginning to make it sooner rather than
later.
Neil, could you back up your assertion that your daughter received
a high
quality education, and Anthroposophical doctrine was not present?
May I
examine her lesson books?
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:06 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
CAA28515; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id CAA10926; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id CAA20147 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 02:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708060924.CAA20147 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 02:24:36 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
John Calkins, I very much appreciate your joining this debate, and
I hope
you can find an Internet connection to continue on.
You said:
)Physical science is very useful for verifying the
)physical nature of the universe, but it does have its
limitations. It
)tends to be reductionist in character, understanding nature by
breaking
)things down into their constituent parts. The problem with this
method
)is that as we divide the world into smaller and smaller parts,
the
)complexity of understanding the whole from its myriad a parts
becomes
)overwhelming for even the most brilliant minds.
No it doesn't. Even un-brilliant people switch their perspectives
constantly between detail and holistic views. I suspect you are
being
seduced by the Anthropsophical conceit that you are being
initiated into
band of superior people who are able to see "a broader view" while
ordinary
mortals, yea, even professors, are lost in the details.
)Now we come to an area of debate. I have had personal experience
of the
)usefulness and correctness of the spiritual nature of the
universe. I
)agree that it is completely illogical in the scientific sense.
Even so
)I know that this is true. I know that these truths are universal
from
)communicating with other thoughtful people who have reached very
similar
)conclusions via a path quite different from mine. While I am
still
)quite a beginner when it comes to studying anthroposophy, I see
that it
)does embrace spiritual ideas that are in common with conclusions
that I
)have reached independent of anthroposophy.
I interpret your "personal experience of the usefulness and
correctness of
the spiritual nature of the universe" to mean it feels good to
you.
Unfortunately, the relationship between things that feel good and
things
that are true is not so simple.
You pick some things Anthropsophy holds in common with other
spiritual
paths and hold those up to prove universality. How about all the
things in
Anthropsophy that -aren't- in common with other spiritual
professions? I'm
sure I could find many things Billy Graham says that I agree with,
but they
wouldn't make me want to go to Billy Graham College.
I do not like making the
)distinction between supernature and nature; if something truly
exists in
)spiritual _nature_ even though it cannot be physically observed,
then I
)would still call it natural.
)
)I have found through my experience that this knowledge of the
spiritual
)nature of things is not something separate, but something I can
apply in
)my daily life. It compliments my understanding of the physical
nature
)of the universe, and I do not have a conflict between the two. I
see it
)as two views of the same thing.
Any religion worth its salt provides moral guidance for daily
living.
Mature religions are harmonious with science. Unfortunately,
Anthroposophy
isn't one of them.
(snip)
)
I would conclude by saying
)that as a future Waldorf teacher, I recognize that my view of the
)universe is unique since one cannot enter my mind to see my
thoughts. I
)respect each individual's right to have a different view of
things. I
)see the role of a teacher is to help expand the students view in
a
)non-assuming manner. This is truly the art of teaching, to act as
a
)facilitator. The students may find their own vision unobstructed
by the
)teacher's prejudices, whether they are drawn to a mostly physical
)(analytical) view, a mostly spiritual (artistic) view, or
somewhere in
)between.
High ideals that we all share. However the notion, often expressed
by
Steiner, that the Anthropsosophical world view is "unprejudiced"
as
compared to the "prejudiced""scientific materialistic" world view,
is a
pious fiction.
)So there is no misunderstanding, by allowing students to
)discover their spiritual nature, I mean just that:
self-discovery. I
)do not mean to teach the students anthroposophy.
Given that the Waldorf teacher is at least tentatively committed
to
Anthropsophy, and in the early grades plays the role of priest
complemented
by the students attitude of reverence, "allowing students to
discover their
spiritual nature" sounds too easily corruptible into "think as I
do" The
Waldorf curriculum is designed to teach the Anthroposophical
world-view
*implicitly*, so it isn't necessary to "teach the students
anthroposophy"
explicitly.
"There is something we should try hard to do-and it works in a
very
enlivening way on the child's whole forces-namely to incorporate
Anthroposophy organically into the lessons, in the sort of way you
did, Dr.
von Heydebrand, in Anthropology, and you, Dr. Stein, in History.
With some
of you it is there of itself. You cannot do Eurythmy without
Anthroposophy.
You must try and bring Anthroposophy into the lesson in such a way
that it
becomes part of it, without teaching it theoretically if you can
possibly
avoid it."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Conferences with the Teachers of the Waldorf
School in Stuttgart 1919 to 1920: Volume One: The First and Second
Years of
the Waldorf School, Stuttgart. (1920) Forest Row, U.K.: Steiner
Schools
Fellowship Publications, 1986, p. 90]
"Waldorf School has a "religious," primarily Christian, emphasis,
which
makes its professed label as an independent school technically
correct but
misleading. The school's spiritual emphasis may in fact place it
closer in
kind to Christian schools than other independent schools."
[Henry, Mary E. School Cultures: Universes of Meaning in Private
Schools. (Washington State University) Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex
Publishing Corp. 1993, p. 60]
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:15 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
EAA19956; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 04:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id EAA28680; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 04:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id DAA12350 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 03:57:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061057.DAA12350 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 11:09:10 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan:
)I recommend Popper's two-volume set "The Open Society and Its
)Enemies."Popper demonstrates a powerful discipline for rational
)argument: don't attack the weak points of the system you oppose;
)Present its strongest points, then refute them. In the first
volume
)he demolishes Plato, in the second, Marx.
)Steiner was a Platonist.
Is this an example of the kind of false syllogism you're talking
about?
Popper demolished Plato
Steiner was a Platonist
ergo Popper demolished Steiner
If so, bravo! It demonstrates exactly the point Popper makes about
not attacking the weak points of the system you oppose.
James
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:57 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
KAA28417; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 10:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id KAA25918; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA28712 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061726.KAA28712 lists1.best.com)
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 10:19:30 +0000
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199708061634.JAA02889 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
On 6 Aug 97 , James Souttar wrote:
) . . . it is hard to see
) in what way 'spiritual science' might be an oxymoron. Rather, I
think
) it far more likely that in the origin of our various languages
the
) two were actually synonymous - and that it's only in
comparatively
) recent times that we've created this curious bifurcation.
Heh. But we are, after all, talking about modern English, as it is
spoken
today, not Latin. Science and religion are hardly synonymous.
I find these attempts to blur the distinction between science and
spirituality to be an impediment to meaningful communication, in
spite of
the rather elegant and elaborate arguments that have been made to
equate
the two. What's the point in talking about science and
spirituality if we
can't agree on what is meant by those terms?
Steve Premo ------ Santa Cruz, California
--
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error." -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:16 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
EAA21355; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 04:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id EAA25339; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 04:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id EAA18199 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 04:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061108.EAA18199 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 11:19:54 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan:
)A popularizer of "Gothean science," but not of 20th century
science.
)He represents the retreat to 19th-century romanticism.
Eloquently.
)"When we are confronted with the black void of pure
instrumentalism,
)the temptations of reactionary idolatry are very near. Having
lost
)the gods, we fall in love with the beautiful idols we can raise
in
)their places. Atoms, quarks, tiny black holes...they are reified,
)garlanded, and dragged forward to assume a place in the temple.
)Calling them real, we animate them with the false life of fear,
our
)fear of the unknown being of nature." [p. 302]
Yet on page 303 (the very next page) he says:
"Like adolescents reading Shakespeare, we feel the language of
quantum phenomena to be at once strange and wonderful. The
meanings
are obscure, some words unknown. All the more reason to pause over
it, to reread the text and muse over its possible meaning. [...]
The
phenomena of light refute a nineteenth-centruy reading of the
world,
even if the modern staging remains fragmentary and hard."
This perhaps shows the danger of selective quoting to make a
point. I
actually found Zajonc extraordinarily cogent on quantum physics -
and
he was able to clearly explain aspects of this subject that I had
puzzled over. But then, as a professor of physics, I suppose it is
his job to communicate these mysterious subjects to the
uninitiated.
James
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:17 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
EAA23756; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 04:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id EAA26638; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 04:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id EAA22694 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 04:18:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061118.EAA22694 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Intuition & Science-materialism
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 11:29:39 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan:
)Linking "scientific materialism" with Hitler unfairly denigrates
)science, and creates a false appearance of opposition between
)Anthroposophical and Nazi philosophy.
Well, I'll (generously ;) concede the point. Mostly, because I
believe it is better made with reference to the other two figures
I
mentioned, Stalin and Mao.
As patron of pseudoscience, 'dialectical materialism' in the form
of
the 'godless' communism of Soviet Russia and the People's Republic
of
China reached dizzying heights. Stalinist patronage of Lysenko was
notorious. In China, the 'great leap forward' involved the belief
that the sheer force of Marxist Lenninist ideology could cause
impossible bumper crops and accelerated growth of plants - to say
nothing of the extraordinary ideas that steel could be made by
children boiling up old scrap iron in cauldron's in their
classroom.
The result, as history testifies, was perhaps the biggest single
epsiode of unnecessary human suffering. And there wasn't a hint of
God, Steiner or the Occult about it anywhere...
James
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:20 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
FAA22149; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 05:33:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id FAA04033; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 05:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA01126 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 05:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061223.FAA01126 lists1.best.com)
From: levy (P.R.Levy bton.ac.uk)
Subject: Re: Testing Steiner's Path
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 13:22:57 +0100 (BST)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
In-Reply-To: (199708020043.RAA02534 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
The problem with the following comments about "science" is that,
by their
own logic, they are necessarily religious statements as well. As
such, you
are using statements of faith to masquerade as fact.
On Fri, 1 Aug 1997 spike netshel.net wrote:
) Levy Posted:
)
) )Dan - here's a direct question. You calim the existence of an
) )anthroposophical fantasy land. How do you justify this. Have
you tested
) )out Steiner's path of self-development for yourself.
)
) How does one _test_ Steiner's path of self-development for
oneself? This is
) the religious path of "faith." Like all religious beliefs you
must have
) faith that its reality exists and you must interpret your
personal
) experiential phenomena as verifying your faith. There could be
no _test_ in
) regard to the scientific path, ie: utilizing the scientific
method.
)
) One of the things I find most disturbing about Anthroposophy is
the
) assertion that it is scientific. Stating this is, I believe,
meant to give
) it some sort of validity. Why not simply say it is a spiritual
belief
) system and that some choose this particular spiritual path? Many
people,
) yourself included, find that it Anthroposophy works for them in
their
) lives. It lends you a sort of personal existential validity or
reality. But
) it is simply _your_ reality, much the same as those that are
Jehovah's
) Witness have their reality and believe just as deeply that it is
based on
) spiritual truth. There is absolutely nothing scientific about
this type of
) belief system. it is a religion.
)
) (St.) Kathy
)
)
)
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:37 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
HAA09555; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 07:55:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA25507; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA08313 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 07:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061445.HAA08313 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: CTA Meeting of 15 May 1997
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:57:20 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708060647.XAA11126 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
RigbyL aol.com wrote:
)I guess
)one needs a PLANS secret decoder ring to find the true messages
in their
)press releases.
Either that or supersensible intuition.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:36 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
HAA00976; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 07:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA07420; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 07:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA27976 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 07:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061424.HAA27976 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Admin: Ad hominems
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:01:41 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708060924.CAA20114 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)Stephen Tonkin, you said,
)
))I'm sure that someone with a PhD could have worked all that out
for
))himself, _if_ he'd bothered to try.
)
)Please direct your writing to the topic of discussion, rather
than the
)character of your correspondent.
Whilst I agree that what I said was not to the topic of
discussion, I
find it difficult to see how suggesting that someone is capable of
logical thought can be considered, as the subject of your
admonishment
suggests, an ad hominem.
Now, when I implied, in another post, that you and de Tollenaere
were
"woolly-minded liberals", *that* was an ad hominem, for which I
apologise. However, replace "liberal", or even "woolly-minded
liberal",
with "people" and the argument still holds.
As for directing writing to the topic of discussion, why doesn't
PLANS
explain the discrepancy between PLANS propaganda and Rigby's post
on the
subject of the "desk job", instead of attempting to dodge the
issue, as
PLANS's president did, in a post which entirely failed to address
the
substance of Rigby's post?
Which do you consider to be more important -- seeking truth or
seeking
ad hominems?
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:38 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA12944; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 08:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA26775; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 08:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA08253 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 07:45:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061445.HAA08253 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:16:03 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708060924.CAA20126 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)Stephen Tonkin wrote,
)
))BTW, Herman, to completely change the subject (I think), have
you ever
))read Karl Popper's _The Poverty of Historicism_?
)
)DAN DUGAN
)I recommend Popper's two-volume set "The Open Society and Its
Enemies."
)Popper demonstrates a powerful discipline for rational argument:
don't
)attack the weak points of the system you oppose; Present its
strongest
)points, then refute them.
Yup, it's a couple of decades since I read it, but I remember it
as a
worthwhile book. Is it a 2-volume set? I think I must have had it
as a
2-in-1 edition.
) In the first volume he demolishes Plato, in the
)second, Marx.
IIRC those aren't the only philosophers he demolishes. (The theme
of the
latter part is developed in the book I cited.)
)
)Steiner was a Platonist.
You claim to be a well-read expert on Steiner, so I can only
assume yu
need to read a bit more Plato to enable you to notice some
important
distinctions between the two. (Determining what they are is left
as an
exercise for the interested student).
In another post on the same subject Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
wrote:
)I agree. I could better have said "prominent South African
)Anthroposophist...".
Indeed you could -- I'll spare you the task of establishing his
prominence.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:40 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA21280; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 08:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA16717; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 08:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA19397 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 08:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061508.IAA19397 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n480
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 07:47:35 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby reposted:
)FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - MAY 12, 1997
)
)Contact:
)Debra Snell, President, (916) 273-1005 snell oro.net
)Dan Dugan, Secretary (415) 821-9776 plans dandugan.com
)
)People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) will present a
briefing on
)the Oak Ridge School's "Waldorf method" program at 4:30 PM,
Thursday, May 15,
)at the California Teachers Association, 1118 10th Street,
Sacramento,
)California. Representatives of the CTA, the Sacramento school
board, and the
)Curriculum Commission of the State Department of Education have
been invited.
Rigby,
What I read here is that is there were three groups invited. I do
not see
an invitation extended to teachers from school sites that are not
CTA
members, to Rudolf Steiner College personnel, or to any other
person not
affiliated with the above stated organizations or any other
non-CTA
members.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:41 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA29702; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 08:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA03493; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 08:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA25378 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 08:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061523.IAA25378 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 08:02:36 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Levy posted:
Studying a subject, making a hypothesis, conducting a series of
controlled
experiments to test the hypothesis, collecting quantified data
from these
experiments, analyzing and comparing the data, and then drawing
conclusions
based on this data is science. This is not religion.
This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm of
"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
religious
belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:48 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
JAA15431; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 09:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA21943; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 09:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id JAA02889 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 09:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061634.JAA02889 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 16:45:46 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy:
)This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm of
)"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
)religious belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
Etymology is revealing. Religion derives from the Latin 'Religio,
Religionis' - a noun meaning obligation or bond. By extension,
those
who bound themselves to a certain 'rule' - as the mediaeval
monastics
did - earned the epithet 'religious'. It is entirely justified to
use
this term (in this original sense) to describe those who similarly
'bind' themselves to a particular methodology, such as the
scientific
method.
Science similarly derives from the Latin 'scientia', to know. Our
use
of the resulting noun to mean 'systematic and formulated
knowledge'
began less than 150 years ago, and replaced the more poetic
'Natural
Philosophy'. Its original meaning similarly makes it entirely
justifiable to use 'science' to describe the knowledge derived
from
other types of enquiry, including the 'spiritual' and 'mystical'.
Since it is a commonplace among the world's greatest mystics to
describe the legacy of spiritual revelation as 'knowledge' (Gk
'gnosis' literally meaning this kind of knowledge), it is hard to
see
in what way 'spiritual science' might be an oxymoron. Rather, I
think
it far more likely that in the origin of our various languages the
two were actually synonymous - and that it's only in comparatively
recent times that we've created this curious bifurcation.
James
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:46 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
JAA11056; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 09:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA09349; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 09:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id JAA21765 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061612.JAA21765 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Desk Job
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 08:51:40 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Rigby,
)I would like to make one more effort to discover the truth behind
the PLANS
)allegation that Kathy Sutphen was transferred to a desk job
because of her
)opposition to the use of Waldorf methods at her school. In the
interest of
)better understanding the situation I recently talked again with
Ruth
)Mikkelsen, the principal at that school.
It's amazing that a member of the Anthroposophy/Waldorf community
feels the
need to contact my former employer about my job situation -
despite any
statements made on this list. It is also amazing that my former
employer
willingly shares my personel records with the Anthroposophical
community.
According to your previous posts I believe I recall your assertion
that
these are two very separate entities and the behavior of the
members of one
(my employer and coworkers) had no bearing on the reputation of
the other
(Rudolf Steiner College and WE). I find your relationship with
Ruth
Mikkelsen to be an interesting one. This serves only to underscore
the
inappropriate behavior on the part of WE supporters and the Rudolf
Steiner
College as they seek to invade public education and obtain public
money.
I think I recall several assertions on your part that you are
_not_
connected with the Rudolf Steiner College and that you do not play
a part
of the ongoing controversy about the infiltration of WE in the
public
school arena here in the Sacramento area. Why are you now taking
it upon
yourself to contact my former employer and illegally obtain
personal
employment information? Interesting behavior on the part of a
person that
has no connection with the Rudolf Steiner College.
It only increased the disparity
)between the PLANS version of events and the school's version.
Following legal advice I am not going to comment at length on this
disparity. However, I will state that I have a personal code of
ethics in
which I strive always to be honest in my dealings with others. I
am human
and when I have erred in this I always then acknowledge my error
or lack of
truthfulness to the person I may have deceived or dishonored in
some way.
If I err or am inadvertantly dishonest on this list I will
acknowledge it.
In regard to the situation that you have taken a personal interest
in, in
an attempt I assume to discredit my personal integrity, I will
state that I
have not made any dishonest statements about my contract offer.
Let it rest Rigby. You seem to be on a personal mission to cast
dispersions
on my credibility and integrity. How is your behavior any
different than
that of the people I once worked with? You have been quick to
point out
that these people are part of the private sector and are not WE
employees,
representatives, connected with the Anthroposophical community,
etc. And
yet, you are obviously in close contact with these people and
communicate
with them regularly.
Once again I assert that when I voiced my objection to formal
inclusion of
Waldorf and the conversion of my school to a model Waldorf site I
was
subjected to a program of discreditation through labeling me as a
liar,
emotionally disturbed, and subjecting me to a series of incidents
in which
I was publicly harassed. Your behavior is in allignment and
conjunction
with these same people. And yes, you are _all_ connected with the
Rudolf
Steiner College, both formally and informally.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:54 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
KAA14346; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 10:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id KAA02770; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA23236 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061717.KAA23236 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Re: Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 19:17:43 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 12:31 AM 6/8/97 -0700, Deby wrote:
)Dear Rigby and evryone,
)
)Kathleen very recently found out that her mother was diagnosed
with cancer.
)She is clearly distraught about this. I'm asking that we give her
a bit of
)a break in the next few days. Likely she will be flying out of
town to be
)with her mother in the next day or so.
)
)Thanks for your consideration. I know we all wish her the best.
)Deby
I do! All the best to Kathleen, and to her family!
Herman de Tollenaere
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:53 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
KAA11444; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 10:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id KAA02066; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA23634 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061718.KAA23634 lists1.best.com)
From: Herman de Tollenaere (hermantl stad.dsl.nl)
Subject: Re: Admin: Ad hominems
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 19:17:49 +0200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
At 03:01 PM 6/8/97 +0100, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)Now, when I implied, in another post, that you [Dan Dugan] and de
Tollenaere were
)"woolly-minded liberals", *that* was an ad hominem, for which I
)apologise.
Apology accepted, as far as I am concerned.
Herman de Tollenaere
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:21:58 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA12014; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA00926; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id KAA03502 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 10:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061736.KAA03502 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 18:21:15 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708061634.JAA02889 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk) wrote:
)Etymology is revealing.
Not only etymology. The whole philosophical basis of scientific
method
is revealing.
A fundamental flaw in science is the philosophy that underlies the
scientific method, assuming we accept Popper's thesis that
hypotheses
should be testable. Empiricism is, according to Popper (and
others)
flawed, yet the only ways of independently testing the contention
that
the scientific method is a valid method are empirical.
In other words:
EITHER
The scientific method is self-validating and cannot therefore be
tested
independently -- it is therefore, by its own definition,
pseudoscience.
OR
The scientific method is verifiable by empirical methods; i.e. by
methods which are rejected by the philosophy which underlies it.
This is not a new revelation -- philosophers of science still seek
a
philosophy of science (and hence a validation of the scientific
method)
which is not circular or empirical or subject to infinite regress
or
otherwise flawed. It has, so far, proved elusive.
I am not trying to claim that the scientific method does not work
-- it
patently does -- but that it may be incomplete as a tool for
answering
all questions we can ask; it may be an approximation.
That does not deny that it is still a very powerful tool, in the
same
way that Newtonian mechanics, although an approximation, enabled
us to
put Pathfinder on Mars. As with any tool, it is best used once its
limitations are understood and, IMNSHO, one of the problems of
conventional science is that its practitioners are freqently
unaware of
its limitations and hence make unfounded assumptions about it.
One of those assumptions is that belief in the essential validity
of its
methodology is anything other than a belief.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:22:00 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA14113; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA13643; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA18414 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061806.LAA18414 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Desk Job
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 18:25:14 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708061612.JAA21765 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
spike netshel.net wrote:
)I will state that I
)have not made any dishonest statements about my contract offer.
Has PLANS made incorrect statements about your contract offer? If
so,
what were they and in what way were they incorrect?
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:22:00 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA24330; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA06071; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA22383 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061816.LAA22383 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 18:27:02 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Steve:
)I find these attempts to blur the distinction between science and
)spirituality to be an impediment to meaningful communication, in
)spite of the rather elegant and elaborate arguments that have
been
)made to equate the two. What's the point in talking about science
)and spirituality if we can't agree on what is meant by those
terms?
The point is, though, that suggesting spirituality can't be
science
rests - in this case - upon semantics. Words mean pretty much what
we
want them to mean, but they also have a history where they meant
(at
various times) fairly specific things.
When Newton used the word 'gravity' to define what his
predecessors
had referred to as the 'principle of attraction', he was using an
ancient word in a wholly new way. And it's wholly permissible for
an
individual to repurpose a word in this way - especially
considering
that neologisms often lack some of the poetic resonances that
reinforce a new meaning of an older word.
Consequently, to suggest that there is a meaning of 'science' that
is
consensual - but crucially is both detached from its origins and
also
allows for no repurposing - is to put a rather arbitrary
demarcation
around the discussion. Steiner repurposed 'science' when he coined
'spiritual science'. He had history on his side, if not
contemporary
usage. And it's reasonable to think that, among Anthroposophists
at
least (who make up some of the participants here), Steiner's usage
has passed into the everyday vocabulary.
In any case, I'm sure you'll find as many definitions of science
as
there are scientists - and a fairly wide gulf between how
'science'
understood by people who do it for a living, and the general
public.
James
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:22:06 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA26502; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 12:28:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA03038; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 12:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id MAA17220 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 12:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061908.MAA17220 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:47:05 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
List Members
I posted the following, but did not include Levy's post. This is
simply my
response to his assertion that what I was describing in regard to
science
is the same as religious belief.
)Levy posted:
)Studying a subject, making a hypothesis, conducting a series of
controlled
)experiments to test the hypothesis, collecting quantified data
from these
)experiments, analyzing and comparing the data, and then drawing
)conclusions based on this data is science. This is not religion.
)
)This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm of
)"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
religious
)belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
)
)Kathy
From ??? ??? Wed Aug 06 13:22:03 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA15707; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 12:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA28804; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA05397 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 11:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708061841.LAA05397 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: What is this about, anyway?
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 14:47:36 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
In the short time I have subscribed to the Waldorf critics
discussions,
I am disturbed at the nature of much of the correspondences. I
think we
all need to ask ourselves what is the purpose of our
participation.
Probably what we have in common is our concern for the education
of our
children. What I often observe is subtle and no so subtle attacks
and
bickering from both sides that have little to do with _today's_
issues
concerning education. If we truly care for our children, it would
be
best for us to try to put our egos aside so that we can
constructively
learn from each other.
On the one hand Waldorf education, like any other educational
approach,
must constantly seek improvement to the constant changes of time
and
culture. The critics of WE are valuable in suggesting areas to
improve. On the other hand, the critics do not have all the
answers to
the problems of education either, and they can learn from the
experience
of Waldorf teachers.
Of course the false claims that have been made should be
corrected, but
the fact they appear to begin with is a more fundemental problem.
Usually these mistakes are made due to a lack of familiarity or
understanding. In general I think the forum would be much more
relevant
if we would try to concentrate our comments on areas of our direct
experiences. I don't mean to pick on the critics, but it is the
clearest example I can think of right now. Steiner's writings are
often
cited by WE critics in their arguments. Even anthroposophists have
difficulty in understanding the _meaning_ of his writings, often
struggling and pondering to find the deeper meaning of his
message. How
can we expect a person who has not taken the leap of faith needed
to
understand anthroposophy to be able to know the meaning Steiner
intended?
We can all read the works of our thinkers and would come up with a
spectrum of opinion to their meaning, largely influenced by our
personal
biases. This is why I would rather hear more about our direct
experiences, feelings, and opinions. These are real and
irrefutable.
How can anyone say you did not experience this or you do not feel
this
way? I believe our discussions will be much more fruitful if we
would
conduct ourselves in this manner.
Of course it is often appropriate to refer to the wisdom of great
thinkers as they relate to _our experiences_. Obviously there are
grey
areas. I hope we can use our judgment to keep the discussion
positive.
I am curious to know how others feel.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:40:16 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
PAA04315; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA22926; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 15:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA23858 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 14:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708062124.OAA23858 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 21:06:09 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Kathy:
)Levy posted:
)Studying a subject, making a hypothesis, conducting a series of
)controlled experiments to test the hypothesis, collecting
quantified
)data from these experiments, analyzing and comparing the data,
and
)then drawing conclusions based on this data is science. This is
not
)religion.
)
)This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm of
)"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
)religious belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
Out of interest, why should it *not* be possible to accomplish
this
kind of scenario in the realm of "spiritual science"? One could
hypothesize that there is an objective reality which is 'divine'
and
whith which it is possible to commune. One could then look to see
whether it is possible to construct a methodology to achieve this.
Then one could pursue the various methods involved (although one
would have to use oneself as a subject), recording one's findings
as
accurately and as truthfully as possible - and creating a
technical
vocabulary where necessary to record experiences for which common
words might be inadequate. Finally, one could make conclusions
from
one's experience as to whether the experiment was successful, and
invite others to replicate it.
Does anyone doubt that what I've just suggested falls totally
within
the scope of the scientific method? But it also beautifully
describes
the way in which mystics have traditionally approached their
subject.
There is nothing in what I've suggested that, say, St John of the
Cross or Julian of Norwich don't do in the records of their
experiments with spirituality. Read the 'Dark Night of the Soul'
and
(allowing for cultural and temporal differences) one will find it
a
'scientific' treatise in exactly this sense.
If you're going to investigate particle physics, you don't only
need
a thorough grasp of the principles of the field - but also, most
probably, a particle accelerator costing millions of dollars and
involving hundreds of thousands of person/hours work. Nobody would
suggest that you can verify such work with a few hours training
and a
few pots and pans in your back-garden. Mystics have traditionally
claimed something not dissimilar for their disciplines - that
those
who seek to verify their findings make a substantial committment
to
study and practice, and may well also require the framework of a
significant body of human enterprise. But they have also
importantly
claimed that, if their methods are scrupulosuly followed, their
findings are both verifiable and repeatable - and the world's
countless traditions testify to a significant number of people who
have been prepared to make the necessary committment to verify for
themselves the assertions of those they follow. In what way is
this
*not* science - even as we currently undersand the term?
James
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:40:52 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
UAA08037; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:12:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id UAA23544; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 20:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id TAA02071 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 19:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070249.TAA02071 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: CTA Meeting of 15 May 1997
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 08:58:44 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708060647.XAA11126 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708061445.HAA08313 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)RigbyL aol.com wrote:
))I guess
))one needs a PLANS secret decoder ring to find the true messages
in their
))press releases.
)
)Either that or supersensible intuition.
)
)--
)Stephen Tonkin
KOPP says:
Take your tongue out of your cheek, now, Stephen, and ...
Show me some, please.
I'd like to see some demonstrable, tangible evidence of
"supersensible
intuition" in action, something that can be tested and repeated by
others,
that has resulted in some concrete advance in knowledge that is
now
accepted at large (not just by the coterie of Steiner,
Anthroposophists and
Waldorf Educators).
In other words, a nobel prize-winning effort that someone can
prove came
from "supersensible intuition"* alone, and which the Nobelist's
peers have
accepted as coming from that source, as opposed to rational,
scientific,
materialistic thought.
(Exclude the literature prize, please: no poets or visionaries.
I'm talking
material world here. And no references to winners who had some
association
with Anthroposophy or other occultism unless they have claimed,
and it has
been accepted by their peers, that that source is the real source
of their
advanced thinking, and that it is testable and usable by others
without
their having to enter into the "higher realms".)
*(Whatever that is -- I'm not sure how it differs from the
"in-tuition"
that I mentioned in my recent posts on science vs. superstition.)
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:41:09 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
UAA17149; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:32:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id UAA26900; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 20:31:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id TAA02275 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 19:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070249.TAA02275 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Science is religion??? (short reply)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:30:04 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708061634.JAA02889 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James Souttar quotes:
)Kathy:
)
))This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm
of
))"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
))religious belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
)
And SOUTTAR says:
)Etymology is revealing. Religion derives from the Latin 'Religio,
)Religionis' - a noun meaning obligation or bond. By extension,
those
)who bound themselves to a certain 'rule' - as the mediaeval
monastics
)did - earned the epithet 'religious'. It is entirely justified to
use
)this term (in this original sense) to describe those who
similarly
)'bind' themselves to a particular methodology, such as the
scientific
)method.
)
)Science similarly derives from the Latin 'scientia', to know. Our
use
)of the resulting noun to mean 'systematic and formulated
knowledge'
)began less than 150 years ago, and replaced the more poetic
'Natural
)Philosophy'. Its original meaning similarly makes it entirely
)justifiable to use 'science' to describe the knowledge derived
from
)other types of enquiry, including the 'spiritual' and 'mystical'.
)
)Since it is a commonplace among the world's greatest mystics to
)describe the legacy of spiritual revelation as 'knowledge' (Gk
)'gnosis' literally meaning this kind of knowledge), it is hard to
see
)in what way 'spiritual science' might be an oxymoron. Rather, I
think
)it far more likely that in the origin of our various languages
the
)two were actually synonymous - and that it's only in
comparatively
)recent times that we've created this curious bifurcation.
KOPP says:
Language lives and changes. Souttar is erudite, but not
contemporary.
If the human activity of knowing more ("science") became something
more in
the last 150 years by progressing from supertition to verifiable
reason,
then it is reasonable for the use of the word "science" to change
to the
new meaning as well. Otherwise why would Oxford University have
just
doubled the amount of money (now 34 million British pounds) for
the third
edition of the venerable Oxford English Dictionary.
The modern meaning of the word is not just "systematic and
formulated
knowledge", as Souttar chooses to restrain us to. It is also a
method of
thought and action to discover new knowledge. It is in this sense
that
Kathy Sutphen is rejecting "Anthroposophical science" as an
oxymoron -- and
she is correct.
This is also because calling the fruits of "spiritual" and
"mystical"
activities, as Souttar does above, "knowledge", is also a misuse
of the
language.
It may be an advanced body of thought and belief, but it isn't
materialistic "knowledge" because it can't be externally proved or
shared
by any path but "in-tuition" and belief in received wisdom.
It may be some form of wisdom or have value or meaning to some
people, but
it will never be shared by all (or even most) as a common
"knowledge".
There are too many of these superstitions for them all the have
validity,
or for any of them to be right and the others wrong.
(I've never written here about the incredible, to me, conceit of
all such
systems, though I have remarked on the intransigence of the
Anthroposophical dogma or method. Science may be a hard
taskmaster, but it
does accept that it can be wrong -- which is how it progresses.
There has
been no progress in the understanding of the world through
Anthroposophy,
that I am aware of, since Steiner propounded his theories. Nothing
has
changed.)
Science is not like that: it can be proven to and shared by
everyone
willing to
forego superstition and deal only with the material -- as have the
vast
majority of us in the Western (and much of the rest of the) world.
Unfortunately there seems to be this growing infection of
backsliding into
superstition. It is, among other things, a failure of media and
education.
Don't let's get started on that one, huh?
Anthroposophists wish to return to the pre-enlightenment mysticism
and
occultism. Part of this movement is to use the old language in the
old
ways, to be compatible with the old, outdated, overturned
supertition.
Souttar's "etymology" lesson is really nothing more than an
attempt to
justify a return to superstition by a return to the roots of the
language.
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:40:41 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
SAA29439; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 18:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA28431; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 18:00:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id RAA26436 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 17:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070050.RAA26436 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Kathleen Sutphen
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:49:54 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby--
(( Dear Rigby and evryone,
Kathleen very recently found out that her mother was diagnosed
with cancer.
She is clearly distraught about this. I'm asking that we give her
a bit of
a break in the next few days. Likely she will be flying out of
town to be
with her mother in the next day or so.
Thanks for your consideration. I know we all wish her the best.
Deby ))
Thanks for the information. Its good to have a reminder that there
is much
more to the human beings who participate here than appears in
their postings,
although I am sorry that it had to be such an event that brought
it to our
attention in this case. I do wish Kathy well.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:40:58 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
UAA10420; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id UAA12148; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 20:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id TAA02540 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 19:49:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070249.TAA02540 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 14:12:11 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708061634.JAA02889 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708061736.KAA03502 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Tonkin says:
)I am not trying to claim that the scientific method does not work
-- it
)patently does -- but that it may be incomplete as a tool for
answering
)all questions we can ask; it may be an approximation.
KOPP says:
Science doesn't claim it is a complete tool. I didn't claim it was
a
be-all, end-all. Science doesn't claim it's infallible; it is
skeptical. It
is the only system of rational knowledge-seeking about the world
which has
this self-regulating mechanism.
TONKIN:
)That does not deny that it is still a very powerful tool, in the
same
)way that Newtonian mechanics, although an approximation, enabled
us to
)put Pathfinder on Mars. As with any tool, it is best used once
its
)limitations are understood and, IMNSHO, one of the problems of
)conventional science is that its practitioners are freqently
unaware of
)its limitations and hence make unfounded assumptions about it.
What are the founded assumptions about Anthroposophy and
Anthroposophical
science that make IT a more useful tool? One which should be
taught to
school children (as opposed, let's say, to university
post-graduates who
have been rigorously trained in all the various methods of thought
and
philosophy)?
)One of those assumptions is that belief in the essential validity
of its
)methodology is anything other than a belief.
Tonkin says science works. He says it is a powerful tool. In fact,
he is a
pretty good scientist, both in his work and his personal
interests. And he
doesn't tolerate too much far-out stuff.
But Tonkin also says science's methodology is a belief. And that
its
philosophy and logic are self-referential and self-validating and
tautological. And he defends spiritual science, and sees no
problem in its
use in schools, in whatever guise (usually Goethean
phenomenological
"experimentation" and induction).
Science works because it produces evidence that can be apprehended
and
understood by virtually anyone, without belief being required.
If it works, it must be valid. If it is valid, it can be relied
upon, which
is a more accurate term than "believed in". This does not make it
a belief
system, like religions, philosophies, superstitions and esoteric
mysticisms.
Science works -- for us all, not just an initiated few -- and it
does it
independently of its philosophical vagaries and uncertainties, its
conundrums and paradoxes, its politics and its personalities. It
works
because it is rational and real, as opposed to non-rational and
ethereal.
Methinks Tonkin must have a bit of a pain in the butt -- not from
Kopp, but
from trying to ride two horses at the same time when they are
going in
different directions.
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:40:55 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
UAA09542; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id UAA11509; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 20:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id TAA02222 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 19:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070249.TAA02222 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Desk Job
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 14:26:28 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708061612.JAA21765 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708061806.LAA18414 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stepehn Tonin throws down a gauntlet:
)spike netshel.net wrote:
))I will state that I
))have not made any dishonest statements about my contract offer.
)
)Has PLANS made incorrect statements about your contract offer? If
so,
)what were they and in what way were they incorrect?
And KOPP tosses his own:
I would say this question is reasonable.
I would also say that it is reasonable to ask how, why, and for
what valid
reason Rigby has access to apparently privileged information about
Kathy's
situation (presuming he's not just inventing all the gossip he's
reporting
as fact). The answer should also include how he justifies making
this
priviliged information public in any way, shape or form, and why
he is
doing it.
How about we do a trade: Rigby answers these questions, and PLANS
answers
Tonkin's.
Then, if we can determine the ethicality of both actions we can
proceed to
an examination of which is the more egregious: misrepresentation,
or
character assassination by innuendo and revealing privileged
information.
(I as a journalist would have questioned the PLANS release and
people for
verification and proof; I would also have totally rejected the use
of the
information Rigby gave about Kathy unless I could find an ethical
way of
brining it into the open. I would certainly want very much to tell
a
complete story of this issue from both sides. I suspect, as I've
said
before, we will have to await legal resolution of the issues.
(If PLANS knowingly falsified the situation for a propaganda
reason, I
would condemn that. If they mistakenly hyped what they believed or
interpreted of the situation, I would be less upset, but I would
not use
the material or I would write a clarification.
(If Rigby on the other hand is revealing personal and personnel
confidences
to which he has no right in the first place, for any reason, I
would expose
that as a probable violation of the law, and I would demand an
explanation
of the authorities from which the information was gained.)
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:41:16 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
VAA14803; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 21:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA05258; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 21:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id VAA20374 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 21:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070420.VAA20374 lists1.best.com)
From: Deby Snell (snell oro.net)
Subject: Re: What is this about, anyway?
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:25:21 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708061841.LAA05397 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
John writes,
How can we expect a person who has not taken the leap of faith
needed to
)understand anthroposophy to be able to know the meaning Steiner
)intended?
Are you saying that I can not understand Anthroposophy unles I
choose to
believe it _before_ I read it? How do you know _when_ you are able
to
understand Anthroposophy as Steiner intended?
)
)We can all read the works of our thinkers and would come up with
a
)spectrum of opinion to their meaning, largely influenced by our
personal
)biases. This is why I would rather hear more about our direct
)experiences, feelings, and opinions. These are real and
irrefutable.
)How can anyone say you did not experience this or you do not feel
this
)way? I believe our discussions will be much more fruitful if we
would
)conduct ourselves in this manner.
Look in the archives. Most of the active members have posted our
experiences. I would love it if more people would post their
experiences,
good, bad or in between.
)
)Of course it is often appropriate to refer to the wisdom of great
)thinkers as they relate to _our experiences_. Obviously there are
grey
)areas. I hope we can use our judgment to keep the discussion
positive.
)
)I am curious to know how others feel.
Thanks, John. How about if we start with you? Somewhere (I think)
I read
that you are a Waldorf teacher. If so, where? How did you come to
work in
WE? What did you do before?
Tell us about your experiences with WE. I am very happy that you
have
joined our discussions. Welcome.
Deby
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:41:25 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA23270; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 00:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA26479; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 00:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id WAA09791 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Wed, 6 Aug
1997 22:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070502.WAA09791 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 17:00:24 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708062124.OAA23858 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James Souttar quotes:
)Kathy:
)
))Levy posted:
))Studying a subject, making a hypothesis, conducting a series of
))controlled experiments to test the hypothesis, collecting
quantified
))data from these experiments, analyzing and comparing the data,
and
))then drawing conclusions based on this data is science. This is
not
))religion.
))
))This type of scenarios cannot be accomplished within the realm
of
))"spiritual science." Therefore, I term it to be religion and
))religious belief, ie: "spiritual science" is an oxymoron.
And SOUTTAR says:
)
)Out of interest, why should it *not* be possible to accomplish
this
)kind of scenario in the realm of "spiritual science"? One could
)hypothesize that there is an objective reality which is 'divine'
and
)whith which it is possible to commune. One could then look to see
)whether it is possible to construct a methodology to achieve
this.
)Then one could pursue the various methods involved (although one
)would have to use oneself as a subject), recording one's findings
as
)accurately and as truthfully as possible - and creating a
technical
)vocabulary where necessary to record experiences for which common
)words might be inadequate. Finally, one could make conclusions
from
)one's experience as to whether the experiment was successful, and
)invite others to replicate it.
)Does anyone doubt that what I've just suggested falls totally
within
)the scope of the scientific method?
KOPP says:
I not only doubt that it does, I am certain of it.
One might be able to "hypothesisize", but it wouldn't be science.
The hypothesis could not be proved by the scientific method, which
requires
tangible evidence, or the inference of that evidence, such as
particle
tracks on photographic plates from bubble chambers that record
physical
events. (I do not agree that quantum phenomena cannot ever be
inferred to
represent reality, just that it's going to be hard to pin it
down.)
So while there might be a methodology to "commune" there could not
be a
methodology to prove that that communion actually took place. It
could not
be objectively demonstrated, so, while it might _appear_
"scientific", it
would be pseudo-scientific.
And others can only _claim_ to have replicated the "thought
experiment", so
they cannot meet the requirements of science either.
SOUTTAR:
)But it also beautifully describes
)the way in which mystics have traditionally approached their
subject.
)There is nothing in what I've suggested that, say, St John of the
)Cross or Julian of Norwich don't do in the records of their
)experiments with spirituality. Read the 'Dark Night of the Soul'
and
)(allowing for cultural and temporal differences) one will find it
a
)'scientific' treatise in exactly this sense.
KOPP:
No. Steiner's body of work, like all other gurus' bodies of work,
may be
beautiful, internally consistent, coherent, logically contructed
according
to its own logical rules, and useful to those who wish to live by
it as a
philosophy.
So is the best science fiction. In fact, in order to be credible
as sci-fi
(and not fantasy, which can be anything it wants to be) it must be
internally consistent.
But such a body of work is superstition, NOT science because it
deals with
the esoteric and posits an unverifiable, undemonstrable,
unrepeatable,
un-real spiritual realm.
These are experiments in inductive thought and not deductive
thought. Much
as in the pre-scientific days of psychology, they are completely
unverifiable, undemonstrable, and unrepeatable. Psychology
realises
(defensively) that it is not a science, though it tries to apply
the
scientific method. It deals with the intangible. Modern psychology
is
becoming science by using physical techniques to study the mind,
whatever
that is.
SOUTTAR:
)If you're going to investigate particle physics, you don't only
need
)a thorough grasp of the principles of the field - but also, most
)probably, a particle accelerator costing millions of dollars and
)involving hundreds of thousands of person/hours work. Nobody
would
)suggest that you can verify such work with a few hours training
and a
)few pots and pans in your back-garden. Mystics have traditionally
)claimed something not dissimilar for their disciplines - that
those
)who seek to verify their findings make a substantial committment
to
)study and practice, and may well also require the framework of a
)significant body of human enterprise. But they have also
importantly
)claimed that, if their methods are scrupulosuly followed, their
)findings are both verifiable and repeatable - and the world's
)countless traditions testify to a significant number of people
who
)have been prepared to make the necessary committment to verify
for
)themselves the assertions of those they follow. In what way is
this
)*not* science - even as we currently undersand the term?
KOPP SAYS:
NO, THEIR FINDINGS ARE NOT REPEATABLE AND VERIFIABLE ACCORDING TO
THE
SCIENTIFIC METHOD.
They are only "verifiable" in the beliefs of those who choose to
think that
they have actually achieved understanding. There is -- as Steiner
said, I
think -- no external test for this; one simply has to take
another's word
that they have achieved understanding (usually because the
statrements are
consistent with the dogma that refuses to admit it is so).
IT IS NOT SCIENCE BECAUSE IT IS NOT DEMONSTRABLE.
Plenty of scientists have done without cyclotrons, by the way. We
may need
bigger science to deal with the smallest (and largest) questions,
but one
can always use a couple of torch batteries, a coil of wire, and
some clear
plastic and a flashgun. (grin)
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 01:41:29 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
AAA06411; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 00:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA19277; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 00:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id AAA22079 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 00:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070740.AAA22079 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 08:33:13 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708070249.TAA02540 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
)Science doesn't claim it is a complete tool. I didn't claim it
was a
)be-all, end-all.
Agreed, you didn't. IMHO the incompleteness automatically
validates the
principle that other tools _may_ be appropriate to questions which
are
outside the remit of science.
)What are the founded assumptions about Anthroposophy and
Anthroposophical
)science that make IT a more useful tool?
I personally find (believe?) it to be an extremely useful tool for
questions which I believe to be outside the remit of science --
metaphysical questions, for example.
)Tonkin says science works. He says it is a powerful tool. In
fact, he is a
)pretty good scientist, both in his work and his personal
interests. And he
)doesn't tolerate too much far-out stuff.
Careful, Michael! Those conversant with our mutual history on this
list
may be trying to wrench their eyebrows down from their hairlines!
:-)
)And he defends spiritual science, and sees no problem in its
)use in schools, in whatever guise (usually Goethean
phenomenological
)"experimentation" and induction).
I see a distinction between spiritual and Goethean science. I see
no
conflict of (educational) interest in using Goethean observation
as one
of an armoury of scientific tools. Both it and what is now termed
"scientific method" need to be used at some point during a science
education -- not necessarily on the same day!
)
)Science works because it produces evidence that can be
apprehended and
)understood by virtually anyone, without belief being required.
In some cases this is true. I wonder, however, what proportion of
people
understand the evidence for special relativity or indeterminacy or
[...
etc ad nauseam]
)
)If it works, it must be valid. If it is valid, it can be relied
upon, which
)is a more accurate term than "believed in". This does not make it
a belief
)system, like religions, philosophies, superstitions and esoteric
)mysticisms.
I find your first statement there to be too strong. How about: "If
it
works, and if a mechanism can be demonstrated, it is most probably
(almost certainly) valid."?
To take a (possibly over-) simplistic exception to your statement,
if I
believed that members of a priesthood needed to utter an
incantation
every sunset in order to ensure that the Sun would rise again the
next
day; if they uttered that incantation, it would surely "work" --
is it
valid?
Whilst science is certainly a different kind of "belief system" to
the
other examples you cite (yes, I know that is not what you meant!),
I
contend that it is still a kind of belief system, particularly for
those
who rarely question its nature.
)Methinks Tonkin must have a bit of a pain in the butt -- not from
Kopp, but
)from trying to ride two horses at the same time when they are
going in
)different directions.
Maybe it's that I've not yet noticed that they are going in
different
directions. Possible explanations are:
I'm too stupid/deluded to notice.
They aren't going in different directions.
Huge insensitive butt.
Take your pick.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:02:58 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
BAA26996; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA07198; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id BAA17351 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070850.BAA17351 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: South Africa (was: Come on Stephen)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:50:06 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
James, you said,
)Is this an example of the kind of false syllogism you're talking
)about?
)
)Popper demolished Plato
)
)Steiner was a Platonist
)
)ergo Popper demolished Steiner
)
)
)If so, bravo! It demonstrates exactly the point Popper makes
about
)not attacking the weak points of the system you oppose.
Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about. But when I admired
Popper's
technique, I didn't mean to imply that the more common form of
argument,
looking for the chinks in the wall and trying to bring it down by
enlarging
them, is "false." It's just that Popper's method is so much more
noble, and
difficult.
I do feel Popper removes a significant portion of Steiner's
foundation.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:01 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
BAA27719; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:57:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA27187; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:55:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id BAA17357 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070850.BAA17357 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Testing Steiner's Path
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:50:12 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Paul Levy, you said,
)The problem with the following comments about "science" is that,
by their
)own logic, they are necessarily religious statements as well. As
such, you
)are using statements of faith to masquerade as fact.
(snip)
The "truths" of religion (doctrines) are pronounced by charismatic
leaders,
and guarded unchanged by a succession of priests or initiates.
The "truths" of science (theories) are held tentatively, and the
more
important the theory is that is overthrown, the higher honor goes
to the
overthrower.
These represent two fundamentally different epistemologies, not
two
religions. The Waldorf/Anthroposophy vs critics philosophy war
turns on
epistemology. How is reliable knowledge obtained?
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:06 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
BAA27977; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA07508; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id BAA17359 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 01:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708070850.BAA17359 lists1.best.com)
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n480
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:50:20 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Rigby reposted:
))FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - MAY 12, 1997
))
))Contact:
))Debra Snell, President, (916) 273-1005 snell oro.net
))Dan Dugan, Secretary (415) 821-9776 plans dandugan.com
))
))People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) will present
a briefing on
))the Oak Ridge School's "Waldorf method" program at 4:30 PM,
Thursday, May 15,
))at the California Teachers Association, 1118 10th Street,
Sacramento,
))California. Representatives of the CTA, the Sacramento school
board, and the
))Curriculum Commission of the State Department of Education have
been invited.
)
KATHY
)Rigby,
)What I read here is that is there were three groups invited. I do
not see
)an invitation extended to teachers from school sites that are not
CTA
)members, to Rudolf Steiner College personnel, or to any other
person not
)affiliated with the above stated organizations or any other
non-CTA
)members.
And the press, which was the purpose of the release. They didn't
show. We
had a parent demonstration at the school that morning that may
have
distracted them. People arrived at that meeting with crossed
expectations,
for which I apologize.
-Dan Dugan
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:04:02 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
JAA12163; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:05:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA27087; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 09:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA13948 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 08:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071548.IAA13948 lists1.best.com)
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Science is religion??? (short reply)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 97 11:28:44 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael:
)This is also because calling the fruits of "spiritual" and
)"mystical" activities, as Souttar does above, "knowledge", is
also a
)misuse of the language.
)It may be an advanced body of thought and belief, but it isn't
)materialistic "knowledge" because it can't be externally proved
or
)shared by any path but "in-tuition" and belief in received
wisdom.
)It may be some form of wisdom or have value or meaning to some
)people, but it will never be shared by all (or even most) as a
)common "knowledge". There are too many of these superstitions for
)them all the have validity, or for any of them to be right and
the
)others wrong.
This is an interesting point. There are, of course, a number of
different kinds of knowledge that most of us would accept under
the
term 'common knowledge'. In addition to intellectual appreciation,
there is also tacit knowledge (the things you don't know that you
know, but which inform your thinking), know-how (practical
'how-to'
knowledge that you can't easily articulate), understanding (when
you
make a 'now it really means something to me' connection with an
idea
you'd only previously grasped conceptually), intuition (in the
non-spiritual sense of hunches and presentiments) and insight
(when
an idea soars through ones mind with the brilliance and energy of
a
meteor). I'm not going to attempt to justify the above further,
because I'm sure we're all familiar with them - or something
broadly
similar (they are also all being meticulously probed and
documented
in the cognitive sciences).
Mystical knowledge, by all accounts, is a cogent, comprehensive
and
powerfully direct form of cognition. And as far as I can see,
accounts of it are surprisingly consistent across religious,
cultural
and linguistic boundaries. So I don't see why it can't be
accounted a
form of 'knowing' - a 'science' - along with the other types of
knowledge. That doesn't mean that one has to accept the hypothesis
that it is 'direct knowledge of the divine' or whatever, only that
it
exists as a widely documented mode of perception - and needs to be
accounted as such.
James
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:21 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
FAA23554; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 05:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id FAA22245; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 05:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA26417 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 05:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071209.FAA26417 lists1.best.com)
From: litvas icu.com
Subject: Re: Desk Job
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 97 08:20:45 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Michael Kopp asks (regarding the "desk job" issue):
)I would also say that it is reasonable to ask how, why, and for
what valid
)reason Rigby has access to apparently privileged information
about Kathy's
)situation (presuming he's not just inventing all the gossip he's
reporting
)as fact). The answer should also include how he justifies making
this
)priviliged information public in any way, shape or form, and why
he is
)doing it.
I'm not certain this information is privileged. Kathy Sutphen
is/was a
public employee, and the basics of her employment contract should
be a
matter of public record.
If a disciplinary action or termination had been involved, it
would be a
different situation, but that does not seem to have been the case.
Someone more familiar with labor and administrative law could
speak with
more authority. Do either Steve Premo or Stephen Wright have
anything to
add?
)How about we do a trade: Rigby answers these questions, and PLANS
answers
)Tonkin's.
We seem to have two separate issues. The first stands alone,
irregardless of what Rigby posted later: Is PLANS posting reliable
"press releases", and specifically, what about the allegations of
the
"desk job" transfer? Deby and Dan, you've been awfully silent on
this
one for too long.
)Then, if we can determine the ethicality of both actions we can
proceed to
)an examination of which is the more egregious: misrepresentation,
or
)character assassination by innuendo and revealing privileged
information.
Again, the two issues are not joint, and asking to merge them
simply lets
PLANS off the hook.
)I as a journalist would have questioned the PLANS release and
people for
)verification and proof; I would also have totally rejected the
use of the
)information Rigby gave about Kathy unless I could find an ethical
way of
)brining it into the open. I would certainly want very much to
tell a
)complete story of this issue from both sides.
Michael, your interest in the ethics of this issue seems
selective. Your
interest in presenting a balanced view is also curious, in light
of the
following post you made to this list in the second half of
February 1997
(from the "landlord-tenant" thread):
)Deby may wish she had done more investigating of the other side
of the
)story before speaking -- or she may not. That's up to her. I do
not see her
)retelling of the story as "irresponsible".
)
)It is relevant, IMNSHO, in the context of this list, to report on
the
)actions of Anthroposophists, because any facet of their
individual or
)collective behaviour may help those of us who have skeptical
views of
)Anthroposophy and its adherents understand them better.
)
)I do not think the discussion on any list has to remain rigidly
limited to
)the aims of any organisation (PLANS) or list charter. This is an
open and
)free forum, unlike the other ones on
Steiner/Waldorf/Anthroposophy. Long
)may it remain so robust.
)
)Free speech, as pointed out previously, includes the right to
openly say
)many things which are impolite or perhaps painful to some. Deby
is within
)those precepts, I think. Only if Deby named the person(s)
involved in this
)case, and reported their actions _inaccurately_ or _libellously_
(under
)U.S. law, where she is posting from) would there be a case to
criticise her.
Now, in this case we are no longer dealing with issues of
anonymity,
since PLANS identified Kathy in the same press release. Kathy has
responded to Rigby's post herself, and did not question the
accuracy of
the information he relayed. I don't think libel is the issue here.
The issue here is one of PLANS publishing misleading or inaccurate
information. The issue has been pointedly ignored by the president
and
secretary of PLANS, both members of this list, and responsible for
the
original post.
Whatever the issue is between Rigby and Kathy is separate. I want
to
emphasize this point, because I want to make it clear that I am
not
trying to attack Kathy Sutphen, but those who seek to manipulate
her
situation for their own ends.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:27 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
GAA09393; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 06:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA06068; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 06:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id FAA07754 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 05:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071238.FAA07754 lists1.best.com)
From: Neil Faiman (faiman zko.dec.com)
Subject: Re: Check early, check often
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 08:24:27 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Greetings.
In my message, "Check early, check often", I mentioned that:
)My own experience was that the representations of the school with
regard
)to the sort of education my daughter would receive were highly
accurate,
)that the quality of the education was excellent, and that
anthroposophical
)"doctrine" was not present in the education. Some Critics here
have
)reported diametrically opposite experiences. Each parent will
make this
)determination for himself or herself in the end, and will be
doing himself
)or herself a service by beginning to make it sooner rather than
later.
Dan Dugan queries:
) Neil, could you back up your assertion that your daughter
received a high
) quality education, and Anthroposophical doctrine was not
present?
I had hoped, by the use of the phrase "in my experience," to
suggest
that I was speaking at least partially in the realm of personal
judgment here -- I didn't intend "my experience" to be an
"assertion".
However, I will do the best that I can.
On objective measures:
My daughter scored in the 99th percentile on the SSAT (Secondary
School Admissions Test).
She was admitted to two (non-Waldorf) "college preparatory" high
schools of high academic standards.
In the one that she chose to attend, she has achieved highest
honors in her first year ("straight A's" in every class in every
term).
She won first place in the school's annual writing contest in the
short story category (an unusual accomplishment for a freshman).
Of course, we are talking about a single student here, and no one
can
quantify the extent to which her personal qualities and intrinsic
aptitudes, her upbringing and home life, and her elementary school
education contributed to these objective results. I am reduced to
more
subjective observations in concluding that her Waldorf elementary
education made a positive contribution to her overall
accomplishments
by the time she reached high school. In particular:
I believe that I had a reasonable familiarity with the form and
substance of her elementary school educational experience: through
regular family discussion about what she was doing in school;
through examination of all of her school work; through fairly
close
personal acquaintance with most of her teachers; and through all
the
traditional media of parent-teacher interaction (class meetings,
newsletters from the teacher, etc.). In short, I know what she was
being taught, and I was happy with it.
Since hers was a close-knit class, the parents all have some
degree
of familiarity with how one another's children are doing this
year.
The stories seem to range consistently from "doing well" to "doing
extremely well." I can't give you statistics, but I can state with
confidence that our family is not at all unusual in our
satisfaction
with how well our child is doing this year, nor in our
satisfaction
with how the Waldorf school experience contributed to it.
I have enough anecdotes from other graduating classes to convince
me that this is not just the story of one successful student, or
one successsful class. (One example: Graduating classes at our
school are generally around twenty students. With several public
high schools in the area, probably no more than half-a-dozen of
that twenty go to any one high school. In one of those area high
schools a couple of years ago, out of a graduating class of
several
hundred, both the valedictorian and the salutatorian were
graduates
of our Waldorf elementary school.)
With regard to Dan's request that I "back up [my] assertion that
...
Anthroposophical doctrine was not present," the best I can do is
to to
state that, having a reasonable acquaintance with anthroposophy,
and
the close familiarity with the school that I referred to above, my
personal observation did not reveal the presence of
anthroposophical
doctrine in the education. I'm really not sure, though, what other
sort of response I could give to such a request.
Inspired by commentary on this mailing list, I have occasionally
quizzed her, with the sort of results that I would have expected
("Anthroposophy? What's that?". "What do you mean, some people
don't
believe the heart pumps the blood? How could anyone think that?".
"India, the Middle East, Greece, Rome? Sounds like my high school
'World Civilization' class.").
One should note, though, that different people have different
views on
what constitutes anthroposophical doctrine in the education. It
would
not help you, the prospective Waldorf parent to ask Dan, or Rigby,
or
Deby, or me, "Is anthroposophy being taught in this classroom?"
because
based on past discussions here, it is quite clear that we could
look at
the same classroom and, in perfect sincerity, give you completely
different answers. Only you can apply your personal standards to
the
particular school you are looking at to come to a decision that
will be
satisfactory to you and your family.
Finally, Dan also asks:
) May I examine her lesson books?
I am afraid that I must make the same answer that I did the last
time
Dan made this request ("Neil, please send me copies of all those
science block lesson books you mentioned. I will pay for the
copying
and postage." [March, 1996]):
) I must respectfully decline to comply with Dan's request. I do
so for
) two reasons. First, I doubt whether Dan's generous offer was
really
) intended to cover the $60+ that the oversize color photocopying
of these
) main lesson books would cost, and I am unwilling to subject them
to
) lesser-quality reproduction. Second, I hope that Dan will not
take
) offense that I am reluctant to provide a quantity of my
daughter's work
) to someone who has a mission to expose the faults of the system
she has
) been educated in, and who has, by my lights, frequently
misinterpreted
) or misrepresented the content of his various research materials.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:36 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
HAA28710; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 07:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA10613; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 07:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA17768 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 07:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071433.HAA17768 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 10:41:41 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan says:
)Are you saying that I can not understand Anthroposophy unles I
choose
)to believe it _before_ I read it? How do you know _when_ you are
able
)to understand Anthroposophy as Steiner intended?
Please refer to James's insightful commentary in "Science is
religion?"
concerning the commitment one must make to understand the mystics.
)I interpret your "personal experience of the usefulness and
correctness
)of the spiritual nature of the universe" to mean it feels good to
you. )Unfortunately, the relationship between things that feel good
and
)things that are true is not so simple.
If you have a question as to what I mean, please ask for
clarification
rather than drawing your own conclusions. My experience with
respect to
my current understanding of the spiritual nature is as follows. I
have
made observations of how the spiritual nature of things has both
spiritual as well as physical consequences. Conversely the
physical
nature of things has both spiritual and physical effects. If one
lives
in conflict either the spiritual and physical, then there are
negative
results both spiritually or physically. If one lives in accord
with the
spiritual and physical natures of the world, then one can find
spiritual
peace and the physical world thrives. I cannot give you a
scientific
proof of what I have discovered. I am sure you could refute any
particular example I give with a purely physical explanation,
after all
there is always a physical view of any event. This does not change
the
fact that I do have a particular view of spiritual nature and I do
see a
connection between the physical and spiritual.
Finally I would like to emphasize that points a present are
largely
based on my own personal experience. My view of Steiner and
anthroposophy is that there is a lot of useful knowledge in his
teachings, but I have found disagreements with him. I admit that
there
are some people within the Waldorf movement that take Steiner's
word as
gospel without critically thinking for themselves. In fact this
practice is against Steiner's principle of independence of
thought. He
says not to take his word for it, but to experience it for oneself
and
draw one's own conclusions.
I would appreciate if you would maintain an emphasis on your
criticisms
to what I say today since I am not Steiner.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:42 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
HAA29984; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 07:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA19770; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 07:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id HAA19496 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 07:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071439.HAA19496 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Apology
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 10:47:45 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
I apologize for confusing Dan's and Deby's comments, in fact on
two
topics, in my last message.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:04:42 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
MAA22597; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 12:11:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id MAA10327; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 12:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA29660 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 11:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071844.LAA29660 lists1.best.com)
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n480
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 16:13:54 +0100
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199708070850.BAA17359 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)) Rigby reposted:
)))FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - MAY 12, 1997
[...]
)Representatives of the CTA, the Sacramento school board, and the
)))Curriculum Commission of the State Department of Education have
been invited.
))
)KATHY
))Rigby,
))What I read here is that is there were three groups invited. I
do not see
))an invitation extended to teachers from school sites that are
not CTA
))members, to Rudolf Steiner College personnel, or to any other
person not
))affiliated with the above stated organizations or any other
non-CTA
))members.
)
)And the press, which was the purpose of the release. They didn't
show.
Did representatives of each of the other invited groups turn up:
Q. Representatives of the CTA?
A.
Q. Representatives of the Sacramento school board?
A.
Q. Representatives of the Curriculum Commission of the State
Department
of Education?
A.
In other words, apart from Dan, Deby, Kathy and Rigby, just who
was
there, how many of them were there, and which groups were
represented
(apart from PLANS)? This is of interest to those of us who are
trying to
get a flavour of the meeting.
--
Stephen Tonkin
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:03:56 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
IAA00555; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 08:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id IAA22972; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 08:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id IAA03376 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071520.IAA03376 lists1.best.com)
From: John Calkins (calkins kodak.com)
Subject: Background info
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 11:28:49 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
)Thanks, John. How about if we start with you? Somewhere (I think)
I
)read that you are a Waldorf teacher. If so, where? How did you
come to
)work in WE? What did you do before?
)Tell us about your experiences with WE. I am very happy that you
have
)joined our discussions. Welcome.
In response to Deby's request, I will tell you something about
myself.
I am currently working at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New
York
as a senior reasearch scientist in the field of optical recording.
We
make recordable CD disks or "CD-R" that some of you may know of. I
also
freelance on the side as a violist in a professional string
quartet and
have a strong interest in sustainable agriculture. While I do
enjoy
some aspects of my work, I am disenchanted with the exploitation
and
mechanization of corporate life. I am leaving my position at Kodak
in
two weeks to attend a two year teacher training program at
Sunbridge
College. For those of you who do not know, Sunbrdige is a Waldorf
training institute in Spring Valley, New York, offering a Masters
degree
program recognized by the regents of New York State.
My wife studied at Sunbridge last year and has another year to
complete
her Masters. Over the past year, I visited my wife about every
three
weeks at school. During those visits I had the opportunity to meet
about forty students (most planning to become Waldorf teachers)
and the
college's faculty. I have had many in depth conversations with
both
students and faculty, and I am convinced that Waldorf education is
a
good path for me. I have a reasonably clear picture of what I am
getting into, and I have no regrets about my decision.
An interesting observation I have made is how different people
react to
my decision. Some people are happy for me that I am doing what is
right
for me. Others cannot understand why I would take a huge salary
cut to
become a teacher. I think it says alot about human nature.
As I have pointed out before, after I leave Kodak I will most
likely not
have access to e-mail. We will be on an austerity budget living in
the
dormitory without the luxury of a private phone to connect our
computer
to the internet. August 22nd will be my last day.
John Calkins
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:04:37 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
LAA12539; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 11:59:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA07563; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 11:58:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id LAA00943 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 11:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708071847.LAA00943 lists1.best.com)
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n480
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 14:47:05 -0400 (EDT)
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
(( And the press, which was the purpose of the release. They
didn't show. We
had a parent demonstration at the school that morning that may
have
distracted them. People arrived at that meeting with crossed
expectations,
for which I apologize.
-Dan Dugan ))
Thank you, Dan.
Rigby
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:05:18 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
OAA06434; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 14:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA13894; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 14:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA09637 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 14:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708072100.OAA09637 lists1.best.com)
From: spike netshel.net
Subject: Contract Offer
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 13:39:58 -0700
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
List Members,
In an effort to settle the dispute about my contract offer for the
1997/98
school year I am copying, verbatim, the first paragraph of my
offer. The
rest of the offer has simply to do with annual salary, step
classification,
TB Clearance, etc., and is not pertinent to our discussion here.
"You are hereby notified that the Superintendent of Schools,
County of
(omitted), has elected you to serve in the position of Community
School/Independent Study Teacher on a full-time basis beginning
July 1,
1997, and ending June 30, 1998 . . ."
The Independent Study position is a desk job (meaning there is no
classroom) located at the Community School. The IS Assignment
Sheets name
this school site at the top of them and is a part of the program
offered at
this school. (An aside to this is that it does not include a
"desk" that is
solely mine, but rather a table that is used by a large amount of
staff,
located in a very, very small room that is also utilized by a
large number
of staff.) Students are required to meet with the IS teacher one
hour per
week. At our site a "study period" was offered on a Mon - Thurs
basis,
however; the person in the room with the students is a TA. During
this time
students work quietly on their individually assigned work. If they
need
assistance they ask the TA or come to me in the room where I meet
with IS
students on an individual basis to assign them new work, perform
paperwork
procedures, and evaluate previous work, tests, etc. Unfortunately,
this is
primarily a desk job. There is an "appointment" for each student
for the
one hour per week. There are the same number of hours dedicated to
this
position as there are students enrolled in the program. Can you
imagine how
much "education" can be done in an hour. Remember that during this
hour
work must be evaluated, books checked in, checked out, assignment
sheets
completed, ie: paperwork.
I'll let the reader determine what this contract is offering.
Perhaps Rigby
and others from the Waldorf community would like to request
further
personnel information from my former employer in order to make a
clear
determination. It is apparent that my personal employment history
is
readily shared with the public, at least those associated with the
Rudolf
Steiner College.
This is the information that PLANS had when they completed their
flyer. My
experience of Dan Dugan is that his approach to life and his work
as a
Waldorf Critic is one of unerring personal honesty. He will not
use any
material unless he is personally assured it is accurate. I also
experience
this of Debra Snell. There are many on this list that do not agree
with
them philosophically, however, to accuse them of dishonesty or
manipulation
is a vastly inaccurate approach to any discussion with or about
them or
PLANS.
It is difficult to follow my attorney's advice at all times and
still
remain a valuable contributory part of the discussion here on this
list.
However, I do believe our discussion to be important. For this
reason I
have offered the pertinent part of my contract offer in order to
clear up
any misunderstanding about Dan's and Deby's use of information
regarding my
treatment at my workplace once I became vocal about my objections
to
Waldorf inclusion.
I also want to state here that any information Rigby made have
obtained
about a position being "created" for me in 1995 is also blatantly
untrue.
An ad was placed for teaching positions that summer and I
interviewed,
along with others that applied. A total of three teachers were
hired. One
was an uncredentialed Waldorf-trained teacher that found he was
unable to
continue teaching at the Community School. He was on his one-year
sabbatical (if this is the term) from the Sacramento Waldorf
School. Was
his job "created" for him? If mine was "created" for me, then the
other job
must too have fit within this category. When he found, after a few
months,
that he could not effectively fulfill the position he was then
transferred
to the Juvenile Hall site where classroom control is a given,
being
provided by Juvenile Hall staff that is in the classroom with
students at
all times. If student behavior is inappropriate then that student
is locked
in his/her cell.
In the summer of 1995 I had 24 years of experience working with
at-risk
young offenders. The Waldorf teacher had none. The position for
which I
interviewed required a credentialed teacher. I had the credential,
I had
excellent employee reviews from the employer offering the job, I
had an
outstanding work record, and my speciality is teaching the at-risk
population. Who would have filled it if I had not? Perhaps another
uncredentialed Waldorf teacher? Needless to say the other teacher
left at
the end of the year and chose not to renew his contract offer.
While I
found him to personally be a very likable fellow, he was patently
not "cut
out" for this type of job. I am sure he will readily agree this is
so.
Kathy
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:05:25 1997
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root proxy2.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.13]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
PAA24631; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 15:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy2.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA19350; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 15:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id OAA22381 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 14:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708072131.OAA22381 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Science is religion???
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 09:31:29 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199708070249.TAA02540 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199708070740.AAA22079 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Stephen Tonkin quotes:
)Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
))Science doesn't claim it is a complete tool. I didn't claim it
was a
))be-all, end-all.
And TONKIN says:
)Agreed, you didn't. IMHO the incompleteness automatically
validates the
)principle that other tools _may_ be appropriate to questions
which are
)outside the remit of science.
KOPP says:
I DID say that I think that science will eventually be able to
answer every
question. It may not be science as we know it, but it will still
be
science, it will still deal with the real and rational as opposed
to
mysticism and superstition.
I DID say that I think there is nothing supernatural about the
universe.
That I think we are the product of nature, not ethereal spirits or
gods.
Therefore there are no questions about nature that are outside the
remit of
science.
This includes inquiry into the "human spirit", that part of our
minds
(which I think cognitive science is in the process of showing is a
physical
process in the material brain) which we have always least
understood and
therefore always elevated to mystical, supernatural status. There
is no
evidence for supernature. There are only mysteries that we make
into
metaphysics and mysticism.
Tonkin quoting KOPP:
))What are the founded assumptions about Anthroposophy and
Anthroposophical
))science that make IT a more useful tool?
And TONKIN says:
)I personally find (believe?) it to be an extremely useful tool
for
)questions which I believe to be outside the remit of science --
)metaphysical questions, for example.
KOPP says:
Okay. You're welcome to it, if you want to reject the perfectly
good
scientific method. What you're perhaps saying is that you just
don't know
enough science* to answer the questions, and Anthroposophy (which
is no
easier to master because it makes a whole lot less rational sense)
is
actually more comforting because it _provides_ ready made answers
from a
supernatural source that one cannot and does not need to question.
(*Not a barb; you know a wee bit more about science than I, a mere
science-trained professional science journalist, do. I only called
myself a
scientist to identify with the methods, not to claim I was a
professional
scientist, much less to imply I was a "believer". I'm a skeptic,
even about
science. Even about myself. (G))
Tonkin quoting KOPP:
))Tonkin says science works. He says it is a powerful tool. In
fact, he is a
))pretty good scientist, both in his work and his personal
interests. And he
))doesn't tolerate too much far-out stuff.
TONKIN says:
)Careful, Michael! Those conversant with our mutual history on
this list
)may be trying to wrench their eyebrows down from their hairlines!
:-)
KOPP says:
Truly sorry I let the secret out Stephen; I promised I would never
reveal
private emails, but I guess alluding to "special knowledge" of you
could be
seen to be a bit hair-raising, forget the eyebrows. It's just my
impression, folks; I've never heard Stephen repudiate
Anthroposophy. He's
still a card-carrying member of the "defenders of the faith"
group. Oops,
not supposed to use labels or ad hominems here, sorry.
Tonkin quoting KOPP:
))And he defends spiritual science, and sees no problem in its
))use in schools, in whatever guise (usually Goethean
phenomenological
))"experimentation" and induction).
And TONKIN says:
)I see a distinction between spiritual and Goethean science. I see
no
)conflict of (educational) interest in using Goethean observation
as one
)of an armoury of scientific tools. Both it and what is now termed
)"scientific method" need to be used at some point during a
science
)education -- not necessarily on the same day!
KOPP says:
But science itself has rejected Goethe's approach. If you teach
science and
phenomenology, you are confusing young people about the nature of
present-day life and thought. I don't care if they find out about
it at
university. But when it is taught as a valid scientific (nay,
spiritual)
method, instead of a historical leftover that has been superseded,
then I
have a problem. I don't see phenomenology as at all valid today.)
Tonkin quotes KOPP:
))Science works because it produces evidence that can be
apprehended and
))understood by virtually anyone, without belief being required.
And TONKIN says:
)In some cases this is true. I wonder, however, what proportion of
people
)understand the evidence for special relativity or indeterminacy
or [...
)etc ad nauseam]
KOPP says:
I didn't say everyone would or should understand it. I don't think
that's
necessary. For me, a method I agree with has developed, tested and
validated the ideas. They can be explained to non-scientists by
good
science communicators who do understand them. And it doesn't
require blind
acceptance on "faith" to use the knowldge for human affairs.
(Unfortunately, I can't keep up with the physics anymore, so I
don't try to
interpret the most recent stuff to my readers and listeners. It
takes
scientists who know how to communicate in plain language to be
science
journlists these days, not journalists who know a little science.
Their day
is done, I'm afraid.)
The difference between science leadership and the priesthood or
guruhood
business is that the scientist is always challengeable _by the
method_.
I don't have to understand, accept, or blindly follow cutting-edge
science
in order for it to have meaning in my life and increase my total
understanding of the universe (and provide me with a better
refrigerator --
ever hear of the atomic scientist Leo Szilard's better fridge? No
ozone-eaters).
I'd ask again, what of Steiner's original ideas has been changed
in 75
years? Why has new understanding of the world and particularly
children,
learning and the brain, done to Steiner's pedagogy. Nothing. And
WE people
reject (as happens to me regularly) ANY challenge of any kind, any
change
of any kind. Your mileage may vary, Stephen -- but then maybe you
aren't
that good an Anthroposophist, or your college of teachers doesn't
have a
strong enough guru-lieutenant to keep you in check, or you just
privately
do what you want to do in your classroom.
Tonkin quotes KOPP:
))If it works, it must be valid. If it is valid, it can be relied
upon, which
))is a more accurate term than "believed in". This does not make
it a belief
))system, like religions, philosophies, superstitions and esoteric
))mysticisms.
And TONKIN says:
)I find your first statement there to be too strong. How about:
"If it
)works, and if a mechanism can be demonstrated, it is most
probably
)(almost certainly) valid."?
KOPP says.
Okay, I'm anything but dogmatic. (G) See my comment above about
skepticism.
But only if you'll agree that Anthroposophy DOESN'T work to
explain the
natural world, can't demonstrate any mechanisms, and is valid only
as a
psychological crutch (sorry, tool) for those who want or need to
believe in
superstition.
TONKIN:
)To take a (possibly over-) simplistic exception to your
statement, if I
)believed that members of a priesthood needed to utter an
incantation
)every sunset in order to ensure that the Sun would rise again the
next
)day; if they uttered that incantation, it would surely "work" --
is it
)valid?
KOPP says:
Yes, if they can _demonstrate_ that if they _don't_, the Sun
_won't_ rise.
Otherwise your belief would have arisen out of fear -- of nature
_and_
priests.
TONKIN:
)Whilst science is certainly a different kind of "belief system"
to the
)other examples you cite (yes, I know that is not what you
meant!), I
)contend that it is still a kind of belief system, particularly
for those
)who rarely question its nature.
KOPP says:
Well, Stephen, it both pains me and gives me perverse pleasure
that by your
own logic there is something in this world that both you and I can
"believe" in, for surely, if science is a belief system, and you
agree
science is valid (even if only for the most part), then YOU ARE a
believer!
For the record, I don't BELIEVE in science, I accept it as a
method for
understanding the natural world, and I believe that's the only
world there
is. If a better system comes along that can SHOW me tangible
evidence of
its theories, then I will quickly change my tune. I don't think I
have to
worry.
Tonkin quotes KOPP:
))Methinks Tonkin must have a bit of a pain in the butt -- not
from Kopp, but
))from trying to ride two horses at the same time when they are
going in
))different directions.
And TONKIN says:
)Maybe it's that I've not yet noticed that they are going in
different
)directions. Possible explanations are:
)I'm too stupid/deluded to notice.
)They aren't going in different directions.
)Huge insensitive butt.
)
)Take your pick.
KOPP says:
Okay, you force me to choose to be polite. (I can't see the
target, anyway.)
Science and superstition (I presume you're referring to
Anthroposophy)
aren't going in different directions. They both try to explain the
unknown.
But everything about them, including their results, is
diametrically
opposed, and their conclusions lead down different paths -- one to
reality,
one to unreality.
One can show it works (and you agree) the other can only claim it
works.
(Show me an angel or an ethereal force or their bubble chamber
tracks. Or
are you going to claim that because I can't see a subatomic
particle the
tracks are made by something else?)
One invites skepticism and disproof as one of its method of
advancing. The
other rejects any progress by those methods and claims
completeness and
immutability. (Not to mention predestination.)
One is open-ended, the other closed.
See Dan Dugan's answer to Paul Levy for further understanding.
From ??? ??? Thu Aug 07 20:05:33 1997
Received: from proxy1.ba.best.com (root proxy1.ba.best.com
[206.184.139.12]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id
PAA27900; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 15:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by
proxy1.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA26579; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 15:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from daemon localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3)
id PAA05234 for waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com; Thu, 7 Aug
1997 15:00:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: (199708072200.PAA05234 lists1.best.com)
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Natural and Supernatural
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 09:59:18 +1200
BestServHost: lists.best.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199708071433.HAA17768 lists1.best.com)
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Errors-To: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
John Calkins replies to Dan Dugan's questioning of Calkins'
understanding
of Anthroposophy:
)If you have a question as to what I mean, please ask for
clarification
)rather than drawing your own conclusions. My experience with
respect to
)my current understanding of the spiritual nature is as follows. I
have
)made observations of how the spiritual nature of things has both
)spiritual as well as physical consequences. Conversely the
physical
)nature of things has both spiritual and physical effects. If one
lives
)in conflict either the spiritual and physical, then there are
negative
)results both spiritually or physically. If one lives in accord
with the
)spiritual and physical natures of the world, then one can find
spiritual
)peace and the physical world thrives. I cannot give you a
scientific
)proof of what I have discovered. I am sure you could refute any
)particular example I give with a purely physical explanation,
after all
)there is always a physical view of any event. This does not
change the
)fact that I do have a particular view of spiritual nature and I
do see a
)connection between the physical and spiritual.
KOPP says:
Can you explain your discoveries in any language other than
Anthroposophy's, so that those of us who are lay interested, but
not
initiates, can understand it?
You referred to James Souttar's comments on "commitment" to the
mystical
way, and Steiner said that the way to Anthroposophical
understanding is
through hard introspection and in-tuition (if not spiritual
clairvoyance,
reserved for Steiner, apparently). Various gods have said they are
the only
way, truth and light, and only through them can one come to
understanding.
Yes, I know Steiner also said you have to find it out for yourself
-- but
if, when you find it out for your self, you agree with Steiner,
then you
are still at the same point: belief in somebody else's religion.
Isn't it
more likely that you have just trained yourself to think and speak
in a
foreign language but are still reading someone else's text? (Dan
Dugan
calls this statement by Steiner a "guru trick", and I agree it is
too
clever to be profound.)
Science is equally hard work, and has a cadre of practitioners who
know
more than I do. But I know their methods, not by being an initiate
(though
I did study science). They can explain their methods and their
results to
me in plain language. They can demonstrate (except at the cutting
edge,
which I think will be demonstrable by science in time) their
knowledge and
use it materially.
I personally can explain much of scientific knowledge to other
people in
plain language (my kids, for instance -- they need it because they
don't
get enough of it at the Steiner school).
Why should I have to be an initiate and become an adept before I
commit to
saying I agree or I understand or I believe Anthroposophy?
Where are the popularisers of Anthroposophy, like the popularisers
of science?
Can you give me some answers here? I've tried to read
Anthroposophy, and it
seems like poppycock to me. I would have to first believe, then
understand.
Is this what is happening to you? First you believe, then