return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1183 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
002 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Tarjei's) (Was Re: Admin: lis
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
005 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
007 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Synarchy
010 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Anthropops NOT welcome?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:39:41 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
)Robert Tolz (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) wrote )
)
)A week or so ago, I made a comment that I had never recalled anyone
)being dis-invited from this list by Dan.
)
)) I subsequently received private email from a former participant
))indicating that Dan had removed him from the list for filing a complaint
))with Dan's web host.
)
)It's no secret. When David Schlesinger (Lefty Redux) made repeated,
)serious attempts to shut down the list, he was reluctantly excluded. He
)also made repeated demands for tens of thousands of dollars from other
)list members for daring to re-post the nasty e-mails he would not stop
)sending privately to list members. I call these extortion threats.
And "(redon geocities.com)" , an anonymous poster with a poor memory, wrote:
)Added note: Lefty sent several warnings before ending the subscriptions of
)people who lifted /cross posted from the Waldorf
)/Steiner lists without permission and/or for poor netiquette (back biting
)and such). It was thought, by some, that Lefty was
)tossed off of the w-c-l in retribution for ending the subscription of some
)w-c-l members who committed the above mentioned
)actions.
Michael KOPP says:
David Schlesinger (aka Lefty or Lefty Redux) also excluded _me_ from his
Waldorf list (after repeated threats to sack me if I didn't tone down my
posts) on the pretext of my _possibly_ having provided Dan Dugan with posts
from Lefty's list, Dan having already been banned.
At that point I had not posted to Lefty's list for several months, because
Lefty had put me (and a number of other people) "on probation", and we
could not post without submitting to his prior censorship, which he
exercised in a draconian fashion. His favourite reason for excluding posts
was that they were "argumentative".
(If anyone want to see the record of my posts to his list, I'm happy to
provide them to show how innocuous they were -- I was pretty tame in those
days.)
And I definitely had not been providing Dan Dugan (or anyone else) with
forwarded material from Lefty's list (though I did not and do not recognize
any bar or moral reason not to).
Guilt by association with an accused -- but never proved -- "criminal" in
Lefty's book. Muzzling. Removal of even my right to read the list.
I posted the entire interchange between Lefty and I on this list for the
record. Anyone who wants to see it can ask me for a cite or search the
archive yourself.
Of course, Lefty's freedom of speech includes running his own lists in
whatever way he chooses. Dan Dugan's answer was to start his own list --
which has been phenomenally more popular with thinking, rational, skeptical
people than any of the incomprehensible Waldo-babble lists are.
The copyright thing was pretty heated. There is no instance of successful
suit for copyright infringement for cross-posting of material from one
public list to another. To the contrary of "redon"'s understanding, Lefty's
Waldorf list was not a private list; posts were searchable through DejaVu
search engine, which means that either the search engine had a subscription
to the list or that the list was somehow being archived or made public
elsewhere.
It was during this time that there were attempts made to gain private
information about me from my ISP. (I happened to be an employee of the ISP
at the time, and they were pretty upset about what was happening to me.)
He also threatened me with litigation for quoting him, and threatened to
sue me for defamation for calling him names. Here's one of them:
Lefty is a fascist blot on the Internet, the greatest free-speech network
ever created by mankind, and perhaps our saviour from the coming new dark
ages of irrationality and worldwide increase in governmental and private
fascism.
It's interesting to note that Lefty's fascism was catching: after Lefty
gave up his list, the new moderator refused me resubscription to the list,
on the grounds that Lefty had left him a list of "troublemakers" who should
not be allowed on. Even after I provided this new moderator with the
evidence of why Lefty had unfairly and fascistically singled me out, and
provided comments from others on the Waldorf list that said they deplored
Lefty's action and I should be allowed back, the new moderator refused.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.2 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Tarjei's) (Was Re: Admin: list policy (was Re: Baltimore school))
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 02:15:04 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) wrote:
)Dan, you may be on to something of special fascination for an
)anarchosophist if there is indeed a historical link between anarchist
)syndicalism and the Threefold Social Order in this "Synarchy" movement.
)I'll do some digging through anarchist channels and see what I find.
I suspect that "synarchy" may be a corruption of anarcho-syndicalism,
which did peak in France around 1907, via the CGT and individuals like
Pouget and Yvetot -- I don't recall any 3SO connection, though, unless
one counts the obvious roots in the Paris Commune, etc.
(I'm glad it was Dan who brought this up -- it's delightfully OT here
(g))
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 08:38:31 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
I really don't want to restart the whole copyright thing again, but:
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)David Schlesinger (aka Lefty or Lefty Redux) also excluded _me_ from his
)Waldorf list (after repeated threats to sack me if I didn't tone down my
)posts) on the pretext of my _possibly_ having provided Dan Dugan with posts
)from Lefty's list, Dan having already been banned.
This is exactly as I remember it. It was blatantly unfair.
)(If anyone want to see the record of my posts to his list, I'm happy to
)provide them to show how innocuous they were -- I was pretty tame in those
)days.)
This again is true.
)Of course, Lefty's freedom of speech includes running his own lists in
)whatever way he chooses. Dan Dugan's answer was to start his own list --
)which has been phenomenally more popular with thinking, rational, skeptical
)people than any of the incomprehensible Waldo-babble lists are.
It is certainly this list where (amongst the mud-wrestling) the
discussion occurs which makes me repeatedly re-evaluate what I'm doing.
A Waldorf school can be (but isn't always) a "self-congratulatory"
environment, and a list like this does keep me on my toes (g). The St
Johns Waldorf list is, however, not intended to do this (its charter is
very clear) and it's a bit off to criticise it for that is a tad like
criticising a lump of cheese because it isn't a nice crisp juicy apple.
)
)The copyright thing was pretty heated. There is no instance of successful
)suit for copyright infringement for cross-posting of material from one
)public list to another. To the contrary of "redon"'s understanding, Lefty's
)Waldorf list was not a private list; posts were searchable through DejaVu
)search engine, which means that either the search engine had a subscription
)to the list or that the list was somehow being archived or made public
)elsewhere.
Whilst the second sentence of the above paragraph is likely correct, I
don't see the distinction between writing to a list (or a newsgroup) and
writing in a newspaper. That newspaper may well be archived. Individuals
can search the archives and make copies of articles for private use.
There are, however, restrictions on what they can re-publish.
Personally, I do object to my stuff being reposted from one list to
another without my permission. I have been known to get pretty ratty
with people who have done so. Having said that, I don't recall ever
having refused permission when I've been asked.
)
)It was during this time that there were attempts made to gain private
)information about me from my ISP. (I happened to be an employee of the ISP
)at the time, and they were pretty upset about what was happening to me.)
My memory may be playing tricks, but I thought this was a consequence of
a discussion about if we could really know who was behind an email name
and one of the parties to this discussion contacting various ISPs to
find out exactly what information would be divulged. Whilst I don't
believe that the intent was malicious, I know that I too would have been
pissed off if someone had made similar enquiries about me.
)It's interesting to note that Lefty's fascism was catching: after Lefty
)gave up his list, the new moderator refused me resubscription to the list,
)on the grounds that Lefty had left him a list of "troublemakers" who should
)not be allowed on. Even after I provided this new moderator with the
)evidence of why Lefty had unfairly and fascistically singled me out, and
)provided comments from others on the Waldorf list that said they deplored
)Lefty's action and I should be allowed back, the new moderator refused.
Well, if it's any consolation, you're in good company -- Bruce Jackson
is suffering a bit of wrist-slapping over there at present (sentence =
one month "lurker status").
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 00:41:14 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
Stephen Tonkin says:
{Michael KOPP said:]
))It's interesting to note that Lefty's fascism was catching: after Lefty
))gave up his list, the new moderator refused me resubscription to the list,
))on the grounds that Lefty had left him a list of "troublemakers" who
))should
))not be allowed on. Even after I provided this new moderator with the
))evidence of why Lefty had unfairly and fascistically singled me out, and
))provided comments from others on the Waldorf list that said they deplored
))Lefty's action and I should be allowed back, the new moderator refused.
)
)Well, if it's any consolation, you're in good company -- Bruce Jackson
)is suffering a bit of wrist-slapping over there at present (sentence =
)one month "lurker status").
)
)Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
)Stephen
Well, no, it's no consolation at all.
I'm an absolute freedom of expression man. Even hate speech should be
protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
speech.
Then you'll have real fascism.
Rave on, Brucey!
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.5 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 08:23:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199904010624.WAA15495 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011616.IAA16287 mail.cruzio.com)
On 1 Apr 99, at 0:19, redon wrote:
)
) Further, I do not think that the St. Johns Waldorf Steiner Lists
) were public lists, unlike usenet.
Not quite like usenet, but the list is open to the public. That is,
anyone can subscribe. As Tonkin said, it's not unlike a newspaper
in that respect.
I thought it was bogus, not because the posts are unprotected by
copyright law, but because there was no damage. The poster
could not have an expectation that the post would remain private
when the list is open to anyone who would subscribe, had no
intention of commercially publishing the post, and it was not being
reposted for any commercial gain.
In this way it's different from a newspaper, which is a commercial
venture.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:31:00 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)I'm an absolute freedom of expression man. Even hate speech should be
)protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
)speech.
)
)Then you'll have real fascism.
For once, I agree with you.
It's an attitude that got me into trouble with the woolly socialists
when I was at university -- their cry was "no platform for fascists".
Mine was "freedom of expression cannot be conditional -- and I want the
fascists where I can see them, not skulking in the woodwork where I
can't."
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.7 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:48:01 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (73051653 toto.iv)
Stephen Tonkin writes:
) # Newton stated that, if he had seen further than others, it was because
) he had stood on the shoulders of giants. If you can't identify the
) giants, how the heck can you stand on their shoulders?
Well, one might argue that it is onl important to stand on the
shoulders is the person(s) on top. It is not really necessary to know
much about the shoulders on the bottom.
I suspect, as always, that it is important to look at each case
separately. Sometimes there will be great value in studying the old
masters (e.g. studying Euclid in a geometry class), and sometimes very
little (e.g. studying Newton's alchemy in a chemistry class).
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 19:20:53 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
))I'm an absolute freedom of expression man. Even hate speech should be
))protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
))speech.
))
))Then you'll have real fascism.
Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)For once, I agree with you.
And so do I.
)It's an attitude that got me into trouble with the woolly socialists
)when I was at university -- their cry was "no platform for fascists".
)Mine was "freedom of expression cannot be conditional -- and I want the
)fascists where I can see them, not skulking in the woodwork where I
)can't."
It's also a problem I'm having with the local young anti-fascists who seem
to feel justified in punishing people physically, not for what they do, but
for what they think and say. They have even disrupted public meetings
violently to prevent public dialogues with the extreme right. Maybe that's
why they're all over the politically oriented usenets
The only acceptable weapon against free speech is free speech. This is
perhaps a simple and uncomplicated way of putting it, but it's basically
what I believe in.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.9 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Synarchy
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 19:26:50 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I found a lot of references on the web (using Sherlock, the Mac OS 8.5's
new wonder where you can plug in an unlimited number of search engines at
once), and here is one:
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~nowar/Synarchy1010.html
or start out at their main page:
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~nowar/
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1183.10 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Anthropops NOT welcome?
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 12:29:02 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In einer eMail vom 26.03.99 05:09:19 (MEZ) Mitteleurop”ische Zeit schreibt
asf peakpeak.com:
Alan:
) But children are not asked. They are taught.
Bruce:
well, what would YOU expect to be done to children in a school?
Alan:
) They are influenced.
Bruce:
I would hope so - they look up to their teacher, who stands for what is good
etc.
Alan:
) So why isnt this key concept clearly explained up front to parents of
children ) of WE?
Bruce:
WHICH key concept? You would have us running a slide-show that lasted 12 years
- to ensure that the parents havent missed anything! It would be better if
they had attended a waldorf school in the first place!
Bruce
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1183 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1184 --------------
001 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
002 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
003 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
004 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - List Humor and Brain Damage ; )
005 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
006 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
007 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setti
008 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.1 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 09:54:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011722.JAA03038 lists1.best.com)
On 1 Apr 99, at 19:20, Tarjei Straume wrote:
) The only acceptable weapon against free speech is free speech. This is
) perhaps a simple and uncomplicated way of putting it, but it's basically
) what I believe in.
There's nothing wrong with simple and uncomplicated statements,
and you are correct. The theory behind free speech is not that
speech can never be dangerous, but that the best solution to
dangerous speech is to point out why it is wrong rather than to
suppress it.
Once you allow the suppression of ideas that are considered
dangerous, you acknowledge that someone has the right to decide
which ideas are dangerous, and I don't trust anybody with that kind
of power. Not a dictator, not a popularly elected government, and
not a vote of the people themselves.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.2 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:59:17 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904010624.WAA15495 lists1.best.com)
(199904011616.IAA16287 mail.cruzio.com)
(199904011624.IAA28022 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011624.IAA28022 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)I thought it was bogus, not because the posts are unprotected by
)copyright law, but because there was no damage. The poster
)could not have an expectation that the post would remain private
)when the list is open to anyone who would subscribe, had no
)intention of commercially publishing the post, and it was not being
)reposted for any commercial gain.
)
)In this way it's different from a newspaper, which is a commercial
)venture.
I'm not about to argue with a lawyer on a point of law (g), but I didn't
realise the Berne Convention (on which, as I understand it, copyright
law, like the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is based)
restricted an author's control over his work unless commercial or other
damage could result.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.3 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:54:31 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com) (199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
) Even hate speech should be
) protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
) speech.
I don¥t agree with you. In Sweden we have a law since 1948; following
the 2nd WW and the nazi crimes against humanity, concerning egging
against folk groups. In its latest version as far as I know (1988:835, 1
Jan 1989) it states:
"Den som i uttalande eller i annat meddelande som sprids hotar eller
uttrycker missaktning f–r folkgrupp eller annan sÂdan grupp av personer
med anspelning p ras, hudf”rg, nationellt eller etniskt ursprung eller
trosbek”nnelse, d–ms f–r hets mot folkgrupp till f”ngelse i h–gst tv Âr
eller, om brottet ”r ringa, till b–ter."
In translation about:
"If you in speech, or in another message, that is spread, threaten or
express contempt against (for?) a folk group or another such a group of
people alluding to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin or
confession, you are to be sentenced to prison for at most two years or,
if the crime is small, to be fined, for egging against a folk group."
The law protects the personal integrity of individuals against violence
in spoken and written form for a number of important reasons.
Do you mean you don¥t have such a law in NZ, or if you do, do you mean
that you are against this protection of the personal integrity of
individuals?
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.4 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: List Humor and Brain Damage ; )
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 12:47:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
http://nt.excite.com/news/u/990331/18/health-humor
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.5 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:33:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)) Even hate speech should be
)) protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
)) speech.
)
)I don¥t agree with you. In Sweden we have a law since 1948; following
)the 2nd WW and the nazi crimes against humanity, concerning egging
)against folk groups.
[...]
)The law protects the personal integrity of individuals against violence
)in spoken and written form for a number of important reasons.
)
)Do you mean you don¥t have such a law in NZ, or if you do, do you mean
)that you are against this protection of the personal integrity of
)individuals?
Sune, I really question whether such a law actually protects the
personal integrity of an individual. I do know that they (the laws)
exacerbate resentment against ethnic groups (in English a "folk group"
usually means a musical group playing folk music/song). One of the
arguments of the ultra right in this country, which they use to gain
sympathy from others, is "Nowadays you can't even *say* anything against
[insert the group of your choice] -- yet anybody can say what they like
about us."
I agree that it's not pleasant to have to listen to the filth that spews
from the sub-nasal orifices of fascists, but that filth is going to spew
out somewhere, and I'd rather it was somewhere where it can be
countered. On one level there is no difference between the suppression
of fascist speech in modern western democracies and the "banning" of
individuals and groups in apartheid South Africa: even though the values
which brought about the suppression differed almost diametrically, in
both cases it is a government suppressing something its supporters don't
like.
As far as the various Waldorf-related lists are concerned, any banning
has been counter-productive from the point of view of the banners: it
led to Dan Dugan starting this list (which, incidentally, I think has
benefited Waldorf Education in that it has brought about a degree of
much-needed (self-) evaluation), and something I have recently heard
privately suggests that it may trigger a more liberal pro-Waldorf list.
Whilst I believe that the St Johns Waldorf list is right to stick to its
charter (that is, after all, its right), the inevitable outcome of this
is -- well -- inevitable.
Whilst I have much with which to disagree where Dan Dugan's/PLANS'
pronouncements on anthroposophy and Waldorf education (and what
constitutes an ad hominem) are concerned, I suggest that it is to his
credit that, despite some extremely vituperative exchanges (and I, to my
shame, have been an active participant in some of these), no-one has (to
my knowledge) been excluded for expressing his views on this list.
It, and the polarisation that often results, certainly keeps this place
an interesting one to be...
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.6 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 14:33:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
On 1 Apr 99, at 21:54, Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) ) Even hate speech should be
) ) protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning
) ) political speech.
)
) I don¥t agree with you. In Sweden we have a law since 1948; following the
) 2nd WW and the nazi crimes against humanity, concerning egging against
) folk groups.
I was going to make a joke about people throwing eggs at Peter,
Paul and Mary, but Stephen already pointed out that in English,
"folk group" usually means a group that performs folk music.
) Do you mean you don¥t have such a law in NZ, or if you do, do you mean
) that you are against this protection of the personal integrity of
) individuals?
I agree with everything Stephen Tonkin wrote on this, and I want to
make one other point.
Such a law would violate the constitution in the United States. It
may seem paradoxical, but in a sense the most important speech
to protect is that which is the most unpopular and offensive. There
is no need to protect speech that doesn't offend anyone, because
there is no motivation to suppress it.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.7 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setting the Record Straight ...)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:18:52 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com) (199904010658.WAA14231 lists1.best.com)
Stephen wrote:
) I suspect that "synarchy" may be a corruption of anarcho-syndicalism,
) which did peak in France around 1907, via the CGT and individuals like
) Pouget and Yvetot -- I don't recall any 3SO connection, though, unless
) one counts the obvious roots in the Paris Commune, etc.
Chapter 52 and 53 of the novel "The Pendulum of Foucault", the somewhat
messy and confusing story from about 1988 by the Italian professor
Umberto Ecco (also the author of the bestseller "The name of the Rose",
later filmed with all our Connery as the hero) describes "synarchy" as
something that originated from a Saint-Yves d'Alveydre.
According to chapter 52:
"He was determined to find a political formula that could lead to a more
harmonious society. Synarchy in opposition to anarchy. A European
society ruled by three councils representing the economical power, the
executive power and the spiritual power, that is, the churches and the
scientists. An enlightened oligarchy through which class struggle could
be eliminated. You¥ve heard of worse."
A search for Alveydre using http://www.evreka.com gave about 69 hits, a
majority of them latin sites.
One in English was http://crystalinks.com/templars7.html.
According to the site:
*************************************
"To Saint-Yves d'Alveydre the Templars stood for a policy of federation
and universal peace which went back to the Carolingians of the early
Middle Ages. Like many French conservative thinkers, including (many
years after him) Charles de Gaulle, he felt that the ancien rÈgime in
France had take a wrong turning, responsible for its later catastrophe,
which he could identify. Unfortunately his choice of the Templars as a
solution to the supposed riddle of the French monarchy was wrong; they
had performed none of the functions that he attributed to them, and his
speculations about them were daydreams added to the old fantasies of
Aroux. [who had portrayed the Middle Ages as having been penetrated by a
vast Manichaean conspiracy]."
"The Vichy regime legislated against Freemasonry, and co-operated with
the Germans in identifying and acting against Masons. But, even within
the regime itself, people were very doubtful that Freemasonry had
genuinely been banished. In the so-called 'Chavin Report', which seems
to have originated from within or near government circles, allegations
were made that large number of people in responsible positions belonged
to Masonic political groups called 'synarchist' which had been in
existence since the 1920s. These synarchists were supposed to have been
inspired in part by the doctrine of Saint-Yves d'Alveydre. They were
represented as a group of influential politicians, businessmen, and
so-called 'technocrats' who had been plotting to seize power ever since
a reputed 'Synarchist Revolutionary Pact' of 1922."
- Peter Partner, The Murdered Magicians
*************************************
In an article on my site at
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/EU/euengoff.htm I have described in what
form the EU-process is now very effectively organizing Europe into a
sort of federation, not unsimilar to the ideas of d'Alveydre, but also
with deep historical roots in the concept of the ideal state of Plato,
forging a union with France and Germany as the main partners, according
to a very strict time table between 1986 and 2030.
In the article I also try to show how - as I see it - it can be
transformed into something good on the basis of an understanding of the
threefold nature of society, reflecting our different relations to the
earth "below" us, to each other as equals and to the spiritual world
"above" us.
Regards,
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.8 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:04:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199904011624.IAA28022 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011852.KAA03905 lists1.best.com)
On 1 Apr 99, at 17:59, Stephen Tonkin wrote:
) Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
) )I thought it was bogus, not because the posts are unprotected by
) )copyright law, but because there was no damage. The poster
) )could not have an expectation that the post would remain private
) )when the list is open to anyone who would subscribe, had no
) )intention of commercially publishing the post, and it was not being
) )reposted for any commercial gain.
) )
) )In this way it's different from a newspaper, which is a commercial
) )venture.
)
) I'm not about to argue with a lawyer on a point of law (g), but I didn't
) realise the Berne Convention (on which, as I understand it, copyright law,
) like the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is based) restricted
) an author's control over his work unless commercial or other damage could
) result.
I'm not saying that the threat of a lawsuit was bogus because
copyright law requires financial damages. An injunction could
issue even in the absence of financial damages, although probably
not against the ISP. The threat was bogus because a copyright
infringement which does not damage the copyright holder is a
trivial, and I think it's bogus to threaten a lawsuit on a trivial matter.
It's like singing a song around a campfire with your friends. Yes,
that's a violation of the copyright, but so what?
Second, if a lawsuit is to be threatened, it should be to the person
who did it, not to the ISP which has no control over the content of
postings to the list.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.9 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 01:47:20 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)The law protects the personal integrity of individuals against violence
)in spoken and written form for a number of important reasons.
This is a unique opportunity for me to proclaim that I agree with Michael
and disagree with you, Sune. We have the same law in Norway, and I have
always been very critical of it. The leader for the notorious white
supremacist party, "Hvit Valgallianse," recently spent time in prison for
his speeches. This kind of thing makes him a saint and a martyr in those
circles, and it fortifies and strengthens the convictions on the extreme
right.
The protection of free speech in America, and the work of the American
Civil Liberties Union (A.C.L.U.), is something I have learned to value and
respect most deeply about that country. I am reminded of an incident that
took place once in the 1980's, I believe, in a suburban area near Chicago -
anyway, it was some place in Illinois. A bunch of neo-Nazis planned a march
through a Jewish neighborhood where the elderly residents wore tatoos from
the Nazi death camps - a rather ugly reminder. So the city council wanted
to ban the march. But the neo-Nazis did get their permission to go through
with this march, thanks to the work of Jewish lawyers from the A.C.L.U. In
other words, the children and grandchildren of Holocaust survivors were
fighting for the right to free speech for the Nazis! Their main argument
was that if the Nazis' right to march was suppressed, the same law could be
used to suppress *anybody* at any time.
This incident may be disputable, but it taught me to truly appreciate the
American reverence for the First Amendment.
Sune, I do see your point, and I know there are good arguments to support
the law against defamation of minorities in European countries. Yet, the
idea of punishing people for their utterances awakens all the
anti-authoritarian instincts in me. Because it must be kept in mind that
there is also a paragraph that I can be charged with for my webpage, where
I openly encourage lawbreaking and criminality. If the extreme right can be
fined and imprisoned for free speech, so can the extreme left, the
anarchists. To protect my own rights, I choose to stick up for the
neo-Nazis and racists as well, just like the Jewish A.C.L.U. lawyers did in
Illinois. Otherwise, I would be a hypocrite.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1184.10 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 00:39:18 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
(199904012241.OAA15845 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904012241.OAA15845 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com) wrote:
)I was going to make a joke about people throwing eggs at Peter,
)Paul and Mary,
Steve, I'm ashamed of you -- that would be a tautology almost as bad as
that perpetrated by those who threw manure in the House of Commons! (g)
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1184 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1185 --------------
001 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: S
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
003 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: S
004 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
007 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Projective Geometry
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Tarjei's) (Was Re: Admin:
li
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - didn't mean it
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.1 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setting the Record Straight ...)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 00:36:53 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
(199904010658.WAA14231 lists1.best.com)
(199904012244.OAA19927 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904012244.OAA19927 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
)Chapter 52 and 53 of the novel "The Pendulum of Foucault", the somewhat
)messy and confusing story from about 1988 by the Italian professor
)Umberto Ecco (also the author of the bestseller "The name of the Rose",
)later filmed with all our Connery as the hero) describes "synarchy" as
)something that originated from a Saint-Yves d'Alveydre.
Thanks -- you know, I've read Foucault's Pendulum (when it was published
in English), but that bit must have passed me by. It's good to be
corrected.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 12:02:01 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
))I'm an absolute freedom of expression man. Even hate speech should be
))protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning political
))speech.
))
))Then you'll have real fascism.
And Stephen Tonkin replied
)For once, I agree with you.
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
)+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
)+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
)+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Ordinarily I would jump with glee and make certain the archives were marked
with a red (or blue) flag on this post, to denote its uniqueness and
importance.
As I mentioned, I have recently been tallying the archives. One of my goals
in doing so was to tally the point score of the two sides, so that I can
see if one or the other is actually getting somewhere in this long stoush.
Unfortunately, my scanning of Stephen Tonkin's 700-odd posts shows that he
has actually agreed with me (more or less) on issues of substance (more or
less) at least six times (more or less) in the 3-1/2 years we've been at
each others' throats.
That means that Stephen must, of necessity, be moved in the spectrum (did I
really say that word?) of the Defenders of the Faith [TM] from his rightful
place near the right (hard radiation) end towards the soft(er) end. This
places him in the middle wavelengths of sweet reason and compromise -- and
will no doubt make him a pariah amongst his colleagues in the
Anthroposophical mafia.
By the way, you know that it's April the second here on this side of the
date line. What day is it on the rest of yours?
Cheers from Godzone (literally almost the Antipodes of Stephen's
coordinates)
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand (S41.17 E174.47)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.3 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setting the
Record Straight ...)
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 16:29:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
(199904010658.WAA14231 lists1.best.com)
(199904012244.OAA19927 lists1.best.com) (199904012352.PAA17569 lists1.best.com)
I like Ecco. The story in the Pendulum reminded me of the Pynchon tour de
force: "Gravity's Rainbow".
I will be in France for a couple weeks in the near future and I plan on visiting
the pendulum.
e
Stephen Tonkin wrote:
) Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
) )Chapter 52 and 53 of the novel "The Pendulum of Foucault", the somewhat
) )messy and confusing story from about 1988 by the Italian professor
) )Umberto Ecco (also the author of the bestseller "The name of the Rose",
) )later filmed with all our Connery as the hero) describes "synarchy" as
) )something that originated from a Saint-Yves d'Alveydre.
)
) Thanks -- you know, I've read Foucault's Pendulum (when it was published
) in English), but that bit must have passed me by. It's good to be
) corrected.
)
) Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
) Stephen
)
) --
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
) + Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
) + (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.4 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 01:26:22 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
(199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
))Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
[...]
)))Then you'll have real fascism.
)
)And Stephen Tonkin replied
)
))For once, I agree with you.
)Ordinarily I would jump with glee and make certain the archives were marked
)with a red (or blue) flag on this post, to denote its uniqueness and
)importance.
)
)Unfortunately, my scanning of Stephen Tonkin's 700-odd posts shows that he
)has actually agreed with me (more or less) on issues of substance (more or
)less) at least six times (more or less) in the 3-1/2 years we've been at
)each others' throats.
My God, Michael! I must be slipping -- that's almost 1% (or less than
once per 6 months).
)By the way, you know that it's April the second here on this side of the
)date line. What day is it on the rest of yours?
As I write, it's 25 mins (UT) into the day after that of All Fools.
)Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
I'll defer to your greater (SM) experience (g).
(And don't try me on much more of this -- my Latin has accumulated over
3 decades of rust!)
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:03:07 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (73051653 toto.iv) (199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com)
Michael Hirsch writes:
)Stephen Tonkin writes:
)
)) # Newton stated that, if he had seen further than others, it was because
)) he had stood on the shoulders of giants. If you can't identify the
)) giants, how the heck can you stand on their shoulders?
)
)Well, one might argue that it is onl important to stand on the
)shoulders is the person(s) on top. It is not really necessary to know
)much about the shoulders on the bottom.
)
)I suspect, as always, that it is important to look at each case
)separately. Sometimes there will be great value in studying the old
)masters (e.g. studying Euclid in a geometry class), and sometimes very
)little (e.g. studying Newton's alchemy in a chemistry class).
)
)--Michael
That would be fine, if Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools left it
at that. But they don't.
Instead, they teach an offshoot type of geometry called "projective
geometry". This is a recognized and reasonable field -- for advanced
students and practitioners of geometry. I doubt that it is taught anywhere
else in state or private elementary or high schools as a regulary part of
the curriculum.
And why is it taught in SWA schools? Because Steiner, and his cult
followers and SWA people attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to it.
No, they don't teach the esoteric, spiritual meaning to the students --
that would be to openly contravene their oft-stated "guarantee" that
Anthroposophy is not taught in the classrooms of SWA schools.
So what's wrong with teaching it? Will it harm the kids? Well, no. Does it
make them spiritualists and cultists? Well, no. Does it have any practical
educational or life value for them, either when it's taught or later?
That's the debatable part: I and many other critics think not; SWA
defenders say that it has benefits for the developing mind and future
intellectual effort. May be. I think not. It's an area that researchers
like David Mollet might spend some time looking at.
The only thing my son David, now a graduate of a public high school,
remembers of his projective geometry lessons is that the teacher made a big
point of telling the students that two parallel lines meet at infinity.
In the meantime, to me, it was just another example of the SWA stealthy and
covert use of Anthroposophical tenets for spiritual purposes without my
knowledge, understanding, and consent.
There's plenty in the archives on this subject; just search on "projective
geometry". We've done it pretty well, and, of course, reached no agreement
between critic and proponent, but there may be some life left in it yet, if
there are new views or data.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:28:43 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall writes:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)) Even hate speech should be
)) protected. You start banning hate speech, you'll wind up banning
))political
)) speech.
)
)I don¥t agree with you. In Sweden we have a law since 1948; following
)the 2nd WW and the nazi crimes against humanity, concerning egging
)against folk groups. In its latest version as far as I know (1988:835, 1
)Jan 1989) it states:
)
)"Den som i uttalande eller i annat meddelande som sprids hotar eller
)uttrycker missaktning f–r folkgrupp eller annan sÂdan grupp av personer
)med anspelning p ras, hudf”rg, nationellt eller etniskt ursprung eller
)trosbek”nnelse, d–ms f–r hets mot folkgrupp till f”ngelse i h–gst tv Âr
)eller, om brottet ”r ringa, till b–ter."
)
)In translation about:
)
)"If you in speech, or in another message, that is spread, threaten or
)express contempt against (for?) a folk group or another such a group of
)people alluding to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin or
)confession, you are to be sentenced to prison for at most two years or,
)if the crime is small, to be fined, for egging against a folk group."
)
)The law protects the personal integrity of individuals against violence
)in spoken and written form for a number of important reasons.
)
)Do you mean you don¥t have such a law in NZ, or if you do, do you mean
)that you are against this protection of the personal integrity of
)individuals?
Yes, we have such a law.
Plus a lot of other "political correctness" laws of a similar nature. It
has hobbled freedom of speech -- and therefore freedom of political
expression and freedom _from_ the odious ideas and political agendas of
those whom these laws are designed to protect.
Yes, I am against these laws.
They do not protect the "personal integrity" of these people. NZ is a
nominally multi-cultural society; in fact it is a bi-cultural one. The
greatest "protection" of these so-called "human rights" laws is reserved
for the minority indigenous people, the Maori. They are in their renascence
phase, where they have learned how to swing the liberal levers of power to
gain advantage -- particularly financial -- for themselves. This may be a
just recompense for the theft of their lands (there was no Maori state,
just bands, tribes and confederations of chiefs) -- or it may be a radical
agenda to completely control future politics in this country by threat and
subversion of laws.
The laws are unfairly and unequally applied by
extra-judicial/quasi-judicial commissions or commissioners: rarely does one
see the colonizing race -- that is, white people -- taking cases of thier
abuse, verbal and physical by such acts as trespass and occupation of land,
to these tribunals. It is understood that the tribunals' purpose it to
redress the inculcated and often institutionalized racism of the white
majority, by punishing them for insults, verbal or otherwise, to Maori,
mainly. Rarely do any other minority groups take cases to the tribunals.
And it is almost universal that judgements go against the whites for their
transgressions.
Maori would have achieved their redress, and their political place, without
these repressions. It is to their disgrace that they have demanded them.
But you can't change human nature by repression of ideas and attitudes. You
have to educate them away, and that takes generations. What these
"political correctness" laws are causing is the entrenching of an even
subtler bias against Maori in the younger generations. So bias will live
on, instead of dying out.
And these laws can be extended at any time to repress other speech which
now has the protection of commonly held fundamental human rights.
Free speech is not negotiable. The only kind of speech which should be at
all proscribed is that which leads to direct, immediate breaking of the
law, such as inciting riot or assault. And the remedy there is simple:
police arrest the perpetrators of the illegal actions, and those who are
guilty of inciting their illegal actions.
But prior restraint is abhorrent, and so is control of people ideas by
repressing the expression of those ideas, however abhorrent they are.
Nazism succeeded because it gained control of freedom of speech and the
press. If free speech had been assured, and a free press, the Nazis would
have failed.
Nominally freedom-loving governments world wide are engaged in a conspiracy
with their media, and international corporations, to muzzle the free
presses which exist now. See Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent".
Further discussion here would be off-topic, and might be better moved to a
forum on free speech, or carried on privately.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.7 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Projective Geometry
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:07:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp:
)And why is it [projective geometry] taught in SWA schools? Because
)Steiner, and his cult
)followers and SWA people attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to it.
)
)No, they don't teach the esoteric, spiritual meaning to the students --
)that would be to openly contravene their oft-stated "guarantee" that
)Anthroposophy is not taught in the classrooms of SWA schools.
)
)So what's wrong with teaching it? Will it harm the kids? Well, no. Does it
)make them spiritualists and cultists? Well, no. Does it have any practical
)educational or life value for them, either when it's taught or later?
)That's the debatable part: I and many other critics think not; SWA
)defenders say that it has benefits for the developing mind and future
)intellectual effort. May be. I think not. It's an area that researchers
)like David Mollet might spend some time looking at.
)
)The only thing my son David, now a graduate of a public high school,
)remembers of his projective geometry lessons is that the teacher made a big
)point of telling the students that two parallel lines meet at infinity.
)
)In the meantime, to me, it was just another example of the SWA stealthy and
)covert use of Anthroposophical tenets for spiritual purposes without my
)knowledge, understanding, and consent.
Please explain to me, Michael, how we're being so sneaky.
As you clearly point out, no spiritual or esoteric meaning is taught. It
doesn't make the children spiritualists or cultists. Your own son has
almost no impression of his class.
If no spiritual content is taught and no spiritual impression is left, and
you have no knowledge or understanding of such practices, what exactly is
going on that you keep fussing about?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 05:02:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
)Instead, they teach an offshoot type of geometry called "projective
)geometry". This is a recognized and reasonable field -- for advanced
)students and practitioners of geometry. I doubt that it is taught anywhere
)else in state or private elementary or high schools as a regulary part of
)the curriculum.
)
)And why is it taught in SWA schools? Because Steiner, and his cult
)followers and SWA people attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to it.
Hey, we anthropops attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to absolutely
everything - to ourselves, to the children, to the sunset, and to the
morning news - even to the comic strips. Naturally, Waldorf teachers may
attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to every subject they teach. That's the
meaning that gives everything value - without it, it has no value.
)The only thing my son David, now a graduate of a public high school,
)remembers of his projective geometry lessons is that the teacher made a big
)point of telling the students that two parallel lines meet at infinity.
And that's where Steiner meets Einstein. And that reminds me: A Russian
once told me that in the Soviet atheist regime, Einstein's ideas, including
his theory of relativity, was highly suspect, and its study was strongly
discouraged. When I asked why, he said that Einstein's ideas bordered on
the spiritual and miraculous. At least, the Soviet authorities thought so.
)In the meantime, to me, it was just another example of the SWA stealthy and
)covert use of Anthroposophical tenets for spiritual purposes without my
)knowledge, understanding, and consent.
Stealthy and covert? You still haven't explained to me about the dangers
that you say are lurking behind my back from Dornach. The paradox, perhaps
about the Anthroposophical Society is that it is the only organization of
its kind, namely an *occult and esoteric* organization that is completely
*open.* And it was this very openness that resulted in so many powerful
enemies for Rudolf Steiner.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Tarjei's) (Was Re: Admin:
list policy (was Re: Baltimore school))
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 22:04:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 3/30/99 5:39 AM )))
Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)How do I say "Biodynamic shit" in Latin, Tarjei?
Sorry to bud in, guys, but you don't; you say it in Greek, when you've been steeped in Coprosophy, training for which can be found...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1185.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: didn't mean it
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 22:30:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Oy. Five minutes ago I posted the following:
)))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 3/30/99 5:39 AM )))
Michael Kopp wrote:
))
))How do I say "Biodynamic shit" in Latin, Tarjei?
)Sorry to bud in, guys, but you don't; you say it in Greek, when you've been steeped in Coprosophy, training for which can be found...
*******
and only upon re-reading it after hitting "Send" did I notice that that could have been read as an insultingly making fun of someone's name. Since in my book that demeans only the aggressor, and, coming from someone who posts infrequently and has already complained of others' incivility, would constitute at once cowardice and hypocrisy, I can only hope that I am believed when I say my intention was to play with words, not names, nor anyone's dignity. I also hope that all here are made of hardy stuff, capable of remitting my inadvertance. Whoops! Really sorry. /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1185 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1186 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: didn't mean it
002 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: didn't mean it
004 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: unsubscribe
005 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Projective Geometry
007 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
008 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: didn't mean it
009 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Projective Geometry
010 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Cardio-Energetics
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: didn't mean it
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 16:39:05 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904020332.TAC06896 lists1.best.com)
Michael Ronal says:
)Oy. Five minutes ago I posted the following:
)
))))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 3/30/99 5:39 AM )))
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)))
)))How do I say "Biodynamic shit" in Latin, Tarjei?
)
))Sorry to bud in, guys, but you don't; you say it in Greek, when you've
))been steeped in Coprosophy, training for which can be found...
)
)*******
)and only upon re-reading it after hitting "Send" did I notice that that
)could have been read as an insultingly making fun of someone's name. Since
)in my book that demeans only the aggressor, and, coming from someone who
)posts infrequently and has already complained of others' incivility, would
)constitute at once cowardice and hypocrisy, I can only hope that I am
)believed when I say my intention was to play with words, not names, nor
)anyone's dignity. I also hope that all here are made of hardy stuff,
)capable of remitting my inadvertance. Whoops! Really sorry. /MRx
And Michael KOPP says:
ROTFLMAO.
What do you mean, you didn't mean it? Damnation, just when I thought I'd
hit the big time!
Best joke I've heard on this list in a long, long, time.
(And it's not even a slapstick joke, which means my Vietnam head wound in
the top right frontal area of my skull hasn't damaged my sense of humour in
the way that snide young Ezra Beeman was probably implying by posting an
otherwise off-topic news story URL about "list humour and brain damage". It
has, however, probably contributed to my baldness.)
Kopp, of course, is from the German _kopf_, meaning head. So now I guess
it's my head that's full of shit ... might as well be: I hadit scared out
of the rest of me in the rice paddies long time ago.
Actually, you can find in the archives a long thread on just this subject,
where the use of biodynamic fertilizer on food crops for humans is held to
mean that in some way the shit winds up in the eater of the crops, and
there is some spiritual significance in this for the Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical nuts.
So don't apologise, Michael, we've seen worse here. Even if you didn't
intend it for me (and I believe you, you're just slow enough not to have
noticed) I take it as a great honour.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.2 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 20:50:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (73051653 toto.iv) (199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com) (199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
It (projective geometry) is great for trivia as well: Did you know Desarque (of projective
geometry) was Decartes' (of the Cartesian coordinate system) roommate in college?
On a more serious note...
I learned Projective Geometry in 11th grade (approx 16), about the same time my art class was using
horizons and vanishing points in form drawing (tables and other simple three dimensional objects).
Is this yet another instance of WE's interdisciplinary application of an abstract concept? Is the
multifaceted approach not one of the finest methodologies for understanding complex subjects?
There is a proven role (the Sante Fe institute comes to mind) for this kind of (interdisciplinary)
approach outside of a conspiracy of inculcated esoterica. And it sure beats memorizing geometric
proofs...
e
Michael Kopp wrote:
) Michael Hirsch writes:
)
) )Stephen Tonkin writes:
) )
) )) # Newton stated that, if he had seen further than others, it was because
) )) he had stood on the shoulders of giants. If you can't identify the
) )) giants, how the heck can you stand on their shoulders?
) )
) )Well, one might argue that it is onl important to stand on the
) )shoulders is the person(s) on top. It is not really necessary to know
) )much about the shoulders on the bottom.
) )
) )I suspect, as always, that it is important to look at each case
) )separately. Sometimes there will be great value in studying the old
) )masters (e.g. studying Euclid in a geometry class), and sometimes very
) )little (e.g. studying Newton's alchemy in a chemistry class).
) )
) )--Michael
)
) That would be fine, if Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools left it
) at that. But they don't.
)
) Instead, they teach an offshoot type of geometry called "projective
) geometry". This is a recognized and reasonable field -- for advanced
) students and practitioners of geometry. I doubt that it is taught anywhere
) else in state or private elementary or high schools as a regulary part of
) the curriculum.
)
) And why is it taught in SWA schools? Because Steiner, and his cult
) followers and SWA people attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to it.
)
) No, they don't teach the esoteric, spiritual meaning to the students --
) that would be to openly contravene their oft-stated "guarantee" that
) Anthroposophy is not taught in the classrooms of SWA schools.
)
) So what's wrong with teaching it? Will it harm the kids? Well, no. Does it
) make them spiritualists and cultists? Well, no. Does it have any practical
) educational or life value for them, either when it's taught or later?
) That's the debatable part: I and many other critics think not; SWA
) defenders say that it has benefits for the developing mind and future
) intellectual effort. May be. I think not. It's an area that researchers
) like David Mollet might spend some time looking at.
)
) The only thing my son David, now a graduate of a public high school,
) remembers of his projective geometry lessons is that the teacher made a big
) point of telling the students that two parallel lines meet at infinity.
)
) In the meantime, to me, it was just another example of the SWA stealthy and
) covert use of Anthroposophical tenets for spiritual purposes without my
) knowledge, understanding, and consent.
)
) There's plenty in the archives on this subject; just search on "projective
) geometry". We've done it pretty well, and, of course, reached no agreement
) between critic and proponent, but there may be some life left in it yet, if
) there are new views or data.
)
) Cheers from Godzone,
)
) Michael Kopp
) Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: didn't mean it
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:28:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
)))) Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) - 4/1/99 11:39 PM )))
Michael Ronal says:
)Oy. Five minutes ago I posted the following:
)
))))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 3/30/99 5:39 AM )))
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)))
)))How do I say "Biodynamic shit" in Latin, Tarjei?
)
))Sorry to bud in, guys, but you don't; you say it in Greek, when you've
))been steeped in Coprosophy, training for which can be found...
)
)*******
)and only upon re-reading it after hitting "Send" did I notice that that
)could have been read as an insultingly making fun of someone's name. Since
)in my book that demeans only the aggressor, and, coming from someone who
)posts infrequently and has already complained of others' incivility, would
)constitute at once cowardice and hypocrisy, I can only hope that I am
)believed when I say my intention was to play with words, not names, nor
)anyone's dignity. I also hope that all here are made of hardy stuff,
)capable of remitting my inadvertance. Whoops! Really sorry. /MRx
And Michael KOPP says:
ROTFLMAO.
What do you mean, you didn't mean it? Damnation, just when I thought I'd
hit the big time!
Best joke I've heard on this list in a long, long, time.
(And it's not even a slapstick joke, which means my Vietnam head wound in
the top right frontal area of my skull hasn't damaged my sense of humour in
the way that snide young Ezra Beeman was probably implying by posting an
otherwise off-topic news story URL about "list humour and brain damage". It
has, however, probably contributed to my baldness.)
Kopp, of course, is from the German _kopf_, meaning head. So now I guess
it's my head that's full of shit ... might as well be: I hadit scared out
of the rest of me in the rice paddies long time ago.
Actually, you can find in the archives a long thread on just this subject,
where the use of biodynamic fertilizer on food crops for humans is held to
mean that in some way the shit winds up in the eater of the crops, and
there is some spiritual significance in this for the Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical nuts.
So don't apologise, Michael, we've seen worse here. Even if you didn't
intend it for me (and I believe you, you're just slow enough not to have
noticed) I take it as a great honour.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand(
MRx here -- just slow enough to spell at least my own name correctly, and just quick enough to ask you to prove your (undeserved) forgiveness by providing me with
1) a translation of )ROTFLMAO( (I know, I know, I'm really slow)
&
2) )"dactylic hexameter" (not a
common subject on this discussion list). Or I can dig it up for any
interested parties.(
Myself, I've not done well digging recently. Standing by. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.4 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:58:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904010336.TAA08311 lists1.best.com)
You sound awful bitter, maybe it is the 60 messages a day...
Am I to understand WE ruined your academic life? Considering your initials end in Ph.D., I find the
claim hollow.
Alas, I do not know when you attended the Davis school, but it used to be in pretty bad shape. Keep
in mind in the late 1980's it was only a few years old. My parents helped found the school, but
grew increasingly dissatisfied and eventually left. The other founding members of the Davis school,
outside of the teachers, were all real world professionals as well and not likely initiates of the
order you imply.
My father is a fan of RS, but you would be sorely disappointed if you took him for an anthropop. He
is a graduate of UCB, decorated Vietnam vet, and one of the first organic farmers in California. He
helped develop the sustainable agriculture program at UCD (perhaps you took a class or two.) He was
invited (and went) to speak in Japan on rice farming. He also help found the Davis Waldorf school
so his daughter could have what he believed to be the best education available (she refused to
commute the 30 miles each way to SWS as I had). My mother, a Jewish intellectual (political
scientist) who taught in the south during the freedom summer, as well as in Madagascar for the peace
corps, agreed with my father and together they spent a great deal of time getting the (private)
school off the ground.
What this man and his wife have in common with anyone associated with your school in the UK is
beyond me. Heaping them all together as part of the oft cited world wide S/W/A conspiracy is sheer
lunacy, or utter gall. Further, your suggestion children are brutalized in WE is beyond the pale,
right in step with Jewish baby eating rumors of medieval Europe. Perhaps you have a final solution
in mind as well. Most of your other allegations are similarly rancorous and devoid of any merit
beyond their remarkably mean spirit. I spoke enough German to pass out of the requirement in
college. Other, more fortunate kids, were blessed with 3 more years. Additionally, I can get by on
my relatively meager (only eight years) Spanish whenver I go to Mexico (another benefit of
osmosis). I was Loki in the (3rd grade?) class play, and the Dragon in another (2nd grade), yet I
was not shunned and in fact I was senior class president (oh the horror). How do you reconcile your
immmature notions of WE cultism with such a blatantly stark counter example?
All told, it seems my experience refutes your claims point by point. And where you rely on nothing
beyond your own subjective, generalized notions (informed by what can only be described as hatred)
to back up your claims, I have particular facts.
Any questions?
e
PS Since the fine fellow unsubscribed, I cc'd him.
sdigby ibm.net wrote:
) How do I unsubscribe. I really do not want over 60 messages a day on
) anything.
)
) By the way, as I unsubscribe, as an ex-Waldorf school student, who hated
) the place, please get focussed. I went ot a very famous Rudolph Steiner
) school in England. At least the Davis school was in awe of the
) teachers, who were totally unqualified
)
) Do you want to stop Waldorf from getting public funding? Do you want to
) stop people with naturalist beliefs (what is wrong in believing in
) trees, etc.?, all religion is based on unreality)? Or is this a venting
) session? Trashing people who like Waldorf may be therapeutic, but it is
) totally disfunctional.
)
) In the two or so years I was at the Steiner school I learned absolutely
) nothing. Classes were set up so that all children of the same age, no
) matter the intellectual ability were kept together, and that class
) catered to the lowest common denominator.
)
) Waldorf and the Steiner system are academically unsound (and I am an
) academic). (Ph.D. botany). Waldorf/Steiner science is from the last
) century - Goethe's perfect organism which unfortunatley does tie in with
) their view of perfect race of man. Their best language (described in a
) Waldorf document I read about four years ago) is German; language is
) apparently learned by osmosis since you never get any translations;
) their creativity is faceless dolls; their art has not changed. The
) children are allowed to start brutal behavior, but not retaliate. Their
) religion is the Norse gods, which may be very entertaining on Hercules
) and Xena, but is quite racist: Baldur is blond, beautiful and good, and
) Loki is dark and evil.
)
) Even the writing style is still the same!
)
) I attended the Davis, California Waldorf open house in the late 1980's.
) I went to Waldorf as a child in the 1940's.
)
) I attended a school board meeting more recently at which some parents
) were trying to get free private schools for their children, i.e. free
) Waldorf schools. I asked if theosophy was still central. I was told by
) the Waldorf representative that it was. I asked if it were not a
) religion. I was told it was.
)
) Absolutely NOTHING had changed.
)
) I am concerned that children who got to Waldorf schools are not
) educated, and may be brutalized. I have friends who like the schools
) and they send their children there. I am extremely concerned that the
) state not pay for relgious education.
)
) As for biodynamic gardening - I never heard anything about the theosophy
) regarding gardening. And, a number of religions do pray over the plants
) and soil.
)
) As for religion. Let's treat this as a separation of church and state.
) the druids were around a long time before quite a few major extant
) religions.
)
) Incidentally, Hitler, despite a revisionist Waldorf history, did very
) much like Steiner's system, since it kept a specific social order. He
) approved of the diet.
)
) And so did I - it was the only good thing at the Steiner school. I liked
) and still like whole grain foods, etc.
)
) So, please, how do I unsubscribe. And, please, decide on your issues
) and don't fight. It is negative, and very harmful. You cannot convince
) someone by trashing them.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.5 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 01:12:19 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 01.04.99 14:58:15 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
mkopp xtra.co.nz:
)
) Rave on, Brucey!
)
Who said I NEVER agreed with Michael?!
raving Brucey is back from Kassel - BTW I have 530 mails to process, and I
will do so as thoroughly as I can - if I miss something directed at me please
repost it! Thanks - rave rave!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:33:06 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
(199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020300.TAA03334 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery says:
)Michael Kopp:
)
))And why is it [projective geometry] taught in SWA schools? Because
))Steiner, and his cult
))followers and SWA people attach esoteric, spiritual meaning to it.
))
))No, they don't teach the esoteric, spiritual meaning to the students --
))that would be to openly contravene their oft-stated "guarantee" that
))Anthroposophy is not taught in the classrooms of SWA schools.
))
))So what's wrong with teaching it? Will it harm the kids? Well, no. Does it
))make them spiritualists and cultists? Well, no. Does it have any practical
))educational or life value for them, either when it's taught or later?
))That's the debatable part: I and many other critics think not; SWA
))defenders say that it has benefits for the developing mind and future
))intellectual effort. May be. I think not. It's an area that researchers
))like David Mollet might spend some time looking at.
))
))The only thing my son David, now a graduate of a public high school,
))remembers of his projective geometry lessons is that the teacher made a
))big
))point of telling the students that two parallel lines meet at infinity.
))
))In the meantime, to me, it was just another example of the SWA stealthy
))and
))covert use of Anthroposophical tenets for spiritual purposes without my
))knowledge, understanding, and consent.
)
)
)Please explain to me, Michael, how we're being so sneaky.
)
)As you clearly point out, no spiritual or esoteric meaning is taught. It
)doesn't make the children spiritualists or cultists. Your own son has
)almost no impression of his class.
)
)If no spiritual content is taught and no spiritual impression is left, and
)you have no knowledge or understanding of such practices, what exactly is
)going on that you keep fussing about?
Sorry, this will have to be a quick answer, not a full explication of the
problem. It's been covered before, and is in the archives, as you well
know, Robert.
It's the _practice_ of a religion with the children as _objects_ of that
religion, one which says that the rituals of projective geometry will
influence the soul development of the children, and the sneaky part is that
the teachers, per Steiner's orders, treat the children as if they belonged
to the _teachers_, not the parents, and to keep the knowledge of what the
teachers do, Anthroposophically, from the parents. As also with
Anthroposphical child development studies, about which parents are told
nothing.
Come on, Robert, don't be so disingenuouos.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.7 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 19:48:30 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
(199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020030.QAA20818 lists1.best.com)
Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
[snip]
))Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
And TONKIN replied:
)I'll defer to your greater (SM) experience (g).
)
)(And don't try me on much more of this -- my Latin has accumulated over
)3 decades of rust!)
Stephen, try an Internet search on that phrase -- I'm sure it'll make your
day.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.8 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: didn't mean it
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 19:42:58 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904020530.VAA15586 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Ronal says:
[snip]
)MRx here -- just slow enough to spell at least my own name correctly, and
)just quick enough to ask you to prove your (undeserved) forgiveness by
)providing me with
)
)1) a translation of )ROTFLMAO( (I know, I know, I'm really slow)
Internet pig latin (shorthand, really) for "rolling on the floor laughing
my ass off". It means I think your post was highly funny, not offensive.
)2) )"dactylic hexameter" (not a
)common subject on this discussion list). Or I can dig it up for any
)interested parties.(
The meter of Greek epic/heroic/Homeric poetry.
For the full story of the English teacher who fed mystical mumbo jumbo
about the relationship of the "platonic year" (precession of the equinoxes,
about 26,000 years) to human physiology and those two to the development of
Greek epic poetic meter, see the archives. Just search on "dactylic
hexameter".
Hint: the Platonic year wasn't even discovered (by a Greek astronomer)
until 400 years after Homer, and greek epic poetry existed, with dactylic
hexameter, _before_ Homer.
English teacher incompetent professionally, cracked mentally, corrupt
spiritually (for teaching this mumbo jumbo).
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.9 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 05:55:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904020300.TAA03334 lists1.best.com)
(199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
(199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020634.WAA29481 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp:
)It's the _practice_ of a religion with the children as _objects_ of that
)religion, one which says that the rituals of projective geometry will
)influence the soul development of the children, and the sneaky part is that
)the teachers, per Steiner's orders, treat the children as if they belonged
)to the _teachers_, not the parents, and to keep the knowledge of what the
)teachers do, Anthroposophically, from the parents. As also with
)Anthroposphical child development studies, about which parents are told
)nothing.
)
)Come on, Robert, don't be so disingenuouos.
Well yes, you're quite right if you mean to say that this general statement
has appeared in the archives before.
What I'm requesting is specifics.
How is it that we practice religion with children as the objects of
religion? All good teachers, in any system, should treat the children in
their care with reverence. Some might even say a good primary teacher
worships childhood and its values.
What are the rituals of projective geometry that are expected to influence
the soul development of these children?
Where did Steiner order the teachers to treat the children in their care
like their own private property? Presuming you can find a quote to back
this up, what practices make you believe this actually happens?
I think you may be on to something with regard to the anthroposophical
child studies which I would enjoy pursuing. I would encourage you (or
anyone else) to describe any questions or issues related to this practice
under a separate heading--I'll be happy to take it up.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1186.10 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Cardio-Energetics
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 11:45:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903301614.IAA06682 lists1.best.com)
Bob Jones wrote:
) Lisa:
) I presented your post on Steiner's prescience to a group of scientists.
Was it on a mailing list, and in case it was, can you tell which one?
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1186 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1187 --------------
001 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
002 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
003 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: S
004 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
005 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: S
006 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
007 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: didn't mean it
008 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Developing evil in Europe (Was: Re: Subject ...)
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Developing evil in Europe (Was: Re: Subject ...)
010 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Correction
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.1 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 11:27:41 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com) (199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei wrote:
) What a tremendous relief that the copyright on Steiner's works expired in
) 1995, 70 years after his death. Lefty's behavior is so unworthy of
) anthroposophy and a disgrace to its founder. It's something the
) Scientologists would do. But since I have encountered at least one
) "anthroposophist" who combines Steiner's ideas with those of Ron Hubbard,
) it wouldn't surprise me if Lefty also had "Dianetics" or Hubbard's policy
) against adversaries on his night table.
Tarjei, I don¥t know what storms are hurling over Oslo. I Stockholm we
have a beautiful spring weather. I was not on this list when David
Schlesinger was here and only know about the events from what Steve and
others tell here now. Based on that and the sun, shining in through the
window, I have the impression you probably don¥t do David/Lefty justice.
Cheers!
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.2 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:43:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com)
(199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904021146.DAA07834 lists1.best.com)
Sune wrote:
)Tarjei, I don¥t know what storms are hurling over Oslo. I Stockholm we
)have a beautiful spring weather. I was not on this list when David
)Schlesinger was here and only know about the events from what Steve and
)others tell here now. Based on that and the sun, shining in through the
)window, I have the impression you probably don¥t do David/Lefty justice.
I was reacting to the impression given. If this impression was so false,
perhaps the same is the case with mmany of the other scandalous allegations
that have been hurleed against WE and anthroposophists on this list?
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.3 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setting the
Record Straight ...)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:25:30 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
(199904010658.WAA14231 lists1.best.com)
(199904012244.OAA19927 lists1.best.com)
(199904012352.PAA17569 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (54162271 toto.iv)
Ezra Beeman writes:
) I like Ecco. The story in the Pendulum reminded me of the Pynchon tour de
) force: "Gravity's Rainbow".
) I will be in France for a couple weeks in the near future and I plan on visiting
) the pendulum.
) e
I thought they both paled in comparison to the Illuminatus Trilogy by
Robert Wilson and ?? Shea. The conspiracy novel to end all conspiracy
novels. (Except, of course, people are still writing them.)
This one was so good that the author himself ended up believing it and
is now an occult mumbo jumboer. So exercise caution when reading!
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.4 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:30:50 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (38847321 toto.iv)
Tarjei Straume writes:
) The protection of free speech in America, and the work of the American
) Civil Liberties Union (A.C.L.U.), is something I have learned to value and
) respect most deeply about that country. I am reminded of an incident that
) took place once in the 1980's, I believe, in a suburban area near Chicago -
) anyway, it was some place in Illinois. A bunch of neo-Nazis planned a march
) through a Jewish neighborhood where the elderly residents wore tatoos from
) the Nazi death camps - a rather ugly reminder. So the city council wanted
) to ban the march. But the neo-Nazis did get their permission to go through
) with this march, thanks to the work of Jewish lawyers from the A.C.L.U. In
) other words, the children and grandchildren of Holocaust survivors were
) fighting for the right to free speech for the Nazis! Their main argument
) was that if the Nazis' right to march was suppressed, the same law could be
) used to suppress *anybody* at any time.
That was Skokie Illinois (a suburb of Chicago) in the middle of America.
) This incident may be disputable, but it taught me to truly appreciate the
) American reverence for the First Amendment.
It was quite controversial at the time. The ACLU lost a lot of
members. Too many people want their own personal kind of freedom.
It's quite amazing to me that the US has the bill of rights. They
teach us in school that the first immigrants (actually, the
Pilgrims--not the first) came to America for religious freedom, with
the (usually unstated) implication that that tradition is shy we have
the bill of rights.
Actually, they came for freedom to practice their own religion, but
were no more tolerant of other religious sects than the others were of
them. Fortunately, the Pilgrim influence was not so strong in
Virginia where most of the nation's early philosopher's lived.
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.5 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Synarchy, the EU and the threefold social order (Was Re: Setting the Record Straight ...)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:51:44 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903311756.JAA10788 lists1.best.com)
(199903300124.RAA11283 lists1.best.com)
(199903312251.OAA15281 lists1.best.com)
(199904010044.QAA29313 lists1.best.com)
(199904010658.WAA14231 lists1.best.com)
(199904012244.OAA19927 lists1.best.com)
(199904012352.PAA17569 lists1.best.com) (199904021426.GAA01969 lists1.best.com)
Michael Hirsch wrote:
) I thought they both paled in comparison to the Illuminatus Trilogy by
) Robert Wilson and ?? Shea. The conspiracy novel to end all conspiracy
) novels. (Except, of course, people are still writing them.)
)
) This one was so good that the author himself ended up believing it and
) is now an occult mumbo jumboer. So exercise caution when reading!
I generally agree with the feeling of mumbo jumbo and not giving a good
feeling of clearly understanding things, that you can get from
conspiracy literature, like David Icke¥s "...and the truth shall set you
free". It¥s just too much, at least to me.
A small problem is ... it¥s possible to deduce the time table for the
whole EC/EU-process for specifically the time 1986-2030, described and
discussed at http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/EU/euengoff.htm, on _purely_
theoretical grounds out of very few assumptions, making its character as
a very strict temporalized mechanical temple building process
understandable, and bothering.
The article tries to describe the thought pattern implicit in the
process and some of its roots and how the organisation - inevitably
being there, and the only other alternative at present probably being
the chaos sticking its head out in the present war in former Yugoslavia,
setting almost half a million people fleeing the last week - can be
handled, turning it to something good.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.6 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 07:01:35 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011956.LAA26665 lists1.best.com)
(199904020232.SAA10178 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020232.SAA10178 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)The only kind of speech which should be at
)all proscribed is that which leads to direct, immediate breaking of the
)law, such as inciting riot or assault.
I would add libel/slander/defamation to that, given that the ultimate
defence against being charged with it would be the truth.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.7 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: didn't mean it
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 22:05:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904020750.XAA09839 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
) Hint: the Platonic year wasn't even discovered (by a Greek astronomer)
) until 400 years after Homer, and greek epic poetry existed, with dactylic
) hexameter, _before_ Homer.
And blood didn¥t circulate until after Harvey.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.8 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Developing evil in Europe (Was: Re: Subject ...)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 22:20:16 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com)
(199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com) (199904021344.FAA16354 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei wrote:
) I was reacting to the impression given. If this impression was so false,
) perhaps the same is the case with mmany of the other scandalous allegations
) that have been hurleed against WE and anthroposophists on this list?
I do agree. It¥s not easy to avoid being drawn into the heat at the list
at times.
...
Almost as much space is given in the news to the 3 Americans caught by
Serbians as the 200 000 more Albanians more than I last heard about it,
that have now have fled Kosovo, mostly into Macedonia, making the total
of 700 000 paople.
Ever more people demand that NATO set in ground troops. Clinton¥s main
argument against it is he does not see how to get them out in a
foreseeable future, once they invade Serbia. Deepening evil developing
in Europe during the last Easter before the new millennium.
Sincerely,
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.9 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Developing evil in Europe (Was: Re: Subject ...)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:28:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com)
(199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com)
(199904021344.FAA16354 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904022044.MAA17289 lists1.best.com)
Sune wrote:
)Almost as much space is given in the news to the 3 Americans caught by
)Serbians as the 200 000 more Albanians more than I last heard about it,
)that have now have fled Kosovo, mostly into Macedonia, making the total
)of 700 000 paople.
)
)Ever more people demand that NATO set in ground troops. Clinton¥s main
)argument against it is he does not see how to get them out in a
)foreseeable future, once they invade Serbia. Deepening evil developing
)in Europe during the last Easter before the new millennium.
Some seven years ago or thenabouts I read a letter to Newsweek from an
American war veteran that made an impression on me. The gentleman in
question had been stationed in Yugoslavia in World War Two. Later, he had
been in the Vietnam War. He explained that intervention in Yugoslavia would
be disastrous and could easily lead to a "Vietnam situation" with no end in
sight. It was because of the terrain where the guerrillas could so easily
hide and keep up the fight that all the bombs and armies in the world would
not stop them. (Well, in the old days, the Pentagon was talking about
bombing North Vietnam back to the stone age. All they managed to do was to
kill a lot of civilians.)
No wonder Clinton and the other national leaders won't send ground troops.
But it seems to be an American wishful thinking at work which suggest that
all you need is bombers, bombs, and pilots. They want to fight a war
without paying the awful price on the battlefield that is the very essence
of war. They want to leave all the body counts to "the others." Otherwise,
they will get another Vietnam - "Be the first one on the block / to get
your son back in a box / and it's one, two, three, what are we fighting for
- ?" - and the peoples of the West will go for the politicians' jugular,
and the Pentagon will have REAL cause to worry about national security. Now
they've gotten themselves caught in the middle.
Between the world wars, i.e. in the twenties and thirties, was an era
called "the machine age." People had absolute faith in technology, in
machines and what they could do. Today, we still live in an era of "the
bomb age." Politicians look at the bomb the way doctors looked at the pill
in the fifties and sixties - a cure-for-all. Perhaps this current disaster
will turn the trend, just like the invention of the nuclear bomb put an end
to "the machine age."
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1187.10 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Correction
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 01:00:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com)
(199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com) (199904021344.FAA16354 lists1.best.com) (199904022044.MAA17289 lists1.best.com)
I, Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Almost as much space is given in the news to the 3 Americans caught by
) Serbians as the 200 000 more Albanians more than I last heard about it,
) that have now have fled Kosovo, mostly into Macedonia, making the total
) of 700 000 paople
Correction:
Different News Media seem to give different figures.
EuroNews just gave a figure between 200 000 and 300 000.
And Milosevic, according to a NATO spokesman, seems to be preparing for
a coup against the democratically chosen President of Macedonia,
threatening to release a civil war there, with the well armed civil
police potentially standing aainst the federal armed forces.
Europe during a developing war. Very sad and very worrying.
Sincerely,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1187 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1188 --------------
001 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
002 - "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps. - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
003 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Projective Geometry
004 - MomOf2Gals aol.com - My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
005 - MomOf2Gals aol.com - Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
006 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Projective Geometry
007 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: didn't mean it
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.1 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:57:25 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
redon posts:
(Who is redon? This is alarmingly similar to the pseudonym: redux)
)The behavior of lifting/cross posting continued and some individuals on the
Waldorf/Steiner Lists began to set copy write fees.
The only individual I know of that began to set copywrite fees was Lefty
Redux aka David Schelsinger. He wrote numerous threatening personal emails
with a copywrite fee at the bottom of each in order to intimidate the
recipient into not sharing the contents of his messages. He continued
posting these to me long after I requested time and again for him to stop.
Finally, I began posting his threatening emails on the WC list and continued
to do so in an effort to expose him. He scared me.
My perception/experience of Lefty Redux aka David Scheslinger is that he is
an intimidating, frightening individual. And . . . I have little doubt he
will send me a threatening, personal email because of this post. I will post
it on this list when and if I receive one.
)Added note: Lefty sent several warnings before ending the subscriptions of
people who lifted /cross posted from the Waldorf
)/Steiner lists without permission and/or for poor netiquette (back biting
and such). It was thought, by some, that Lefty was
)tossed off of the w-c-l in retribution for ending the subscription of some
w-c-l members who committed the above mentioned
)actions.
He didn't send me several warnings. I was simply kicked off the list. I had
cross-posted and subsequently apologized to WC list members for doing so.
However, this did not stop his threatening behavior toward me. He was
removed from the WC list for his threatening, inappropriate behavior on the
list. It was disconcerting and frightening.
There is no other take on the situation with Lefty Redux aka David
Schlesinger. He can frame it any way he wishes, the truth is that he was a
disconcerting aggravant on this list and his threatening behavior frightened
some of us.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.2 ---------------
From: "ksutphen" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 16:10:26 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Robert Flannery posted:
)
)But my request that you substantiate your claim that waldorf gardening
)classes inculcate anthroposophy or anthroposophical principles remains
)unanswered.
I don't know, experientially, that Waldorf gardening does inculcate
Anthroposophy or its principles. What I know is that *all* the other
pedagogical practices I was taught were based on Anthroposophical religious
beliefs. Nothing on this list, since I first requested information about
biodynamic gardening, would lead me to believe that teaching gardening ala
Waldorf methods would be any different.
And yes, I did carry on once again about my own personal experience. Sorry .
. . it was a period in my life that I still find personally horrifying and
somewhat unbelievable in light of the fact that I was a public school
teacher. What is pertinent about my experience, in light of biodynamic
gardening, is that I was qualified to teach organic gardening, yet was not
permitted to do so because of my refusal to subject myself to further
indoctrination via Waldorf training.
Do I recall correctly that you are a Waldorf teacher? And, if so, why don't
you simply describe to me how gardening in a Waldorf school curriculum is
bereft of Anthroposophical influence. I am interested in a discussion on
this subject. Clearly I have little personal information/experience re:
biodynamic gardening - only suspicion based upon experience in the Public
School Waldorf Teacher training courses.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.3 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 06:30:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It may not be rituals which are taught, but aspects of the curriculum are
based on anthroposophical spiritual beliefs. Those outside of anthroposophy
do not share these beliefs and may not wish to see that the choice of what
is taught and how it is taught is based on a spiritual belief system they do
not share. At least without a full disclosure. What is so hard to
understand about that?
Alan S Fine MD
)
)How is it that we practice religion with children as the objects of
)religion?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.4 ---------------
From: MomOf2Gals aol.com
Subject: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 19:19:50 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathy and others who responded to the comments I made about Steiner's view of
``thinking with the heart'' and the field of neurocardiology.
Thanks for pointing out that many, many other Waldorf parents use the
same language. I am not much surprised by that, for one reason: most of those
of us who have our children in a Steiner school believe that Steiner was a
``genius'' etc. and have read at least some of what he wrote. I learned about
neurocardiology, however, from Sounds Like Science on National Public Radio.
It was ME that made the connection in my mind. When the commentator on the
radio talked about how the heart and brain communicate back and forth with
the heart often leading, that statement led my back to Steiner's comments.
I actually love the bantering and challenging that go along with this
list, except for one thing. I just don't get the kind of suspicious, almost
spooky feelings that people relate that they were somehow knowingly
``tricked'' by their Waldorf school in some way. Some of you make it sound as
if the school was a cult of Devil-worshippers who go to great lengths to hide
this fact, but once they get your innocent child in their clutches, all kinds
of dark, secret and naughty things happen to them. You know this is bogus.
Perhaps some of you, when you finally learned about anthroposophy and
the fact that your children were being discussed in light of its teachings
felt uncomfortable, as the teachings do not always jive neatly with those of
mainline Christianity or Judaism or Islam or whatever. Over and over again,
you folks have mentioned that teachers light a candle at story time -- and
you flood that statement with a kind of queasy, occult feeling, as if there
is something in the nature of candles that calls forth the Devil, etc. etc.
Do you honestly find lighting candles a scary thing?
Yeah, I know that in a Steiner school those teachers who are
self-described anthropops DO believe in the Archangel Michael and Ahriman (I
may have spelled that wrong, sorry!) and so on. I still do not know why you
think this is bad, or that the school should have a disclaimer given to every
parent explaining the viewpoint of the school on spiritual matters! Again,
does the public school give us a sheet telling us the spiritual backgrounds
of the teachers in their classrooms? How about the Catholic Church -- which
even the Catholics I know think is full of mumbo-jumbo mystical things,
including lighting candles and ritually drinking the blood of and eating the
flesh of Christ, the leaders of that cult.
Could someone just be a bit more blunt -- don't worry about hurting
my feelings -- about what you think is WRONG with these schools? Do you fear
that they do not do a good job educating the young people? Do you fear they
are somehow brainwashed in anthroposophy? (I could argue that kids attending
Catholic school are brainwashed to that religion. My 41 year old husband
feels his sense of spirituality was ruined for life through Catholic
education. Oh, he learned his basics, all right. But he learned in fear, not
just of the nasty nuns and threatening priests but also fear of hellfire and
damnation. Is that somehow more acceptable?)
I have to confess here that I am a journalist by profession, and
research is my specialty. I am happy to go outside the school structure to do
research on the heart-mind connection -- outside the Steiner ``cult'' if you
will. But I must tell you -- back in the 80s I began work on a series of
stories about how people who had received heart transplants were reporting
what seemed to them strange and new tastes, likes and dislikes. In many
cases, it turns out that those new likes, etc. were those of the heart donor!
I was fascinated by this, and began to research it. This was long before I
had children or even considered SWA.
Thanks again for the lively debate, etc. I am eager to see the whole
picture as clearly as I can, and do not mind at all being confronted or asked
questions, or directed to other sources. But I beg you out there to be more
clear yourselves in what you think the real problems are.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa in Balto
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.5 ---------------
From: MomOf2Gals aol.com
Subject: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 19:34:14 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Anyone out there familiar with the work of Joseph Chilton Pearce,
author of about 14 books on children and child-rearing? He wrote ``Magical
Child'' ``Crack In The Cosmic Egg'' and the latest, ``Evolution's End.''
He seems to be a champion of the Waldorf and Montessori approaches to
education.
I also noticed that in at least on of prominent child development
expert David Elkind's books (``The Hurried Child'') he praises Waldorf
education are being tuned in to the development of the child and educating
that child appropriately for each stage. Elkind even mentions that the change
of teeth -- from the baby or milk teeth to permanent teeth -- is a sign of
readiness for formal schooling. I had heard that at my Waldorf school and
thought it sounded a bit wacky, like one of those things that I am not really
going to buy. Then I turn around and see Elkind, a very respected and noted
expert, say the same thing.
Just a thought.
Lisa
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.6 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 20:23:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030032.QAA18346 lists1.best.com)
)It may not be rituals which are taught, but aspects of the curriculum are
)based on anthroposophical spiritual beliefs. Those outside of anthroposophy
)do not share these beliefs and may not wish to see that the choice of what
)is taught and how it is taught is based on a spiritual belief system they do
)not share. At least without a full disclosure. What is so hard to
)understand about that?
)
) Alan S Fine MD
There's nothing hard to understand about your phrasing, but that's not at
all what Michael keeps saying.
Your example is met by the simplest disclosure found in all waldorf school
literature: "Anthroposophy serves as a foundation for the curriculum in a
waldorf school".
I have seen that statement, or its equivalent, in every piece of
promotional waldorf literature I've come across. If it raises questions
for you as a prospective parent, ask them. Just don't expect a
"twelve-year slide show", as Bruce has characterized it.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.7 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 20:23:51 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
Kathy requests:
)Do I recall correctly that you are a Waldorf teacher? And, if so, why don't
)you simply describe to me how gardening in a Waldorf school curriculum is
)bereft of Anthroposophical influence.
First off, as I said in an earlier post, I don't know much about
biodynamics--I know even less about how gardening is taught in waldorf
schools.
Secondly, since most waldorf schools (at least in the U.S.) do not have a
gardening curriculum, I can't share any experiences from school. There
just isn't much to go on.
Gardening was not part of the original curriculum in Molt's school (take
note, those of you who like to say the curriculum hasn't changed a whit
since 1919). Steiner said and wrote nothing about teaching gardening.
But more to the point, I'm not interested in taking up your offer--I began
this thread in order to challenge your claim that a waldorf gardening
program is a vehicle for anthroposophical dogma.
Unlike you, I'm not going to make any claims about the content of such a
program without any relevant personal experience.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 05:34:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (199904030032.QAA18503 lists1.best.com)
Dear Lisa,
Thank you for your post - it's nice to have an investigative reporter in
St. Rudy's Cult Army - also known to this list as the Nation for the
Defenders of the Faith. We are all brainwashed and deluded cult victims,
except perhaps for those of us who are sleazy, sneaky, conniving, sinister,
dishonest, and conspiring hypnotists who are working to keep the gullible
twits under guru Rudy's mumbo jummbo spell. Dan Dugan has hinted that at
least some of us may be in need of deprogrammers and exit counsellors or
similar therapy. Doctor Alan Fine has plenty of experience working with
cult victims, including Jim Jones survivors, and he has also treated
anthroposophists, though perhaps not necessarily for cult brainwashing. But
dr. Fine did see me as an example of someone with a frightening adherence
to cult doctrine, and his assessment may be interpreted as a diagnosis.
This reminds me of an experience I had thirty years ago, in 1969, when I
was a teenager busted for cannabis, which is now smoked openly and legally
in Amsterdam coffee shops. The police doctor, who was a very arrogant and
opininated notorious bastard, concluded after our interview that I was a
"narkoman" - a drug addict. When I asked him how he was led to this
conclusion, he answered: "Because of your reasoning." What he meant was
that my opinion that cannabis was a soft drug and not necessarily
dangerous, was proof of addiction.
With all fairness to dr. Alan Fine: He is not arrogant or opinionated. On
the contrary, he has proven to be a man of flexibility who is truly
endeavoring to understand anthroposophy better and achieve a balanced view
based upon critical, self-dependent thinking. Still, the stigmatizing of
anthroposophists as hypnotized cult victims chanting St. Rudy's mantra
rather than having their views grounded in self-dependent, critical
thinking is very similar to the way I was stigmatized as a drug addict by
the police doctor because I was an upstart teenager who disagreed with the
state's view on cannabis.
And while we're on the subject of police and busts: Dan Dugan would like to
hear more about the story from J”rna, Sweden, 25 years ago or thenabouts.
("thenabouts" is another one of my coined words. As a cult leader in my own
right, I'm entitled to re-invent the languages.) I suspect that his motive
is that when the law enforcement does something to someone, that someone is
a criminal. Yet the point is that if Martin Luther King had not been jailed
on repeated occasions, the unjust laws would not have been changed so soon.
Homeopathy and anthroposophical medicine stand a lot stronger today than
they did a few decades ago.
Lisa, I think one of the reasons why the wolves immediately jumped all over
you was that you stated your opinion about Rudolf Steiner's contributions
to some specialized professional fields, like science or medicine. Most
people, not only anthroposophists, would understand that you were impressed
by Steiner and enthusiastic about anthroposophy, and that you would like to
learn more. But WE critics are not "most people." They are clinical
pseudo-diagnosticians, practicing pseudo-psychology. They consume volume
after volume by Rudolf Steiner with the sole purpose of ridiculing it. If
you know relatively little about medicine, but find it interesting and
perhaps truthful that the heart is not a pump in the conventional sense,
but that the blood is driven by an occult life-force, you are an
indoctrinated, gullible, mantra-chanting twit. But if you go the opposite
way and say that our consciousness is only the result of chemical brain
processes, that life originated from a "primordeal soup" that gulped up a
living cell by pure accident, and that our "I" is an illusion because a
guru brain surgeon has said so, you are not brainwashed or duped even if
you know nothing about medicine or biology. No, then you're a very wise,
critical thinker!
You see, when you disagree with a hardcore WE critic on science and
cosmology, it's because you don't know any better than to chant mantras in
your half-sleep. For this reason, you are urged to wake up and see the
Light of the Accidental Cell in the Primeval Soup. Anything to the contrary
would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution if mentioned to students in a
school. What is of utmost importance is to fortify the school gate against
the spiritual beings who created humanity and who left their footprints in
nature. This is why they get so riled up about natural science and how it
is taught.
For the record, Lisa, I should repeat that I don't consider myself
competent to say anything specifically about WE - only anthroposophy.
This is a GENUINE RAVING from Uncle Taz.
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: didn't mean it
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 22:50:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
)))) Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) - 4/2/99 2:42 AM )))
wrote:
)Michael Ronal [NO. TWO "L's". OR MAYBE STAY WITH "MRx" TO AVOID CONFUSION AMONG US SEVERAL NAMESAKES? THAT WOULD BE NICE] says:
)[snip]
)MRx here -- just slow enough to spell at least my own name correctly, and
)just quick enough to ask you to prove your (undeserved) forgiveness by
)providing me with
)
)1) a translation of )ROTFLMAO( (I know, I know, I'm really slow)
)Internet pig latin (shorthand, really) for "rolling on the floor laughing
)my ass off". It means I think your post was highly funny, not offensive.(
MRx here again:
Thanks for the one out of two, and the re-re-assurance.
To my cutting & pasting MKOPP's citation:
)))2) )"dactylic hexameter" (not a
)common subject on this discussion list). Or I can dig it up for any
))interested parties.(
MKOPP now offers:
)The meter of Greek epic/heroic/Homeric poetry.(
MRx:
Some on this list know Ted Pugh. True story: He asked a waitress, "What's the soup du jour?" She answered, "It's the soup of the day."
MKOPP:
)For the full story of the English teacher who fed mystical mumbo jumbo
)about the relationship of the "platonic year" (precession of the equinoxes,
)about 26,000 years) to human physiology and those two to the development of
)Greek epic poetic meter, see the archives. Just search on "dactylic
)hexameter".(
MRx:
Michael, I'm even slower than you, a judge of such things, realize. My request (did I ask it too slowly?) was that you do indeed "dig it up for any
interested parties" -- namely, moi. You see, I'm real slow, and can't do it for myself. Please make good on your offer, so I can concentrate on the content. I don't want to ask someone else to help me, it would be embarassing.
MKOPP:
)Hint: the Platonic year wasn't even discovered (by a Greek astronomer)
)until 400 years after Homer, and greek epic poetry existed, with dactylic
)hexameter, _before_ Homer.
)English teacher incompetent professionally, cracked mentally, corrupt
)spiritually (for teaching this mumbo jumbo).
MRx:
I'm interested in the evidence, not because I doubt your testimony, but because of the topic. And also because then (maybe) I'll ask you (seriously) what constitutes "mumbo-jumbo." (I have a dictionary, and even know how to use it [I think], but I want to hear from YOU, and maybe your colleagues here.) It's been a long time since I (intentionally) dismissed ANYTHING with a term like that, and I want to see if I can achieve that stance, even experimentally, again. Will you help? BTW, I'm REALLY not seeking to convert you; I'm seeking to "try on" your mental outlook. Hope you'll give me a chance. DYKTA, /MRx
)Cheers from Godzone,
)Michael Kopp
)Wellington, New Zealand(
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1188.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 23:16:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 4/2/99 10:34 PM )))
(whose posts I appreciate more than [*sigh*] I have been able to make clear) writes:
)[snip]
)"thenabouts" is another one of my coined words. As a cult leader in my own
)right, I'm entitled to re-invent the languages.
)[snip]
)This is a GENUINE RAVING from Uncle Taz.(
MRx here:
Only the claim to originality constitutes a genuine rave (& only because you generate so much true originality am I not loath to rein you in), for:
Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged c 1981 gives:
thenabouts \ adv \ [ 1 then + abouts (as in thereabouts)] : near that time : about then
******
I think you plant these once in a great while just to make me feel good. /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1188 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1189 --------------
001 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
002 - Michael Hirsch (hirsch ma - Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
003 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
005 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
006 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Projective Geometry
007 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Projective Geometry
009 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
010 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.1 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 06:48:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030418.UAA20247 lists1.best.com)
MICHAEL RONALL (or MRx) wrote:
)
)Only the claim to originality constitutes a genuine rave (& only because
)you generate so much true originality am I not loath to rein you in), for:
)
)Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language
)Unabridged c 1981 gives:
)
)thenabouts \ adv \ [ 1 then + abouts (as in thereabouts)] : near that time
): about then
)
)******
I stand corrected. After a decade of using spoken English only on rare
occasions, I suspected for a minute that the word might be a Tazism. I
should have checked the dictionary.
)I think you plant these once in a great while just to make me feel good. /MRx
If my posts don't make an anthropop like yourself feel good, you should ask
Michael Kopp for the address to those Waldorf teachers on New Zealand who
are growing commercial biodynamic pot. Gotta be dynamite.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.2 ---------------
From: Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu)
Subject: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:54:43 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: (117843735 toto.iv)
MomOf2Gals aol.com writes:
) Anyone out there familiar with the work of Joseph Chilton Pearce,
) author of about 14 books on children and child-rearing? He wrote ``Magical
) Child'' ``Crack In The Cosmic Egg'' and the latest, ``Evolution's End.''
) He seems to be a champion of the Waldorf and Montessori approaches to
) education.
Interesting. I just visited a Montessori school and their methods
seem almost diametrically opposed to Waldorf methods.
Early reading vs. late. Individualized learning vs. group. Black
outlines in all the artwork vs. the fuzzy colorful waldorf stuff
(though to be fair, I asked about the black outlines and they said
that it wasn't deliberate. My theory is that the art teacher at that
particular school is just not very interesting. The art on the walls
was fairly trite, though decently executed.)
Hard to imagine someone approving a lot of both methods.
--Michael
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.3 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 05:57:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904030000.QAA22326 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030000.QAA22326 lists1.best.com)
ksutphen (ksutphen jps.net) wrote:
)The only individual I know of that began to set copywrite fees was Lefty
)Redux aka David Schelsinger.
I seem to recall that I (and others) did a few times as well -- as I
said in a previous post, I'd not refuse permission if someone asked, but
I did (and still do) resent the reposting of my stuff from one list to
another without even the courtesy of informing me, particularly if it is
against the charter of the original list.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 00:09:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) - 4/2/99 11:48 PM )))
wrote:
)
)[snip]
If my posts don't make an anthropop like yourself feel good,(
*****
MRx:
Tarjei! You blew my cover! Now they'll NEVER take me seriously. And I was doing SO WELL...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.5 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: My so-called ``indoctrination'' with SWA
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 07:33:23 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030512.VAA28057 lists1.best.com)
)MRx:
)
)Tarjei! You blew my cover! Now they'll NEVER take me seriously. And I was
)doing )SO WELL...
The NSA has been on to you for a long time.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.6 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:50:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner. It
mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. It speaks
of the main lesson. It speaks of the power of sensuality and individual
power. It quotes Herodotus and Albert Schweitzer. There is not a single
mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of the
doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is simply
no doubt.
)
)Your example is met by the simplest disclosure found in all waldorf school
)literature: "Anthroposophy serves as a foundation for the curriculum in a
)waldorf school".
)
)I have seen that statement, or its equivalent, in every piece of
)promotional waldorf literature I've come across.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.7 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 08:11:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030032.QAA18346 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine MD wrote:
) It may not be rituals which are taught, but aspects of the curriculum are
) based on anthroposophical spiritual beliefs. Those outside of anthroposophy
) do not share these beliefs ...
A central "spiritual belief" of anthroposophy is that the spirit of man
is eternal and that just as we live through a number of days and nights
through life, also the individual life as a whole constitues a form of
long "day" upon which follows a form of "night" followed by a new "day".
In Sweden an investigation some years ago showed that about 20% of adult
Swedes had the same or a similar type of "life feeling" too. Only very
few of them probably call themselves "anthroposophists". My hunch is
more the other way around from what you write; that many people outside
of anthroposophy actually _do_ share the basic views of anthroposophy,
even if they don¥t call themselves "anthroposophists".
"Anthroposophy" only puts into words the "life instincts" of a great
group of people, making it possible to handle more consciously, even if
many others of course don¥t feel the same way about life.
) ... and may not wish to see that the choice of what
) is taught and how it is taught is based on a spiritual belief system they do
) not share. At least without a full disclosure. What is so hard to
) understand about that?
It¥s not hard to understand. As Robert Flannery points out, most
promotional waldorf literature also describes that background either
saying that WE is based on anthroposophy or that it is based on the
philosophy, developed by Rudolf Steiner and something about who he was.
This is also the case with the waldorf school in Austin
(http://www.austinwaldorf.org/brochure/philosophy2.htm), into which one
temporary participant on this list one month ago had planned to put his
child, saying he would refrain from doing after having found out that it
was based on a spiritual view of man and the world.
I wrote to him, regretting the situation, saying I didn¥t think he had
done anything wrong, and also tried to get in contact with the school,
to ask it to be more specific about its background, not only mentioning
Rudolf Steiner, but also at least that the "philosophy" he put into
words is called "anthroposophy". But I only got to the person
responsible for the web site, not the ones responsible for the school
and left the problem at that point.
At "Kristofferskolan", the largest and oldest waldorf school in Sweden,
prospective parents some years ago had to participate in an obligatory
introductory course on waldorf education before putting the children
into the school. I don¥t know about the sitution now, but expect it not
to have changed.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.8 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 08:22:39 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030554.VAA26011 lists1.best.com)
Alan Fine wrote:
)I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
)mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner. It
)mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. It speaks
)of the main lesson. It speaks of the power of sensuality and individual
)power. It quotes Herodotus and Albert Schweitzer. There is not a single
)mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
)teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
)spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of the
)doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is simply
)no doubt.
On the one hand, the flier may be defended because it seeks to make WE
somewhat comprehensible to the borader public at a quick glance. On the
other hand, there may be an element of spiritual cowardice at work here - a
temptation that Rudolf Steiner warned against. What he warned against was
the tendency to represent anthroposophically oriented spiritual science to
the public as if it were exactly like secular natural science. I once heard
a Norwegian anthroposophist debating a secular humanist on the radio, and
the humanist actually gave a more accurate description of anthroposophy
than the anthroposophist did, who kept "explaining away" the spiritual
aspect almost as if it wasn't there.
To take a stand for the spirit requires a certain amount of boldness,
courage. Steiner mentioned that it took him a long time of preparation to
muster the courage necessary to present anthroposophy publicly. The courage
required of Waldorf staff is minute in comparison, but we are faced with
laziness or love of ease here.
So I agree with you wholeheartedly, Alan - it sounds like a lousy flyer.
Somebody imbued with the living spirit of anthroposophy should march into
that school and give those people a real shake-up.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.9 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 07:19:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (117843735 toto.iv) (199904030456.UAA17954 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030456.UAA17954 lists1.best.com)
Michael Hirsch (hirsch mathcs.emory.edu) wrote:
)I just visited a Montessori school and their methods
)seem almost diametrically opposed to Waldorf methods.
They are -- I've always wondered why they are lumped together.
Successful alternatives to the mainstream, I guess.
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1189.10 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 07:10:58 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
(199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
(199904020030.QAA20818 lists1.best.com)
(199904020750.XAA09814 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904020750.XAA09814 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
)))Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
)
)Stephen, try an Internet search on that phrase -- I'm sure it'll make your
)day.
OK, Michael, did that -- part of something that is used as a filler? Are
you going to tell me why..?
In blissful ignorance,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1189 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1190 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Projective Geometry
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: malarky
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - RE: Projective Geometry
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Projective Geometry
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 04:12:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Sune Nordwall [mailto:Sune.Nordwall home.se]
)
) At "Kristofferskolan", the largest and oldest waldorf school
) in Sweden,
) prospective parents some years ago had to participate in an obligatory
) introductory course on waldorf education before putting the children
) into the school. I don¥t know about the sitution now, but
) expect it not
) to have changed.
)
I would have expected a school with such a name to offer more
freedom to the parents.
Sorry, that's just a bad joke. We'll see whether anybody on the
list gets it besides me.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 04:17:05 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Tarjei Straume [mailto:tastraum online.no]
) On the one hand, the flier may be defended because it seeks to make WE
) somewhat comprehensible to the borader public at a quick
) glance. On the
) other hand, there may be an element of spiritual cowardice at
) work here - a
) temptation that Rudolf Steiner warned against. What he warned
) against was
) the tendency to represent anthroposophically oriented
) spiritual science to
) the public as if it were exactly like secular natural
) science.
Do you mean to say that Steiner actually gave "indications" that
Waldorf schools and teachers should be forthright about disclosure? I had
been under the impression, based on comments by Waldorf Critics here, that
deception about the underlying foundations of the pedagogy was just what Dr.
Steiner ordered. Please help dispel the confusion, one way or another.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 22:56:13 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199903311636.IAA19084 lists1.best.com)
Ron Miller, you wrote,
)p.s. Dan, please unsubscribe me. And thanks for inviting me in. Good
)luck to you.
Not until you promise to copy each of your son's lesson books to me as it
is completed!
-Dan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:42:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904010024.QAA14114 lists1.best.com)
(199903312336.PAA03556 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904010056.QAA10119 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei, you wrote,
)What a tremendous relief that the copyright on Steiner's works expired in
)1995, 70 years after his death. Lefty's behavior is so unworthy of
)anthroposophy and a disgrace to its founder. It's something the
)Scientologists would do. But since I have encountered at least one
)"anthroposophist" who combines Steiner's ideas with those of Ron Hubbard,
)it wouldn't surprise me if Lefty also had "Dianetics" or Hubbard's policy
)against adversaries on his night table.
Lefty was upset about my quoting posts from the Waldorf list, not Steiner.
I have always acknowledged that the authors of posts to public mailing
lists have automatic implicit copyright on their writings, but also that it
is fair use to quote them in a subsequent discussion.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Joseph Chilton Pearce/David Elkind/Waldorf
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 00:54:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030038.QAA24191 lists1.best.com)
Lisa, you wrote,
) I also noticed that in at least on of prominent child development
)expert David Elkind's books (``The Hurried Child'') he praises Waldorf
)education are being tuned in to the development of the child and educating
)that child appropriately for each stage. Elkind even mentions that the change
)of teeth -- from the baby or milk teeth to permanent teeth -- is a sign of
)readiness for formal schooling. I had heard that at my Waldorf school and
)thought it sounded a bit wacky, like one of those things that I am not really
)going to buy. Then I turn around and see Elkind, a very respected and noted
)expert, say the same thing.
Elkind is a -popular- self-appointed expert. When Waldorfians started
quoting him for support I bought and read "The Hurried Child" (1981 revised
edition). I was disappointed. It is a work of -opinion- backed up by no
evidence. One footnote about the effect of early reading refers to a
study...reported in Sports Illustrated.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:27:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199903312202.OAA04020 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei, you wrote,
)You may be right about that. It is also my impression that Steiner
)misunderstood the young Einstein to begin with (his doctoral thesis of
)1905), but gradually came to admire him.
I don't think so. Steiner participated in the Einstein-bashing that was
part of the popular anti-intellectualism in Weimar Germany that also fed
the fires of anti-Semitism.
"The time is now that we ought to speak of such things, all the brilliant
nonsense which is called relativity theory through which Einstein became a
great man. This would be able to be rejected if one were to have clear
concepts about things, concepts which really correspond to the reality. ...
This idea doesn't have the slightest relationship to reality. This whole
unhealthy idea lives today as the theory of relativity and enjoys the
widest acclaim."
[Rudolf Steiner, The True Nature of Substance & Energy, August 7, 1917
(Rick Mansell translation, tape SL266, Rudolf Steiner Research Foundation,
Redondo Beach, California) The lecture of 7 Aug 1917 is the second lecture
in the KARMA OF MATERIALISM.]
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:32:55 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199903312202.OAA04020 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903312202.OAA04020 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199903312331.PAA23042 lists1.best.com)
Stephen Tonkin, you wrote,
)Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) wrote:
)) It is also my impression that Steiner
))misunderstood the young Einstein to begin with
)
)I agree, in spades. Mind you, that was noting compared to the
)spectacular balls-ups made by Ernst Lehrs in _Man or Matter_, where he
)demonstrates the "I don't understand it so it can't be true" syndrome
)(e.g. Chapter X) and goes on to promulgate the easily-falsifiable
)Goethean misconception that colour can arise simply as a result of an
)interplay between light and dark.
)
)Don't get me wrong, Tarjei -- I think Steiner and Goethe and Lehrs all
)had some valuable insights but, in the realm of the physical sciences,
)tehy all made some magnificent errors. Goethe and Steiner at least had
)the excuse of the times they lived in -- Lehrs, who survived into the
)latter part of this century, didn't.
When at the San Francisco Waldorf School I pointed out the absurdity of
teaching that Goethe refuted Newton, I was advised to read Lehrs. I did,
but I don't think it got the results the Waldorf teachers expected.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 01:52:47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (a9603dd2.2436ba37 aol.com)
Lisa, you wrote me privately, I'm answering you publicly. You wrote:
) You said that some of my statements on the development of the brain
)as associated with what Steiner wrote are a bunch of malarky. How so?
On March 19, just before you made your first post to the list, I posted the
text of an article about a Joseph Chilton Pierce lecture about
"neuro-cardiology." An excerpt:
"Research in neuro-cardiology has pointed out that the heart is the major
governor of intelligence. It is the heart that has the ability to respond
in a way that is "most intelligent" for the well-being of the body. The
brain has a way of "intellectualizing" and getting us in trouble, you may
have noticed."
This is the typical anti-intellectualism of romanticism, new-age
philosophy, and Waldorf: feelings are true, reason is false. IMHO a very
poor guide for life.
"How does the heart think? It actually has brain cells!"
This absurd assertion is followed by a description of embryonic development
in which I am not knowledgeable enough to untangle science from imagination.
A web search reveals no scientific sources for "neuro-cardiology" as
described by Pierce.
Here's a capsule description of another JCP presentation:
"From Vision to Reality in the 21st Century
Joseph Chilton Pearce: Effects of Technological Childbirth
"Neuro-cardiology is the hottest field in medicine, offering the most
startling discoveries of our century and throws new light on the critical
importance of re-instating non-technological birth, breastfeeding, and long
bonding. The heart plays an enormous role in embryonic formation, fetal
development, birth, bonding, immunities, DNS, and all subsequent
relationships throughout life. The heart is the controlling factor in the
action of hormones, the immune system, nervous system, and the
electro-magnetic field, all of which influence the brain. The synchrony of
heart and brain can get disrupted by the birth process and effect people
the rest of their lives resulting in 80% more frequent illness."
)From the program of an adoption conference:
"Thursday Professional Day & Friday Keynote Speaker - Joseph Chilton
Pearce... Internationally recognized for his compelling research on birth
and development, Joe is the author of six books including The Crack in the
Cosmic Egg, Magical Child and currently Evolution's End: Claiming the
Potential of Our Intelligence. In two unprecedented major addresses
"Adopting the Heart-Brain Factor" and "Bonding From the Heart" at these
adjacent adoption conferences, Joe will look at different aspects of his
recent focus on neuro-cardiology field research on heart-brain interaction
and the impact of this dynamic on a child's mental, emotional and physical
development...."
)From another adoption program:
"Joe will be presenting the pioneering research from the Institute of
HeartMath that proposes the existence of heart intelligence. The heart is a
key system which influences the hormonal and immune systems, the nervous
system, and produces the body's largest electro-magnetic field, all of
which influence the brain. Joe will address how the synchrony of heart and
brain can get disrupted by the birth process and affect people the rest of
their lives."
Those of us who have been studying quackery and pseudoscience for many
years recognize the signs. Check out the "Institute for Heartmath"
(http:www.heartmath.com) in Boulder Creek, CA. They sell stress-reduction
tapes and programs. The research papers they list are published in an
unlikely mix of journals; some legitimate, others obviously fringe like
"Proceedings of Integrating the Science and Art of Energy Medicine".
"Neuro-cardiology" is not an exciting new area in science; it's a new
pseudo-scientific buzzword, being promoted by one person, JCP.
I'm not putting you down for believing this stuff, Lisa. There's really no
way for a consumer to differentiate the real from the bogus when it's so
slickly presented.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.9 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: RE: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 12:28:27 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030914.BAA08865 lists1.best.com)
Bob Tolz wrote:
) Do you mean to say that Steiner actually gave "indications" that
)Waldorf schools and teachers should be forthright about disclosure? I had
)been under the impression, based on comments by Waldorf Critics here, that
)deception about the underlying foundations of the pedagogy was just what Dr.
)Steiner ordered. Please help dispel the confusion, one way or another.
I have no idea what Steiner said to Waldorf teachers about the schools. I
was referring to the public dissemination of spiritual science. I don't
remember the reference or the exact words, but Steiner said something to
the effect that some of his co-workers had tried to offer the materialists
a watered-down, secularized, and despiritualized anthroposophy that would
be more palatable to their prejudiced thinking. But Steiner always stressed
that spiritual science should assert itself boldly and openly in the face
of materialism. What the age needed was a spiritual renewal - a renewal
that would bring the living spirit of the Hierarchies, the gods, right into
the classrooms, the laboratories, into science and medicine, the
universities, the kindergartens, to the food table, the theater and the
arts - into literature, child-upbringing, and education. Today we see many
social ills that are the direct result of a life void of spirit, where
young people are denied access to a spiritual body of knowledge that gives
their existence meaning and places their struggles and sufferings in a
deeper and higher context they can understand? How many young people will
commit suicide, end up on Death Row, become junkies, and get wasted in so
many ways because the "mumbo jumbo" that this new age has to offer them is
suppressed and scorned?
I am beginning to get very annoyed with not only the Nazi-allegations, but
all these repetitions about Waldorf administrations lying and deceiving and
plotting and conspiring and sneaking around like thieves and muggers
because they don't spell this out on their flyers. They just don't have the
guts - it's that simple. It's nothing deceptive or dishonest about being
chicken what the spirit is concerned, what Christ is concerned. On the
contrary, it is very understandable in the face of hostile attitudes
encountered on this list - where even talk about the Christ Spirit, or
Christ Impulse, is compared to white supremacism! I understand that you
have a problem with the constitutional separation of church and state in
relation to Waldorf and public schools in America, and I don't envy you
that problem. But that is no reason to throw so much puke all over
anthroposophy and Rudolf Steiner.
Well, this was another raving from Uncle Taz. (I'm beginning to catch up
with the critics.) You see, I don't know if I have the patience to sit this
out for two or three years like so many others, so I'll just get it off my
chest while I'm here.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1190.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 21:54:25 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030554.VAA26011 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030624.WAA14036 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei Straume puts the gloss on a Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
school's representation of itself to the public:
)Alan Fine wrote:
)
))I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
))mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner.
))It
))mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. It
))speaks
))of the main lesson. It speaks of the power of sensuality and individual
))power. It quotes Herodotus and Albert Schweitzer. There is not a single
))mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
))teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
))spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of
))the
))doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is
))simply
))no doubt.
And Tarjei replies:
)On the one hand, the flier may be defended because it seeks to make WE
)somewhat comprehensible to the borader public at a quick glance.
Michael KOPP says:
Bwahahahahaaaa....Doctor Goebbels, eat your heart out, wherever you are.
STRAUME:
)On the
)other hand, there may be an element of spiritual cowardice at work here - a
)temptation that Rudolf Steiner warned against.
KOPP:
Yeah, and maybe they're going by another warning of Steiner's, to hide the
true nature of Anthroposophy and Waldorf Education from the prospective
parent customeers and from the public and from the state.
Spiritual cowardice? Not from the arrogant Anthropops I've known.
Smoke screens don't hide reality, Tarjei -- save your blather.
[snip]
STRAUME:
)So I agree with you wholeheartedly, Alan - it sounds like a lousy flyer.
)Somebody imbued with the living spirit of anthroposophy should march into
)that school and give those people a real shake-up.
KOPP:
As I reported in another post here sometime in the last few months, I
recently attended a prospective customers parents evening lecture at my
children's former Steiner school. I heard nothing -- nada, zip, nil, zero
-- in three hours, about Anthroposophy, the spiritual underpinnings of the
school, or any of the other things critics say should be openly disclosed.
What I did hear was waffle and cant and a putdown of the public school
system and more baffle-gab about the parents questions about such things as
late reading. It was a travesty.
And I have it down verbatim in my written notes.
Tarjei, the emperor's new threads are getting more and more transparent,
and your weaving of excuses and faux dismay are like crystal glass.
Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical schools engage in deliberate false
advertising, lie to prospective customers, and dupe them into signing
contracts that they understand the nature of the education. This is
reprehensible.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1190 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1191 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Projective Geometry
003 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Projective Geometry
004 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
005 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Projective Geometry
006 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Projective Geometry
007 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
008 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Projective Geometry
009 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
010 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 22:07:06 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904020750.XAA09814 lists1.best.com)
(199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199903310922.BAA25572 lists1.best.com)
(199904010632.WAA21415 lists1.best.com)
(199904010936.BAA08342 lists1.best.com)
(199904011248.EAA22739 lists1.best.com)
(199904011646.IAA09287 lists1.best.com)
(199904020002.QAA27011 lists1.best.com)
(199904020030.QAA20818 lists1.best.com)
(199904020750.XAA09814 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030638.WAA23238 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz) wrote:
))))Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
))
))Stephen, try an Internet search on that phrase -- I'm sure it'll make your
))day.
)
)OK, Michael, did that -- part of something that is used as a filler? Are
)you going to tell me why..?
)
)In blissful ignorance,
)Stephen
Okay, Stephen, it's like this. It's a Latin version of a Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical text. I think it means something like ...
You can fool all of the people some of the time,
You can fool some of the people all of the time ...
But you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
There, does that help?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 22:00:25 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030554.VAA26011 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030624.WAA14036 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei Straume writes:
)Alan Fine wrote:
)
))I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
))mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner.
))It
))mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. It
))speaks
))of the main lesson. It speaks of the power of sensuality and individual
))power. It quotes Herodotus and Albert Schweitzer. There is not a single
))mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
))teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
))spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of
))the
))doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is
))simply
))no doubt.
And STRAUME replied (after more baffle-gab):
)So I agree with you wholeheartedly, Alan - it sounds like a lousy flyer.
)Somebody imbued with the living spirit of anthroposophy should march into
)that school and give those people a real shake-up.
Michael KOPP says:
And what would you have this person, "imbued with the living spirit of
Anthroposophy", tell the school to do?
Hire a PR firm to tell a little more of the truth in an even less revealing
way?
(They probably wouldn't have to hire one; there's probably a good
professional, paid lier already in the school community who would
volunteer.)
Do you think the school should use disclosure document written by Daniel
Saykaly, and posted here frequently, which has never been substantively
refuted by anyone on this list as not being a true picture of SWA?
Tell us, Tarjei, what would YOU tell the school to say?
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
(Who has been a PR person, for good causes like national parks, and the Red
Cross, but who found that even there he had to tell too many lies -- yes,
the Red Cross has skeletons -- and went back to real journalism.)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.3 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 22:24:34 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904020634.WAA29481 lists1.best.com)
(199904020300.TAA03334 lists1.best.com)
(199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
(199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904021048.CAA19567 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery writes:
)Michael Kopp:
)
))It's the _practice_ of a religion with the children as _objects_ of that
))religion, one which says that the rituals of projective geometry will
))influence the soul development of the children, and the sneaky part is
))that
))the teachers, per Steiner's orders, treat the children as if they belonged
))to the _teachers_, not the parents, and to keep the knowledge of what the
))teachers do, Anthroposophically, from the parents. As also with
))Anthroposphical child development studies, about which parents are told
))nothing.
))
))Come on, Robert, don't be so disingenuouos.
)
)
)Well yes, you're quite right if you mean to say that this general statement
)has appeared in the archives before.
)
)What I'm requesting is specifics.
[snip]
So go look in the archives for the specifics. They are there. These issues
have been covered in detail. I'm sorry that I don't have time to write an
index or FAQ (unless someone can find me a grant to pay for groceries while
I do it).
I apologize to any newcomers to the list who are offended or feel it is my
duty to provide details; but Flannery KNOWS the evidence is there, he's
just trying to make me waste my time and this list's bandwidth, or hoping
that I won't take the time and he can therefore rubbish my views as
unsubstantiated.
Dan Dugan is ususally the one who provides the citations and quotes, as he
has a voluminous library of original source material that he knows well. I
do it only when there's an overwhelming need. At the moment I don't have
the time.
)I think you may be on to something with regard to the anthroposophical
)child studies which I would enjoy pursuing. I would encourage you (or
)anyone else) to describe any questions or issues related to this practice
)under a separate heading--I'll be happy to take it up.
Why don't you just go ahead and start your own thread? I'll be happy to put
in my two cents worth.
And, regarding requests for specifics, my tally of posts from the two sides
shows that there are far more unanswered questions on the Defenders' side
than the critics' side. Seems the Defenders want to have it both ways: the
critics should do both their own homework, and the Defenders' homework too.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.4 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 13:18:42 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903281543.HAA12246 lists1.best.com)
Kathy wrote:
) Could someone on this list clarify for me exactly what biodynamic gardening
) is. Are there spiritual beliefs that underly the specific practices that
) would define biodynamic gardening? What must one do to garden
) biodynamically?
)
) Thanks for your input.
First, I want to say that I¥m very unhappy about what happened to you as
a teacher in a school, transformed into a public waldorf school. As I¥ve
said in another post, I don¥t think existing schools with public
teachers should be "taken over" and "transformed", "reeducating"
teachers who have no choice if they don¥t want to become unemployed.
A waldorf school in the south of Stockholm: "Martinskolan", started in
about 1980 on the premises of a public school that had been closed down.
But it was _completely_ closed and only the building remained, when it
started up as a new waldorf school.
As for biodynamic gardening and farming, I¥ve been trying to look around
on the Internet for information.
Some results:
http://www.steinercollege.org/anthrop/sn.html contains a sort of
introductory general summary on the subject.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/biobaby/contentslist.html describes the
contents of the lecture cycle by Rudolf Steiner, on which biodynamic
farming is based; "Spiritual Foundations for the Renewal of
Agriculture", held in 1924. It costs about $22 and can bo ordered from
Amazon books
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/093725035X/hppubli00/002-9405429-9092808).
Se also http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/AFSIC_pubs/srb9705u.htm and
http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/AFSIC_pubs/srb97-05.htm
What is Biodynamic Agriculture? by Koepf (one of the pioneers of
biodynamic farming) at $2.50 can be ordered from The Josephine Porter
Institute of Applied Biodynamics in Woolwine WA see
http://igg.com/spiritual_ag/european/steiner/jpi/jpibks.html#steinerag.
http://web0.tiac.net/users/seeker/biodyn.html contains a text: What Is
Biodynamic Farming? by a Melvin D. Saunders.
How biodynamic gardening is taught in waldorf schools, if or when
taught, I don¥t know. My personal experience of biodynamic farmers and
gardeners is that are very down to earth people, working and talking in
very concrete ways about their work.
As for the "theoretical" basis of biodynamic farming, my impression is
that most biodynamic farmers and gardeners have great difficulties
really understanding it.
Research done on the effect of different biodynamic preparations is
often clear, yet sometimes showing contradictory results under different
conditions that are difficult to analyze because of the complexity of
field research.
Finally, when looking around on the web, I came across an interesting
description of "anthroposophy, Rudolph Steiner (1861ñ1925) and Waldorf
Schools" in a "Sceptics dictionary", put up by a Robert Todd Carroll,
at It can be found at
http://wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us/~btcarrol/skeptic/steiner.html and
http://skepdic.com/steiner.html
The dictionary contains no specific entry on biodynamic farming.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.5 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 06:32:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030554.VAA26011 lists1.best.com)
I said:
))Your example is met by the simplest disclosure found in all waldorf school
))literature: "Anthroposophy serves as a foundation for the curriculum in a
))waldorf school".
))
))I have seen that statement, or its equivalent, in every piece of
))promotional waldorf literature I've come across.
To which Alan Fine replied:
)I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
)mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner. It
)mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. It speaks
)of the main lesson. It speaks of the power of sensuality and individual
)power. It quotes Herodotus and Albert Schweitzer. There is not a single
)mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
)teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
)spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of the
)doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is simply
)no doubt.
Thank you, Alan, for once again reminding me that there is no such thing as
an absolute (especially when it comes to dialogue on this list).
I would now amend my original statement, quoted above:
"Your example is met by the simplest disclosure found in most waldorf
school literature: 'Anthroposophy serves as a foundation for the
curriculum in a waldorf school'.
I have seen that statement, or its equivalent, in every piece of
promotional waldorf literature I've encountered personally. While the use
of such language is not universal, it certainly should be. If a waldorf
school does not make this fact clear in its materials, for whatever reason,
it is failing to disclose the most basic element of its pedagogy."
Thanks again for the clarification. I stand corrected.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.6 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 13:46:02 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030624.WAA14036 lists1.best.com)
(199904030554.VAA26011 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904031036.CAA05004 lists1.best.com)
(!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN")
(html)
(head)
(style type="text/css")(!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--)(/style)
(title)
Re: Projective Geometry
(/title)
(/head)
(body)
(div)I wrote:(br)
>(br)
>>So I agree with you wholeheartedly, Alan - it sounds like a
lousy flyer.(br)
>>Somebody imbued with the living spirit of anthroposophy
should march into(br)
>>that school and give those people a real shake-up.(br)
>(br)
>Michael KOPP says:(br)
>(br)
>And what would you have this person, "imbued with the living
spirit of(br)
>Anthroposophy", tell the school to do?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)I never tell anyone what to do. Giving them a real shak-up means
awakening the Spirit in them and encouraging them to give people
sunshine rather than fog.(br)
(br)
>Hire a PR firm to tell a little more of the truth in an even less
revealing(br)
>way?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)So you are accusing me of disguising the truth, making it
"less revealing"? I am sneaking around, whispering to
people that they should tip-toe and hide their true selves? Is that
how you perceive me, Michael - just because I am an anthroposophist?
Gosh, you're a lot more prejudiced and slanderous than I thought
possible. Let me remind you what Christ says in Matthew (font
color="#000000")5:15:(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")(br)(/font)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000")"Neither do men light a candle, and
put it under a bushel, but on(br)
a candlestick; and it gives light unto all that are in
the house.(/font)(font size="+2")"(br)
(/font)(br)
>(They probably wouldn't have to hire one; there's probably a
good(br)
>professional, paid lier already in the school community who
would(br)
>volunteer.)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)The school is paying someone to go out and lie - ?(br)
(br)
>Do you think the school should use disclosure document written by
Daniel(br)
>Saykaly, and posted here frequently, which has never been
substantively(br)
>refuted by anyone on this list as not being a true picture of
SWA?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Like I said, I wont tell a school what to do. But I don't think
that any anti-anthroposophist is qualified to compose what a Waldorf
school should present to the public.(/div)
(div)(br)
>Tell us, Tarjei, what would YOU tell the school to say?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)I wouldn't. I believe them perfectly capable of speaking for
themselves. But if that disappoints you, here you go: "We are a
criminal gang of lying, cheating, child-molesting, deceiving, evil,
ignorant, gullible, brainwashed twits and sons of bitches who are out
to destroy your children."(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Satisfied?(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Tarjei(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)P.S. Unsubscribe me, Dan. I've had enough of this garbage.(br)
(/div)
(div)http://www.uncletaz.com/(/div)
(/body)
(/html)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.7 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 13:45:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030908.BAA06602 lists1.best.com)
Robert (Tolz) wrote, commenting on:
) ) At "Kristofferskolan", the largest and oldest waldorf school
) ) in Sweden, prospective parents some years ago had to participate
) ) in an obligatory introductory course on waldorf education
) ) before putting the children into the school. I don¥t know about
) ) the sitution now, but expect it not to have changed.
) I would have expected a school with such a name to offer more
) freedom to the parents.
It¥s one way of handling the problems discussed on this list.
) Sorry, that's just a bad joke. We'll see whether anybody on the
) list gets it besides me.
You demand mythological knowledge? Maybe Dan can contribute.
Cheers,
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.8 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 07:30:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904021048.CAA19567 lists1.best.com)
(199904020634.WAA29481 lists1.best.com)
(199904020300.TAA03334 lists1.best.com)
(199904020230.SAA08754 lists1.best.com)
(199904011651.IAA12407 lists1.best.com) (73051653 toto.iv)
(199903301944.LAA21348 lists1.best.com)
(199903301844.KAA09731 lists1.best.com)
(199903310518.VAA11198 lists1.best.com)
(199903311438.GAA15002 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904031036.CAA05029 lists1.best.com)
My plea:
))What I'm requesting is specifics.
Michael Kopp's refutation:
)So go look in the archives for the specifics. They are there. These issues
)have been covered in detail. I'm sorry that I don't have time to write an
)index or FAQ (unless someone can find me a grant to pay for groceries while
)I do it).
)
)I apologize to any newcomers to the list who are offended or feel it is my
)duty to provide details; but Flannery KNOWS the evidence is there, he's
)just trying to make me waste my time and this list's bandwidth, or hoping
)that I won't take the time and he can therefore rubbish my views as
)unsubstantiated.
)
)Dan Dugan is ususally the one who provides the citations and quotes, as he
)has a voluminous library of original source material that he knows well. I
)do it only when there's an overwhelming need. At the moment I don't have
)the time.
You always have plenty of time to make these broad accusations. Now you
try to beg off when I ask you to substantiate your claims?
There's absolutely no evidence in the archives that supports your
contentions that any aspect of the curriculum in a waldorf school imparts
anthroposophy to the children, either knowingly or unknowingly--recall that
what I'm asking for is not the same as the isolated examples of boob
teachers teaching anthroposophy or new-age ideas as fact.
I'm not interested in a rehash of your stories about the pyramids and sound
power or dactylic hexameter or anything else you've already talked
about--what I'm looking for specifically is something you can describe
which would back up your statement about projective geometry:
))It's the _practice_ of a religion with the children as _objects_ of that
))religion, one which says that the rituals of projective geometry will
))influence the soul development of the children, and the sneaky part is
))that
))the teachers, per Steiner's orders, treat the children as if they belonged
))to the _teachers_, not the parents, and to keep the knowledge of what the
))teachers do, Anthroposophically, from the parents.
If I'm being forgetful, pardon me, but I don't recall anything you've
already posted which substantiates any of this.
I'll let you in on the only tactical script I follow: when I see something
stated that appears to me to be totally speculative, I ask for evidence.
I ask for two reasons. First, I read many of these vague criticisms as
overblown or groundless. Kathy's descriptions of waldorf gardening classes
would fall into this category--she has now admitted that she has no
experience on which to base such characterizations.
Secondly, I have always felt that some of the critical material encountered
here is on point, and useful to anyone interested in making waldorf
education better. Alan Fine has just pointed out to me that the
relationship of anthroposophy to waldorf education is not always as clear
as it should be--I appreciate this.
In the last three or four months, I have challenged you on a number of
occasions. Most of these involve your claims that there is some sort of an
institutional bent in waldorf schools to inculcate anthroposophy into the
hearts and minds of unsuspecting children, in every minute of every day,
via some sort of osmosis. You have yet to answer me substantially.
Here's a claim you made on 17 January:
)No education is for the children alone, despite the arrogant (and sinister)
)grab for childrens hearts and minds (and souls, too) by Steiner/ Waldorf/
)Anthroposophical cultists.
)
)This is mind control, and is no better than that practiced by any other
)totalitarian regime or religious cult (mainstream or fundamentalist).
I'm not interested in another review of pseudoscience in NZ--I've always
accepted your stories at face value (although seeing the number of times
you've attributed my military service and quotes to Bob Tolz makes me
wonder at your accuracy, I must admit). Just give me some solid evidence
of how waldorf education indoctrinates children with the dictates of
anthroposophy on a regular basis. While you're at it, find some support
for this notion that Steiner encouraged waldorf teachers to disregard
parents and treat children as their own property.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.9 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 08:51:21 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have skipped the thread here because I am no expert, but Gardening is
taught in almost all German FWS (possible all); I also received gardening
lessons when I was at (waldrof) school.
If there is still a need could SOMEONE state what still remains unresolved?
Maybe this is one of Michaels statistics?
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1191.10 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 08:51:17 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 03.04.99 12:04:12 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
dan dandugan.com:
) When at the San Francisco Waldorf School I pointed out the absurdity of
) teaching that Goethe refuted Newton, I was advised to read Lehrs. I did,
) but I don't think it got the results the Waldorf teachers expected.
)
Who told you that Goethe refuted Newton, the teachers or a Goethe biography?
As I understand Goethe he had a great respect for Newton, and nowhere does he
(IMHO) refute him.
Bruce
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1191 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1192 --------------
001 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Projective Geometry
002 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
003 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: malarky
004 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: malarky
005 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
006 - Kevin Houston (Kevin urly - Off Topic - Kosovo Link
007 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
008 - ksutphen jps.net - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
009 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
010 - ksutphen jps.net - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.1 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 08:51:18 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In einer eMail vom 03.04.99 12:45:08 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
mkopp xtra.co.nz:
Michael Kopp:
) And, regarding requests for specifics, my tally of posts from the two sides
) shows that there are far more unanswered questions on the Defenders' side
) than the critics' side. Seems the Defenders want to have it both ways: the
) critics should do both their own homework, and the Defenders' homework too.
Does you "tally" allow you to repeat the actual questions or only their
statistical significance? I would like to see a resume of what is outstanding
- maybe (and it is quite probable) I missed something!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.2 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 10:05:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com) (199904030954.BAA21770 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) Tarjei, you wrote,
)
) )You may be right about that. It is also my impression that Steiner
) )misunderstood the young Einstein to begin with (his doctoral thesis of
) )1905), but gradually came to admire him.
[DAN DUGAN]
) I don't think so. Steiner participated in the Einstein-bashing that was
) part of the popular anti-intellectualism in Weimar Germany that also fed
) the fires of anti-Semitism.
[snip Steiner quote from 1917, criticizing Einstein]
Dan,
All you've done is support the first leg (in time) of what Tarjei
wrote. You've taken a snapshot rather than given us a movie. Can you
(or Tarjei) help us out with the "gradually came to admire him" comment
by Tarjei?
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.3 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 10:30:29 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) )[LISA] You said that some of my statements on the development of the brain
) )as associated with what Steiner wrote are a bunch of malarky. How so?
)
) On March 19, just before you made your first post to the list, I posted the
) text of an article about a Joseph Chilton Pierce lecture about
) "neuro-cardiology." An excerpt:
)
) "Research in neuro-cardiology has pointed out that the heart is the major
) governor of intelligence. It is the heart that has the ability to respond
) in a way that is "most intelligent" for the well-being of the body. The
) brain has a way of "intellectualizing" and getting us in trouble, you may
) have noticed."
)
) This is the typical anti-intellectualism of romanticism, new-age
) philosophy, and Waldorf: feelings are true, reason is false. IMHO a very
) poor guide for life.
)
I didn't have much time to spend on a web search on neurocardiology,
and I didn't really try to find anything which said that Pierce's
"romantic" claims are true, but I did find the following in a review of
a new text entitled Neurocardiology, edited by J. Andrew Armour and
Jeffrey L.Ardell, which refers to the heart as a "little brain":
"Many of the leading-edge discoveries presented in Neurocardiology
challenge currently held concepts of cardiac regulation. Of particular
note is the newly emerging understanding of the structure and function
of the intrinsic cardiac nervous system. Composed of afferent, local
circuit and efferent sympathetic and parasympathetic neurons capable of
generating spontaneous activity independent of inputs from central
neurons and other intrathoracic neurons, the intrinsic cardiac ganglia
are described as much more than simple relay stations for autonomic
input to the heart. Multiple lines of evidence that point to the
capacity of intrinsic cardiac neurons to communicate among themselves,
with other body parts and with the central nervous system are discussed
in detail, and offer a new understanding of the intrinsic cardiac
nervous system as a functional "little brain" within the heart. The
concepts clearly mapped out in this groundbreaking volume not only
challenge us to revise portions of our current view of cardiac
regulation, but also invite the development of enriched strategies to
manipulate cardiac function in disease states. Neurocardiology is highly
recommended for those with a background in neurophysiology who seek to
update and enhance their understanding of neural regulation of the
heart."
Full review at
http://www.webcom.com/~hrtmath/IHM/Library/Reviews/Neurocardiology.html
Did your web search pick up that one, Dan? It seems to suggest that
current scientific research is pointing to a conclusion that the heart
is not just a dumb pump.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.4 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 10:48:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
Sorry, but what's turning up in my web search is perhaps relevant to
those interested in research into "heart-evoked" phenomena. At
http://www.mpipsykl.mpg.de/html/strian.htm is the following discussion:
"More recently, we have set up "objective" electrophysiological methods
to measure brain activity in relation to heart activity. In analogy to
our investigations of sensory-evoked potentials, we are studying
heart-evoked potentials. Some difficult methodological problems of the
approch have been solved satisfactorily, namely the exploration and the
treatment of the cardiac electrical field artifact, but some other
important issues are still under debate. Our observational data contain
reliable findings on the existence of heart cycle-related brain
activity. However, we have so far not been able to trace back the
generation of the potential to cortical structures. Whether the
projection area lies in the frontal cortex as other investigators have
hypothesized or in the deep insular cortex (cf. animal and PET studies)
or whether it is to be found in the somatosensory cortex, which is in
good accordance with our data, cannot be decided yet."
And at http://www.webcom.com/~hrtmath/IHM/ro/hro/hintro2.html, you'll
find a pretty lengthy article describing several researchers' theories
and findings about "the heart appeared to be sending meaningful messages
to the brain which it not only understood but obeyed."
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.5 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 10:51:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030908.BAA06602 lists1.best.com) (199904031148.DAA26099 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
) Robert (Tolz) wrote, commenting on:
)
) ) ) At "Kristofferskolan", the largest and oldest waldorf school
) ) ) in Sweden, prospective parents some years ago had to participate
) ) ) in an obligatory introductory course on waldorf education
) ) ) before putting the children into the school. I don¥t know about
) ) ) the sitution now, but expect it not to have changed.
)
) ) I would have expected a school with such a name to offer more
) ) freedom to the parents.
)
)
) ) Sorry, that's just a bad joke. We'll see whether anybody on the
) ) list gets it besides me.
)
) You demand mythological knowledge? Maybe Dan can contribute.
)
A hint: my stint as a disc jockey at the college radio station in the
70's gives me a better position than many people to make that joke, such
as it is.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.6 ---------------
From: Kevin Houston (Kevin urly-bird.com)
Subject: Off Topic - Kosovo Link
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 14:08:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
I'm not trying to start a Kosovo thread here, I just thought I would pass
on a link to a very informative and very neutral site:
http://www.stratfor.com/crisis/kosovo/default.htm
It is being written by a company that does private intelligence work for
businesses.
Check out their Jan 4th, 1999 predicition about this war. in the global
intelligence update section
http://www.stratfor.com/crisis/kosovo/giu.htm
For the record, and if you want to discuss this off list with me, I think
the US has no business there.
Kevin
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.7 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 21:33:03 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904030908.BAA06602 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030908.BAA06602 lists1.best.com)
Tolz, Robert (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) wrote:
)) From: Sune Nordwall [mailto:Sune.Nordwall home.se]
)
))
)) At "Kristofferskolan",
) I would have expected a school with such a name to offer more
)freedom to the parents.
)
) Sorry, that's just a bad joke. We'll see whether anybody on the
)list gets it besides me.
Bobby McGee ain't on this list....
Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
Stephen
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
+ (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.8 ---------------
From: ksutphen jps.net
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 14:46:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Robert Flannery posted:
)First off, as I said in an earlier post, I don't know much about
)biodynamics--I know even less about how gardening is taught in waldorf
)schools.
(snip - more about bd gardening)
)
)But more to the point, I'm not interested in taking up your offer--I began
)this thread in order to challenge your claim that a waldorf gardening
)program is a vehicle for anthroposophical dogma.
But you haven't challenged my claim at all. I keep asking you to do so, but
it seems you simply want to needle me about my suspicions that a
Waldorf-based gardening curriculum would be steeped in Anthroposophical
beliefs. I have simply asked that someone tell me what they know about the
subject. If you have nothing to say on the issue, I wish you would have made
that clear in your initial post.
Once again, it is my suspicion that bd gardening ala Waldorf would be like
the rest of the curriculum - based on Anthroposophical spiritualism. I'm
interested on what the unique beliefs/criteria are to practice bd gardening
and how this is expressed on the curriculum level. For example: are all the
practices the same (inside and outside the context of a Waldorf school), but
the students simply aren't informed of the underlying beliefs for various bd
practices? This would make it like the rest of the Waldorf
curriculum/pedagogy I experienced.
)Unlike you, I'm not going to make any claims about the content of such a
)program without any relevant personal experience.
Good for you. This was your opportunity to tell me it ain't so.
I also asked if you are a Waldorf teacher. I think I recall that you are,
but perhaps I have you mixed up with another contributor.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.9 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 20:35:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030908.BAA06602 lists1.best.com) (199904032108.NAA28854 lists1.best.com)
Can't put one past Stephen Tonkin. He even got my Malvinas reference a
month ago!
Stephen Tonkin wrote:
)
) Tolz, Robert (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) wrote:
) )) From: Sune Nordwall [mailto:Sune.Nordwall home.se]
) )
) ))
) )) At "Kristofferskolan",
) ) I would have expected a school with such a name to offer more
) )freedom to the parents.
) )
) ) Sorry, that's just a bad joke. We'll see whether anybody on the
) )list gets it besides me.
)
) Bobby McGee ain't on this list....
)
) Noctis Gaudia Carpe,
) Stephen
)
) --
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
) + Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astronomy Books +
) + (N50.9105 W1.829) | (http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk) +
) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1192.10 ---------------
From: ksutphen jps.net
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 17:35:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sune posts:
)As for biodynamic gardening and farming, I¥ve been trying to look around
)on the Internet for information.
)
)Some results:
Thank you for your research. I appreciate the time it took for you to
respond to my question.
Kathy
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1192 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1193 --------------
001 - ksutphen jps.net - Re: Projective Geometry
002 - ksutphen jps.net - Re: Deceptive advertising (was Projective Geometry)
003 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
006 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: malarky
007 - David McKay (mckay oro.ne - RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
008 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
009 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
010 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - What is Anthroposophical Influence?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.1 ---------------
From: ksutphen jps.net
Subject: Re: Projective Geometry
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 17:41:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Flannery posts:
)I ask for two reasons. First, I read many of these vague criticisms as
)overblown or groundless. Kathy's descriptions of waldorf gardening classes
)would fall into this category--she has now admitted that she has no
)experience on which to base such characterizations.
Jeez Flannery. What do you mean I have "now admitted . . ." I said all along
that I had no experience with it, only my suspicions. Why don't you tell me
why my suspicions are *not* so. As far as I can surmise at this point in
time, every single exercise I engaged in during my Public School Waldorf
Teachers Training was based on Anthroposophical religious beliefs . . . all
of this without my informed consent.
Why don't you take an example of a bit of standard Waldorf School curriculum
and tell us why and how it is not based on an Anthroposophical belief? So
far you are all talk and no substance.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.2 ---------------
From: ksutphen jps.net
Subject: Re: Deceptive advertising (was Projective Geometry)
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 17:31:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alan Fine posts:
)))I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
)))mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner.
)))It
)))mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. (snip)
There is not a single
)))mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
)))teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
)))spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of
)))the
)))doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is
)))simply
)))no doubt.
A nearby Waldorf School located in Applegate, CA (next door to Weimar, CA)
runs an ad in the yellow pages of the phone book. It's a pretty good sized
ad. It states it is an art-based education . . . nothing about Steiner,
Anthroposophy, spiritualism, etc., etc.
I don't perceive this as cowardice, rather I consider it to be false
advertising. In regard to the current selling of Waldorf to public schools I
consider the lack to disclosure to be "Conspiracy to Defraud". I will look
up the actual California Penal Code # next week. I recently reviewed two
slick advertising films put out by the Rudolf Steiner College ala Betty
Staley. These were put together to sell the Waldorf curriculum to public
schools. One is "The Waldorf Promise" and the other is "Reviving the Art of
Education". (The names are subtle bits of slick selling points in and of
themselves.) Nowhere in these films is anthropsophy mentioned. This is not
accidental - it's deliberate.
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.3 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 14:00:15 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904031526.HAA29753 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz writes:
)Dan Dugan wrote:
)
))
)) )[LISA] You said that some of my statements on the development of
))the brain
)) )as associated with what Steiner wrote are a bunch of malarky. How so?
))
)) On March 19, just before you made your first post to the list, I posted
))the
)) text of an article about a Joseph Chilton Pierce lecture about
)) "neuro-cardiology." An excerpt:
))
)) "Research in neuro-cardiology has pointed out that the heart is the major
)) governor of intelligence. It is the heart that has the ability to respond
)) in a way that is "most intelligent" for the well-being of the body. The
)) brain has a way of "intellectualizing" and getting us in trouble, you may
)) have noticed."
))
)) This is the typical anti-intellectualism of romanticism, new-age
)) philosophy, and Waldorf: feelings are true, reason is false. IMHO a very
)) poor guide for life.
))
)
And TOLZ replies:
) I didn't have much time to spend on a web search on neurocardiology,
)and I didn't really try to find anything which said that Pierce's
)"romantic" claims are true, but I did find the following in a review of
)a new text entitled Neurocardiology, edited by J. Andrew Armour and
)Jeffrey L.Ardell, which refers to the heart as a "little brain":
)
)
)"Many of the leading-edge discoveries presented in Neurocardiology
)challenge currently held concepts of cardiac regulation. Of particular
)note is the newly emerging understanding of the structure and function
)of the intrinsic cardiac nervous system. Composed of afferent, local
)circuit and efferent sympathetic and parasympathetic neurons capable of
)generating spontaneous activity independent of inputs from central
)neurons and other intrathoracic neurons, the intrinsic cardiac ganglia
)are described as much more than simple relay stations for autonomic
)input to the heart. Multiple lines of evidence that point to the
)capacity of intrinsic cardiac neurons to communicate among themselves,
)with other body parts and with the central nervous system are discussed
)in detail, and offer a new understanding of the intrinsic cardiac
)nervous system as a functional "little brain" within the heart. The
)concepts clearly mapped out in this groundbreaking volume not only
)challenge us to revise portions of our current view of cardiac
)regulation, but also invite the development of enriched strategies to
)manipulate cardiac function in disease states. Neurocardiology is highly
)recommended for those with a background in neurophysiology who seek to
)update and enhance their understanding of neural regulation of the
)heart."
)
)Full review at
)http://www.webcom.com/~hrtmath/IHM/Library/Reviews/Neurocardiology.html
)
) Did your web search pick up that one, Dan? It seems to suggest that
)current scientific research is pointing to a conclusion that the heart
)is not just a dumb pump.
Michael KOPP says:
Mine did, and I agree with Dan's characterization of it as a commercial
venture based on pseudo-science, with little bits of truth sprinkled in for
the appearance of scientific acceptance.
The operative words in Robert Tolz's last paragraph are instructive in how
the whole scam of pseudo-science and Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy works:
"It *seems* to *suggest* that current *scientific* research is pointing to
a conclusion that the heart is not just a dumb pump".
A few papers in pseudo-scientific journals, and some research by one person
at the National Institute for Mental Health (a place notorious to the
orthodox scientific community as a hotbed of irreplicable pseudo-science)
does not constitute any movement pointing towards any of the fanciful
nonsense so beloved of Anthropops and gullibles of all types.
"A few papers" does not make a tidal wave of a new paradigm in science.
"Neurocardiology" is a neologism of pseudo-science. It is not an accepted
field of research or practice. In my Internet search for the word, the ONLY
hit was the HeartMath outfit. A totally commercial, new-age-sucker-bait
self-help outfit, by the look of their Web site.
I searched a number of orthodox science sites on the Web for any hint of
new research that shows the heart to have the magical powers ascribed to it
in this mumbo jumbo movement of pseudo-scientist and Anthroposophist and
others. I couldn't find a single thing.
I am a regular reader of New Scientist magazine and Scientific American,
the two most popular sources of information for the general public. I don't
read Nature or Science because I'm not a practicing scientist, I'm only a
science reporter (somewhat retired). Both of these magazines are good at
reporting the outer limits of traditional science, and the more credible of
the fringe researchers. Both of them have a reputation for good journalism.
I have not seen anything in the last five years in any of these sources
that remotely leads to the conclusion that Robert Tolz seems to want to
draw: "`science' is moving towards confirming the beliefs of Anthroposohy
and the `spiritual science' of Rudolf Steiner".
I am perfectly willing to accept that some researcher could have found
something new regarding the relationship between the heart and the rest of
the body. People are finding these things all the time. When the research
is done by reputable people, it is reported in reputable journals -- not
the fringe, "frontier" journals like the one that Ralph Marinelli's "heart
is not a pump" paper was published in.
Marinelli's `work' has not achieved a single mention in any mainstream
publication, nor has any other worker, `Anthroposophical scientist',
`Goethean scientist', or mainstream scientist, even bothered to try to
replicate his `findings'.
Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
In the meantime, huge and increasing numbers of gullible people who WANT to
believe in *something*, *anything*, magical, supernatural, or more than is
real in our everyday lives, and the entrepreneurs and religious cultists,
will turn these fringe "discoveries" -- pseudo-science -- into cash cows
and orthodox dogmas.
Robert Tolz has challenged me, in another post, to show specific evidence
for all the assertions I have made over my 3-1/2 years here. He says I
can't because all I have done is make unsupported claims or harped on my
personal experience in only one Steiner school.
Bullshit. The evidence is there. Tolz is engaging in the propaganda
technique of calling white black; the theory is that if he does it enough
times, people will begin believing that black is white.
I challenge him (as I and other critics always do with such assertions as
"It seems to suggest that current scientific research is pointing to a
conclusion that the heart is not just a dumb pump") to provide credible
citations, of more than a single, unknown researcher, to back up this
ludicrous statement.
How about it, Tolz? Find the list of papers, find the reputable, impartial
reporting of these incredible, breakthrough "discoveries", list them for
us, give us the bona fides of the researchers (who, for example, is Ralph
Marinelli, and what are his qualifications?), and make a case for how that
supports your outlandish claim.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 14:24:39 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904031544.HAA06866 lists1.best.com)
Robet Tolz says:
)Sorry, but what's turning up in my web search is perhaps relevant to
)those interested in research into "heart-evoked" phenomena. At
)http://www.mpipsykl.mpg.de/html/strian.htm is the following discussion:
)
)"More recently, we have set up "objective" electrophysiological methods
)to measure brain activity in relation to heart activity. In analogy to
)our investigations of sensory-evoked potentials, we are studying
)heart-evoked potentials. Some difficult methodological problems of the
)approch have been solved satisfactorily, namely the exploration and the
)treatment of the cardiac electrical field artifact, but some other
)important issues are still under debate. Our observational data contain
)reliable findings on the existence of heart cycle-related brain
)activity. However, we have so far not been able to trace back the
)generation of the potential to cortical structures. Whether the
)projection area lies in the frontal cortex as other investigators have
)hypothesized or in the deep insular cortex (cf. animal and PET studies)
)or whether it is to be found in the somatosensory cortex, which is in
)good accordance with our data, cannot be decided yet."
)
)And at http://www.webcom.com/~hrtmath/IHM/ro/hro/hintro2.html, you'll
)find a pretty lengthy article describing several researchers' theories
)and findings about "the heart appeared to be sending meaningful messages
)to the brain which it not only understood but obeyed."
Michael KOPP says:
My understanding of this, and some other synopses I've seen of work
mentioned by the HeartMath outfit, is that this research relates to the
physiological functioning of the autonomic nervous system and organs such
as the heart which are controlled by it.
The idea that the heart (or any other organ) originates signals from cells
that are interpreted by the brain and relayed back the heart to cause it to
do something is not that far-fetched, nor unlikely.
It certainly doesn't mean that the heart has some sort of sentience, or
even some form of higher nervous activity that would be the equivalent of
information processing and control by the autonomic centres of the brain
and nervous system.
These researchers' reports make the mistake, I believe, of
anthropomorphizing, or using language inappropriate to a scientific
understanding of what they are talking about. To say that the heart
"appeared to be sending meaningful messages" is misleading because we think
of "messages" as consisting of coherent thought and higher meaning. While a
"message" in physiology and neurology may indeed be coherent and have
meaning for the brain and nervous system, it is not the same as messages
that contain thought and higher meaning. The heart does not have to have
sentience or higher information processing ability in order to do what
these researcher say.
Why this happens I don't know; I certainly don't think it's because the
researchers (unless they of the pseudo-scientific sort, like
"Anthroposophical scientists") believe that the heart has sentience.
The application of this research in medical science, say, may indeed be
practicable, after a very large amount of research on the meaning to human
physiology of the discovered phenomena.
But to base an entire new-age human-potential BUSINESS on it is to
fraudulently use science as pseudo-science.
These scams usually also include the assertion that the `science' *proves*
some `spiritual' or `inner' powers of the human being in some way that only
_their_ method or philosophy or religion knows how to make practicable by
ordinary people. For *money*, or for *joining* (which often leads to
contributing money).
This is known as "health fraud", and there is a backlash movement against
it on the Internet and in, particularly, U.S. society.
There is every reason to believe that "Anthroposophical medicine", with its
homeopathy and "Weleda" chemical preparations, is just such a health fraud
scam.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 15:08:50 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904032254.OAA21169 lists1.best.com)
Kathy Sutphen wrote:
)Robert Flannery posted:
)
))First off, as I said in an earlier post, I don't know much about
))biodynamics--I know even less about how gardening is taught in waldorf
))schools.
)
)(snip - more about bd gardening)
))
))But more to the point, I'm not interested in taking up your offer--I began
))this thread in order to challenge your claim that a waldorf gardening
))program is a vehicle for anthroposophical dogma.
)
)But you haven't challenged my claim at all. I keep asking you to do so, but
)it seems you simply want to needle me about my suspicions that a
)Waldorf-based gardening curriculum would be steeped in Anthroposophical
)beliefs. I have simply asked that someone tell me what they know about the
)subject. If you have nothing to say on the issue, I wish you would have
)made
)that clear in your initial post.
)
)Once again, it is my suspicion that bd gardening ala Waldorf would be like
)the rest of the curriculum - based on Anthroposophical spiritualism. I'm
)interested on what the unique beliefs/criteria are to practice bd gardening
)and how this is expressed on the curriculum level. For example: are all the
)practices the same (inside and outside the context of a Waldorf school),
)but
)the students simply aren't informed of the underlying beliefs for various
)bd
)practices? This would make it like the rest of the Waldorf
)curriculum/pedagogy I experienced.
)
))Unlike you, I'm not going to make any claims about the content of such a
))program without any relevant personal experience.
)
)Good for you. This was your opportunity to tell me it ain't so.
)
)I also asked if you are a Waldorf teacher. I think I recall that you are,
)but perhaps I have you mixed up with another contributor.
Michael KOPP says:
My children, when at a Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical school, were not
"taught" even the rudimentary elements of gardening and horticulture (no
real agriculture, it's an urban school with no large flat ground to plant)
whether ordinary or biodynamic.
This does not mean that they didn't DO gardening; they did, quite a lot of
it.
But it was never explained to them in either orthodox scientific terms or
folk terms or Anthroposphical terms or biodynamic principles.
However, they did certain things only at certain times; they did most
things in ways which seemed unusual to them; and they used "Preparation
500" and other things that are well-known as biodynamic agents.
And as my son formed a relationship with a classmate in the school who was
the daughter of one of the main Anthroposophical families, both parents
being teachers in the school, my son (a scientifically-minded skeptic long
*before* going to a Steiner school) brought home tales of how the teachers
planned and carried out the gardening activities of the students according
to biodynamic principles.
The school also offered evening sessions for parents interested in learning
about biodynamic principles, and all the school's landscaping and amenities
were planned and executed (mostly by volunteer parent labour, when not done
by students themselves) according to biodynamic principles.
So, in fact, my children were participating in relious rites without my
permission, engaging in activities not just informed by, but controlled by,
Anthroposophy, in direct contradiction of the school's promise to me that
Anthroposphy was not in the curriculum or classroom. (Well, I guess the
latter was technically true in this instance: all the gardening was
outdoors. (G) )
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.6 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 00:54:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com) (199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) I am a regular reader of New Scientist magazine and Scientific American,
) the two most popular sources of information for the general public. I don't
) read Nature or Science because I'm not a practicing scientist, I'm only a
) science reporter (somewhat retired). Both of these magazines are good at
) reporting the outer limits of traditional science, and the more credible of
) the fringe researchers. Both of them have a reputation for good journalism.
)
) I have not seen anything in the last five years in any of these sources
) that remotely leads to the conclusion that Robert Tolz seems to want to
) draw: "`science' is moving towards confirming the beliefs of Anthroposohy
) and the `spiritual science' of Rudolf Steiner".
I'm not drawing any such conclusion. I'm merely posting web citations
for others who are interested to follow up.
By the way Michael, are you implying that if New Scientist and
Scientific American haven't reported on something in the last five years
that the subject doesn't exist?
)
) Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
) agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
) credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
I'd be interested in whether the Armour edited textbook which was
reviewed in the URL I mentioned describes "replicated" research. I'm
not about to go out and buy it. Anybody have access to it?
)
) Robert Tolz has challenged me, in another post, to show specific evidence
) for all the assertions I have made over my 3-1/2 years here. He says I
) can't because all I have done is make unsupported claims or harped on my
) personal experience in only one Steiner school.
I did? Please remind me when I so challenged you? Either my memory is
failing me, or this is the third example in the space of a week or so
that Michael Kopp has attributed someone else's post to me.
)
) How about it, Tolz? Find the list of papers, find the reputable, impartial
) reporting of these incredible, breakthrough "discoveries", list them for
) us, give us the bona fides of the researchers (who, for example, is Ralph
) Marinelli, and what are his qualifications?), and make a case for how that
) supports your outlandish claim.
I make no claims. So there's nothing for me to back up.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.7 ---------------
From: David McKay (mckay oro.net)
Subject: RE: Setting the Record Straight (Lefty)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 22:27:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030000.QAA22326 lists1.best.com)
Kathy:
)
)The only individual I know of that began to set copywrite fees was Lefty
)Redux aka David Schelsinger. He wrote numerous threatening personal emails
)with a copywrite fee at the bottom of each in order to intimidate the
)recipient into not sharing the contents of his messages. He continued
)posting these to me long after I requested time and again for him to stop.
)Finally, I began posting his threatening emails on the WC list and continued
)to do so in an effort to expose him. He scared me.
)[snip]
)He didn't send me several warnings. I was simply kicked off the list. I had
)cross-posted and subsequently apologized to WC list members for doing so.
)However, this did not stop his threatening behavior toward me. He was
)removed from the WC list for his threatening, inappropriate behavior on the
)list. It was disconcerting and frightening.
)
)There is no other take on the situation with Lefty Redux aka David
)Schlesinger. He can frame it any way he wishes, the truth is that he was a
)disconcerting aggravant on this list and his threatening behavior frightened
)some of us.
David Schelsinger was/is everything that has been posted and more. He
wrote to my server, as well as many others, to try and have my service
denied for something I didn't do. Originally Deby posted a forwarded post
to her from the SJU Waldorf List on this list. David/Lefty removed me from
the SJU list assuming that I or someone else had provided the forwarded
post to Deby. I had nothing to do with what Deby does or doesn't do.
Lefty then started sending me threating posts privately. We all called his
bluff by purposely re-posting on this list as well as informing the company
he worked for that he was sending the above extortion demands that Kathy
mentions on company time and company email. That seemed to finally put an
end to David Schelingers sick power trip.
David McKay
)
)Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.8 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 09:19:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com) (199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
) "Neurocardiology" is a neologism of pseudo-science. It is not an accepted
) field of research or practice. In my Internet search for the word, the ONLY
) hit was the HeartMath outfit. A totally commercial, new-age-sucker-bait
) self-help outfit, by the look of their Web site.
Dear antipode Michael,
Try http://www.evreka.com and "neurocardiology" - 64 hits and
Free medline at http://www.medportal.com/ - 23 hits.
Not a big research field, it seems - yet.
But interesting and possibly growing.
Friendly greetings,
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.9 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 06:42:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com) (199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com) (199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
Sune Nordwall wrote:
)
) Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) ) "Neurocardiology" is a neologism of pseudo-science. It is not an accepted
) ) field of research or practice. In my Internet search for the word, the ONLY
) ) hit was the HeartMath outfit. A totally commercial, new-age-sucker-bait
) ) self-help outfit, by the look of their Web site.
)
) Dear antipode Michael,
)
) Try http://www.evreka.com and "neurocardiology" - 64 hits and
) Free medline at http://www.medportal.com/ - 23 hits.
)
) Not a big research field, it seems - yet.
) But interesting and possibly growing.
It's not Michael's fault that he claims that neurocardiology is totally
fringe stuff.
He was either unwittingly deceived by search engine that turned up only
one hit on the term "neurocardiology." I can only suspect that the
search engine Michael used was either (a) non-objective, with a
prejudice towards disregarding anything that does not support Michael's
prejudices, (b) wimpy and totally in need of Viagra. Or maybe it was
just smoking the same stuff that makes Michael attribute all of Robert
Flannery's (and who knows how many others') posts to me.
I figured if I tried all of the best search engines, and some I never
heard of before, then I could determine which one was the lame search
engine in need of criticism. I was unsuccessful in finding any search
engines that reported only one hit:
Altavista -- 64 hits
Netscape, Excite -- 18 hits
Infoseek -- 48 hits
Lycos -- 20 hits
Hotbot -- 62 hits
Snap -- 70 hits
Looksmart -- 64 hits
IQuest Medical Professional Database (on Compuserve) -- 21 hits
Intelihealth Professional Bookstore at
http://www.lb.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/bookshelf?/Z109999~id~ shows three
textbooks on the subject:
ARMOUR/NEUROCARDIOLOGY, 1ST EDITION, 1994
TER HORST/NEUROCARDIOLOGY :FUNDAMENTALS OF
HEART-BRAIN INTERACTION, 1ST EDITION
New book. Not yet published. Due 08/99
JOHNSON/NEUROCARDIOLOGY MPN # 13, 1ST EDITION, 1985
Methinks it's time for Michael Kopp to change search engines.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1193.10 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 06:44:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
Kathy Sutphen asks:
)Do I recall correctly that you are a Waldorf teacher? And, if so, why don't
)you simply describe to me how gardening in a Waldorf school curriculum is
)bereft of Anthroposophical influence. I am interested in a discussion on
)this subject.
I am a waldorf teacher--currently teaching at the third-grade level.
And Michael Kopp relates:
)This does not mean that they didn't DO gardening; they did, quite a lot of
)it.
)
)But it was never explained to them in either orthodox scientific terms or
)folk terms or Anthroposphical terms or biodynamic principles.
)
)However, they did certain things only at certain times; they did most
)things in ways which seemed unusual to them; and they used "Preparation
)500" and other things that are well-known as biodynamic agents.
(snip)
)So, in fact, my children were participating in relious rites without my
)permission, engaging in activities not just informed by, but controlled by,
)Anthroposophy, in direct contradiction of the school's promise to me that
)Anthroposphy was not in the curriculum or classroom.
Would you mind explaining to me what you consider "religious" in this context?
Does something that is "controlled" or directed by anthroposophy contradict
a school's statement that anthroposophy is not taught?
In another recent post, Kathy comments:
)Jeez Flannery. What do you mean I have "now admitted . . ." I said all along
)that I had no experience with it, only my suspicions. Why don't you tell me
)why my suspicions are *not* so. As far as I can surmise at this point in
)time, every single exercise I engaged in during my Public School Waldorf
)Teachers Training was based on Anthroposophical religious beliefs . . . all
)of this without my informed consent.
I would ask you the same question I just asked Michael: how do you define
"religious" in this context?
)Why don't you take an example of a bit of standard Waldorf School curriculum
)and tell us why and how it is not based on an Anthroposophical belief? So
)far you are all talk and no substance.
In trying to pin down Michael and Kathy over the issue of anthroposophy and
the curriculum of a waldorf school, a number of things are becoming
painfully clear to me.
Apparently, it is too easy to confuse the issue of anthroposophical content
in the lessons (clearly a no-no, but something that has happened from time
to time) with the issue of anthroposophy serving as a basis for curriculum
choices and teaching methods.
I read "Soul Economy in Waldorf Education" over the last few days. Here's
what Steiner had to say in a few places about these same issues:
"You must realize that the Waldorf School or any other school which might
spring from the anthroposophical movement, would never wish to teach its
pupils Anthroposophy in the form in which it exists today. This I should
consider the very worst thing one could do. For Anthroposophy in its
present form is a subject for grownups and, as one can see from the color
of their hair, often for quite mature adults! Consequently it is
presented through its literature or by word of mouth in a form appropriate
only to the adult. I should consider any passing on to pupils of content
taken from my "Theosophy" or from my book "Knowledge of the Higher Worlds
and Its Attainment" as the very worst misuse possible. Such a thing simply
must not happen. For if we were to teach content which is totally
unsuitable for school-agers, we should--forgive this somewhat trivial
expression used in the German language--we should make the young folk want
"to jump out of their skin." Naturally, in class lessons they would have
to submit themselves to what the teacher brought, but inwardly they
nevertheless would experience such an urge. Anthroposophy itself is not to
be taught in a Waldorf School. What matters is that its teaching should
not become mere theoretical knowledge, or a world outlook based on certain
ideas, but it should become a way of life, involving the entire human
being. If then a teacher who is an anthroposophist enters school, he must
have so worked upon himself that he has become a many-sided and skillful
person, someone who has developed the art of education. And it is this
latter achievement which is important, but never a wish to bring
anthroposophical content to pupils." (pages 127-128).
"As mentioned before, it is not at all our aim to teach an ideology in a
Waldorf School, though such a thought might easily occur to people upon
hearing that the anthroposophists have founded a new school. Our aim is to
carry insights gained through knowledge of Anthroposophy right into actual
teaching." (pages129-130)
Kathy, anthroposophy stands behind every educational practice in a waldorf
school. Anthroposophy is a world-view that has everything to say about the
way a teacher views a child, and thus how a child learns and what material
is most appropriate at a given age, and how it should be presented.
)Why don't
)you simply describe to me how gardening in a Waldorf school curriculum is
)bereft of Anthroposophical influence?
Nothing taught in a waldorf school is bereft of anthroposophical influence,
but everything properly taught in a waldorf school is bereft of
anthroposophical content.
Now, if Michael Kopp believes this constitutes mind control, that's his
right. Here's another quote from SEWE:
"The teacher is called upon to carry into his lessons the utmost respect
for soul and spirit. Without it, he will succeed as little as if he were
lacking an even fundamental artistic and scientific background. Therefore
the first prerequisite of a Waldorf teacher is to have reverence for the
soul and spiritual potential which each child brings with it into the
world. When confronted with the child, the teacher must be imbued with the
awareness that he is dealing with an innately free human being. With this
attitude he will be able to work out educational principles and methods
which will safeguard the child's inborn freedom so that in later life, when
a pupil looks back upon his school days, he will not find any infringement
upon his personal freedom, not even in the aftereffects of his education."
(page 206)
I happen to believe that every human being is a holy creation of God, and
this quality is least adulterated in childhood. The definition of
"religious" that I would recognize in waldorf teachers and waldorf schools
would be "scrupulously faithful or conscientious". "Devotion" is an
important concept in a waldorf school, indicating as it does a "fervent
spirit, usually genuine and often independent of outward observances".
[relying here on the Unabridged Version of the Random House Dictionary of
the English Language]
When "religious" is used as a general term (applying to whatever pertains
to faith or worship), I find it inapplicable to waldorf education.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1193 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1194 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
002 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
003 - WaldorfEdu aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
004 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
006 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: malarky
007 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
008 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Deceptive advertising (was Projective Geometry)
009 - Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-l - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
010 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 23:56:06 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904041038.DAA24119 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz writes:
) It's not Michael's fault that he claims that neurocardiology is
)totally
)fringe stuff.
)
) He was either unwittingly deceived by search engine that turned up
)only
)one hit on the term "neurocardiology." I can only suspect that the
)search engine Michael used was either (a) non-objective, with a
)prejudice towards disregarding anything that does not support Michael's
)prejudices, (b) wimpy and totally in need of Viagra. Or maybe it was
)just smoking the same stuff that makes Michael attribute all of Robert
)Flannery's (and who knows how many others') posts to me.
KOPP:
None of the above (I've never smoked anything in my life -- nothing.)
My search engines are obviously tuned to ignore pseudo-science, and, as I
use a Mac, with Sherlock, there is obviously one engine which has not
learned yet.
)
) I figured if I tried all of the best search engines, and some I
)never
)heard of before, then I could determine which one was the lame search
)engine in need of criticism. I was unsuccessful in finding any search
)engines that reported only one hit:
)
) Altavista -- 64 hits
) Netscape, Excite -- 18 hits
) Infoseek -- 48 hits
) Lycos -- 20 hits
) Hotbot -- 62 hits
) Snap -- 70 hits
) Looksmart -- 64 hits
) IQuest Medical Professional Database (on Compuserve) -- 21 hits
KOPP:
Many of these will be multiples of the same pages.
)Intelihealth Professional Bookstore at
)http://www.lb.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/bookshelf?/Z109999~id~ shows three
)textbooks on the subject:
)
)ARMOUR/NEUROCARDIOLOGY, 1ST EDITION, 1994
)
)TER HORST/NEUROCARDIOLOGY :FUNDAMENTALS OF
)HEART-BRAIN INTERACTION, 1ST EDITION
)New book. Not yet published. Due 08/99
)
)JOHNSON/NEUROCARDIOLOGY MPN # 13, 1ST EDITION, 1985
KOPP:
Check these books out, Robert, and tell me which ones of them are real
science, and which are the pseudo-science that outfits like the HeartMath
Institute is selling.
)
) Methinks it's time for Michael Kopp to change search engines.
KOPP:
Nah, it's time for you to stop hiding behind search engine hits and address
the substance of my prior posts on this subject, which is that your and
Anthropsophy's and lots of other new-age wowsers' interpretations of
"neurocardiology" is not only pseudo-science, but inflation of tidbits of
real physiology into some new spiritualistic mumbo jumbo about the heart
being the real brain and soul to boot.
Go back to the dark ages, please, where this sort of stuff belongs.
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.2 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 11:55:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com) (199904041156.EAA11907 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) My search engines are obviously tuned to ignore pseudo-science, and, as I
) use a Mac, with Sherlock, there is obviously one engine which has not
) learned yet.
Sorry, I've heard of a Mac, but I've never heard of Sherlock. You mean
that using a Mac restricts you to using one search engine? I'm
flabbergasted.
[Snip Tolz's enumeration of hits with other search engines]
)
) KOPP:
)
) Many of these will be multiples of the same pages.
No question that some of the references are duplicates. That fact
doesn't detract from the purpose of my posting, which was to provide
contrast to your claim that your search engine had only a single hit.
[Snip Tolz's enumeration of 3 texts with "neurocardiology" in the
title]
)
) KOPP:
)
) Check these books out, Robert, and tell me which ones of them are real
) science, and which are the pseudo-science that outfits like the HeartMath
) Institute is selling.
I'll be happy to see if I can find them in the library. I'm not going
to buy the Armour book, even from Amazon.com at a pricey $60-$70 if I
recall correctly. That's real text-book territory, not self-help book
prices. Although another was published in the late 80's, the third one
is not available until August; which certainly implies to me that people
haven't stopped working on the issues.
But even if I get ahold of any of the texts, I'm not sure I'd be
qualified to render an opinion as to the level of true vs.
pseudo-science evidenced therein. How would you propose that I evaluate
those texts in a way which would satisfy even you that I had been
even-handed and knowledgable enough?
) )
) ) Methinks it's time for Michael Kopp to change search engines.
)
) KOPP:
)
) Nah, it's time for you to stop hiding behind search engine hits and address
) the substance of my prior posts on this subject, which is that your and
) Anthropsophy's and lots of other new-age wowsers' interpretations of
) "neurocardiology" is not only pseudo-science, but inflation of tidbits of
) real physiology into some new spiritualistic mumbo jumbo about the heart
) being the real brain and soul to boot.
Re-read my prior post. I have made no claims about the truthfulness of
this stuff. However, whenever a WC makes a post which is easily
verifiable or testable (talk about "science"!), such as when Dan Dugan
claimed that his internet search showed absolutely no support for
Pearce's position, that sometimes sets me into verification mode. As a
Waldorf Critic Critic, it is my sworn duty to point up misstatements and
illogic from the WC crowd.
)
) Go back to the dark ages, please, where this sort of stuff belongs.
I wonder how many times in the history of science that sort of
statement was made about something which came to be generally accepted.
The fact that I found references on the internet that tend to support
Pearce's position is aimed solely at Dan's broad statement that there
was none. It does not mean that I believe in Pearce's position. I
simply do not have enough information to agree or disagree with that
position.
My approach to this issues is a pretty standard form of skepticism.
Yours, on the other hand, betrays your cynicism about almost anything
that has not yet been proved.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.3 ---------------
From: WaldorfEdu aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 14:25:51 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 4/2/99 8:23:50 PM, you wrote:
((My perception/experience of Lefty Redux aka David Scheslinger is that he is
an intimidating, frightening individual. ))
I totally agree. I wasn't asked to leave the list but did so because of the
way he treated me and others. Likewise I rarely post to this list becuase of
the way Dan dealt with me. As with many others time is always at a premium
and I belong to numerous other lists where I have had no hassles at all for
many many years.
For the record - I've sent out fliers describing material based on the
Waldorf approach (without anthroposophy) to every school in the USA (over the
years well over a million). We are now working through sending another five
thousand with another 45,000 to be sent thru' the year. This coming week I go
to another part of the USA to give 4 presentations (with acknowledgement to
Waldorf) at a major conference. Similarly I've given 6 such presentations
during the last 6 months at national conferences here in the USA. No problems
whatsoever.
David
Dr. David Mollet
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.4 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 13:26:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com) (199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com) (199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
Kopp, I hope you are not so sloppy in your professional work. Besides failing
miserably at basic and fundamental research (yes it is harder to find news than
it is to mimic the status quo), you seem to be confusing established with
accepted. Of course, in your world there might not be a distinction. Then
again, what is the point of researching that which is already established.
I have a feeling you would trash Einstein and Galileo, among others, in their
respective endeavors and at their appointed times. Pit bulls of the old guard
are feared (in Pit Bull language respected) only for their brutal methods.
I am glad there are others on this list willing to do a proper investigation of
the facts.
e
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) ) "Neurocardiology" is a neologism of pseudo-science. It is not an accepted
) ) field of research or practice. In my Internet search for the word, the ONLY
) ) hit was the HeartMath outfit. A totally commercial, new-age-sucker-bait
) ) self-help outfit, by the look of their Web site.
)
) Dear antipode Michael,
)
) Try http://www.evreka.com and "neurocardiology" - 64 hits and
) Free medline at http://www.medportal.com/ - 23 hits.
)
) Not a big research field, it seems - yet.
) But interesting and possibly growing.
)
) Friendly greetings,
)
) Sune
) Stockholm, Sweden
)
) http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
) - a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
) EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 09:22:37 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
(199904041156.EAA11907 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904041552.IAA09244 lists1.best.com)
Robert Tolz writes:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
))
)) Go back to the dark ages, please, where this sort of stuff belongs.
And TOLZ replied:
) I wonder how many times in the history of science that sort of
)statement was made about something which came to be generally accepted.
Not very often.
Usually what science does is scoff at the new research or researcher.
Scientists are human, after all, and play power games just like the rest of
us, even those of us on this list, and, particularly, Anthroposophists.
So, for instance, nobody told Jacques Benveniste to "go back to the darks
ages" for his preposterous attempt to prove a theory called "water memory"
to validate the earlier-demolished theory of homeopathic dilution of
substances.
Science just pointed out the holes in his reasearch, tried to duplicate his
results and couldn't, and dismissed him as a credible researcher. He's
still working, though, in a pseudo-science foundation of his own creation,
funded by some rich looney he has convinced of his theories.
Only the pseudo-scientists, whose work has also been dismissed, claimed to
be able to replicate "water-memory".
But what science has that no other system has is a mechanism for new
discoveries and new work to eventually be accepted, or long-held theories
to be overturned.
So, where science now accepts many things it didn't a hundred years ago
(Rutherford's famous dictum that atomic fission chain reactions, and thus a
bomb or nuclear power generation, were impossible, comes to mind) the cult
of Rudolf Steiner, and his religion Anthroposophy, have neither repudiated
nor gone beyond anything he said was true.
And which of Rudolf Steiner's many assertions about the nature of the
Unverse HAS come to be "generally accepted"? Can you give us an example, Mr
Tolz?
Which is now taught in _general education_ as a scientifically accepted
fact?
How about the "heart is not a pump"? Has Ralph Marinelli, the retired high
school teacher working in his basement "Centre for Anthroposophical
Science", had his "work", published once by any other journal than the one
fringe "frontier science" journal?
Has it been "generally accepted" by anyone but creduluous, wanna-believe
Anthroposophists? Has anyone even cared to try to replicate his
"experiments" and "research"? Has the scientific establishment taken much
notice of it at all? The only people who are interested are the Defenders
of the Faith, and the critics on this list.
The James Randi Educational Foundation has a standing offer of $1 million
for any scientifically-verifiable (that is, replicable and double-blind
experimental controlled) proof of any such paranormal claim. It was
offered to Benveniste; he declined. It's been offered to claims made on
this list.
Nobody has ever even submitted any of this mumbo jumbo to try to claim the
prize, because they know their "theories" are either outright fake or plain
nonsense. Of course, the pseudo-scientists and frauds usually claim that
Randi's "science" is too restrictive, and that they have "gone beyond" it.
Bullshit. The entire body of science is unlikely to be completely
overturned at a stroke by them ... or Goethe's phenomenology or Steiner's
fertile imagination.
I repeat, Mr Tolz: take your mumbo jumbo and go back to the dark ages,
where it and your belief in it belong.
Standard disclaimer: anyone, including Mr Tolz, is free to believe anything
they want. I am not trying to prevent Mr Tolz from believing or practicing
anthing he chooses to -- as long as it is not brought into the public arena
as fact, and does not injure anyone, particularly those who do not want it.
But I am just as free to criticise it in any way I choose, short of causing
physical harm to anyone. That's what freedom of religion and freedom of
expression are about.
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.6 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: malarky
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 14:44:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com) (199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
Is that a fact? Please tell me where your beloved, cherished and benevolent
scientific community has proven HIV causes AIDS? You cannot, because such a
proof does not exist (if you believe a select group of skeptics.) Yet this is
now assumed in all the scientific literature. Please explain this little
idiosyncrasy of the scientific method in action to me?
Your explanation of science represents an Old Guard mentality. It is powerful
in that it is in power, nothing more. There is nothing inherently powerful about
it as a paradigm (you often confuse your conservative methods for what they
attempt to conserve). In fact, it is as facile as anything else dictated by
inertia.
e
PS If others wish to investigate more about an alternative hypothesis of HIV,
please search for a Professor Duesberg at Berkeley. I 'cherry picked' Feynman
from his site.
Michael Kopp wrote:
) Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
) agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
) credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
)
) In the meantime, huge and increasing numbers of gullible people who WANT to
) believe in *something*, *anything*, magical, supernatural, or more than is
) real in our everyday lives, and the entrepreneurs and religious cultists,
) will turn these fringe "discoveries" -- pseudo-science -- into cash cows
) and orthodox dogmas.
)
) Cheers from Godzone,
)
) Michael Kopp
) Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.7 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 14:47:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904032254.OAA21169 lists1.best.com)
I suppose I could contribute to this thread since I have first hand knowledge of
the gardening curriculum at the Sacramento Waldorf school. I think gardening
was a sporadic offering, and only applied to lower school (8-).
Unfortunately (for critics and maybe for me), I do not recall any BD elements
to the class. It mainly consisted of agrarian chores like tilling the soil,
feeding the animals weeding the flower beds. Sometimes I wondered if we were
not doing the gardener's work for him! I am somewhat familiar with the basic
tenets of BD farming, but my knowledge of their application in the garden of SWS
is not direct. I can speculate they were used in preparing the compost or
fertilizer we used. (We were not told, but this does NOT mean it was concealed
from us. Our class dealt with GARDENING, NOT BD farming, or RS.) In all
probability, I think gardening in WE was nothing more than botany lab.
Growing up on a farm myself, I did not see a great deal of utility (ahh for the
days when I was a pragmatist!) in gaping at the cows. Moreover, I can see why
immigrants from agrarian countries would not find gardening useful and rather
learn typing or accounting for its efficiency in making gonzo dollars in the
Global Economy. That said, I think it extremely important people remain linked
to the soil (Nature, whatever) so they do not grow up to epitomize the robot
ideal in all its synthetic splendor. To the degree a society divorces itself
from the soil (nature), classic schizophrenic tendencies of hopelessness,
alienation, psychosis and universal disorientation will become pronounced in the
population. The more one feels connected to nature, the more one will belong.
(This is something often broached by futurists)
Pol Pot (and maniacs like him) aside, an appreciation for Nature is fundamental
for our understanding of the Universe and how we fit it. You can examine all
the literature you want, study all the abstracted texts you care to, none will
approach the satisfied understanding a gardener reaps as he tills the soil,
plants the seeds and observes his garden grow.
At the time I did not like gardening much, but weeding in the garden still beat
most academic classes in terms of enjoyment. I think my classmates were the
richer for it too.
e
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.8 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Deceptive advertising (was Projective Geometry)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 14:45:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904040144.RAA23653 lists1.best.com)
You should be a lawyer, you could be in charge of all the fine print you see
under the car advertisements.
You do know the yellow pages charges by the letter right? (or the sentence, same
difference) Critics invent conspiracy where most mortals invent God (just about
everywhere). I think many on this list would benefit from the writings of
Occam, a well known philosopher who popularized Occam's razor (a parsimonious
concept).
Do you think it right and just for everyone to be compelled to state their bias
when making any statement? Your byline alone would run most of each post.
More seriously, what on earth could WE be defrauding someone of? An atheistic
existence?? I am living proof this is not the case. The statement as you
describe it is absolutely accurate as an elementary (no imaginary
numbers[spiritual mumbo jumbo]) description.
There is art in all aspects of the WE curriculum (otherwise, how did I learn
sewing, knitting, perling, crocheting, drawing, painting, marbling, acting,
singing, composing, etc. and so forth.). This is indubitable fact. There might
also be AS aspects to my education as well, this does not nullify the fact there
is also art. What about this do you fail to understand? Would you like me to
draw you a picture? (the bad pun aspect of this last sentence should take
precedent over the snide remark aspect)
What do you make of religious art? Is it an expression of art, or an expression
of religion? I do not know there is an answer, but I would like to see your
bias on this (with the appropriate preamble).
e
ksutphen jps.net wrote:
) Alan Fine posts:
)
) )))I am holding in my hand a flier for the Denver Waldorf High School. It
) )))mentions that WE was founded by "philosopher/scientist" Rudolf Steiner.
) )))It
) )))mentions the interweaving of the arts into all aspects of study. (snip)
) There is not a single
) )))mention of anthroposophy or spirituality. Not one. I know many of the
) )))teachers there. They are a reasonable group. I do not know if hiding the
) )))spiritual focus is deliberate or unconcious (I give them the benefit of
) )))the
) )))doubt and lean to the latter), but of the lack of disclosure there is
) )))simply
) )))no doubt.
)
) A nearby Waldorf School located in Applegate, CA (next door to Weimar, CA)
) runs an ad in the yellow pages of the phone book. It's a pretty good sized
) ad. It states it is an art-based education . . . nothing about Steiner,
) Anthroposophy, spiritualism, etc., etc.
)
) I don't perceive this as cowardice, rather I consider it to be false
) advertising. In regard to the current selling of Waldorf to public schools I
) consider the lack to disclosure to be "Conspiracy to Defraud". I will look
) up the actual California Penal Code # next week. I recently reviewed two
) slick advertising films put out by the Rudolf Steiner College ala Betty
) Staley. These were put together to sell the Waldorf curriculum to public
) schools. One is "The Waldorf Promise" and the other is "Reviving the Art of
) Education". (The names are subtle bits of slick selling points in and of
) themselves.) Nowhere in these films is anthropsophy mentioned. This is not
) accidental - it's deliberate.
)
) Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.9 ---------------
From: Robert Tolz (rtolz tnsj-law.com)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 22:49:07 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
(199904041156.EAA11907 lists1.best.com) (199904042210.PAA02545 lists1.best.com)
Michael Kopp wrote:
)
) And which of Rudolf Steiner's many assertions about the nature of the
) Unverse HAS come to be "generally accepted"? Can you give us an example, Mr
) Tolz?
I have no idea, nor do I care to defend anything Steiner has asserted.
Remember, I'm not a defender of the faith.
)
) I repeat, Mr Tolz: take your mumbo jumbo and go back to the dark ages,
) where it and your belief in it belong.
Keep your insults to yourself, Mr. Kopp. Remember, I do not believe in
what you say I believe in.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1194.10 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 18:24:31
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
At 06:44 AM 4/4/99 -0400, you wrote:
)Does something that is "controlled" or directed by anthroposophy contradict
)a school's statement that anthroposophy is not taught?
What about something that has anthroposophy as its foundation, and a
pedagogy which flows direct and inseparably from "esoteric Christianity"?
Is this a violation of the Establishment Clause even though it is promoted
as a secular methodology? Shades of Malnak v. Yogi in New Jersey perhaps?
)Apparently, it is too easy to confuse the issue of anthroposophical content
)in the lessons (clearly a no-no, but something that has happened from time
)to time) with the issue of anthroposophy serving as a basis for curriculum
)choices and teaching methods.
The anthroposophical basis for Waldorf education leads directly to
anthroposophical content and methodology. It is good to see that this is
"clearly a no-no," but it must also be recognized that this is illegal.
)When "religious" is used as a general term (applying to whatever pertains
)to faith or worship), I find it inapplicable to waldorf education.
But the question is not simply how if anthroposophy/waldorf education seem
religious to a Waldorf teacher. Religious studies scholars and scholarly
reference works on religion commonly classify anthroposophy as a religion
and an influential one on today's "new spirituality" of the New Age
movement (along with groups such as Rosicrucianism, etc.). In addition,
even if this argument should fail, the courts are taking accepting a
broader definition of religion in order to allow for the growth and
influence of the new spirituality along with more traditional theistic
faiths. As a case in point, the Science of Creative
Intelligence/Transcendental Meditation was offered in the New Jersey public
school system as a secular relaxation technique. When a lawsuit was brought
before the New Jersey federal court, in spite of the fact that TM said it
was not religious, and that several clergy and TM practitioners said they
saw nothing religious in the practice, the courts ruled that TM in the
public schools advanced the cause of a Hindu sect in violation of the
Establishment Clause. (See my article, "Reading, Writing...and 'Spiritual
Science?:' The Religious Pedagogy of Waldorf Education," in the next issue
of TruthQuest Journal for an elaboration on these points.)
The Waldorf case in Sacramento, CA is one to watch....
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1194 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1195 --------------
001 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
002 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
003 - redon (redon geocities.co - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
004 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
005 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (long, with science cites, no rant)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.1 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 22:53:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
If biodynamic gardening was proven superior by proper scientific methods, I
doubt anyone would have any objection to the teaching of it, and the
promotion of it. However, this system of agriculture, as well as many of
the tenets of anthroposophy are not proven this way, and belong to a
spiritual belief system, not the material world. Such tenets of your belief
system have nothing to do with the mathematical reality of the pythagorean
theorem. It is the consistant blurring of the boundaries between the
material truths we all share, and the personal spiritual beliefs of yours
(and your fellow anthroposophists) which is at the core of what makes those
of us outside of your faith very uncomfortable.
)Your objection, Kathy (and I apologize if I have misunderstood it), is that
)even if biodynamic farming is the best in existence, and even if it could
)save the ozon layer and the rain forests and the ecology, you would still
)protest against students learning about it in public schools because it is
)rooted in the spiritual-religious anthroposophical conception about natural
)laws, such as etheric and astral forces connected with the planets and
)phases of the moon.
)
)By the same token, the law of the triangle works, it's very good geometry.
)Still, Pythagoras believed in the gods and the spiritual universe, and all
)his works are rooted in these views. For that reason, Kathy, the drums of
)the ancient Greeks as well as the drum of Shakespeare are reminders of the
)problem that is inherent in an objection of this kind. I believe that
)everyone involved with American public schools and the separation of church
)and state would feel relieved if this problem would disappear.
)
)))
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.2 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 23:09:33 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Would it be possible to send one to me?
Alan S. Fine MD
- I've sent out fliers describing material based on the
)Waldorf approach (without anthroposophy) to every school in the USA (over
the
)years well over a million). We are now working through sending another five
)thousand with another 45,000 to be sent thru' the year. This coming week I
go
)to another part of the USA to give 4 presentations (with acknowledgement to
)Waldorf) at a major conference. Similarly I've given 6 such presentations
)during the last 6 months at national conferences here in the USA. No
problems
)whatsoever.
)
)David
)Dr. David Mollet
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.3 ---------------
From: redon (redon geocities.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 01:28:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904050322.UAA16131 lists1.best.com)
) From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
) Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
)
) At 06:44 AM 4/4/99 -0400, you wrote:
) )Does something that is "controlled" or directed by anthroposophy contradict
) )a school's statement that anthroposophy is not taught?
)
) What about something that has anthroposophy as its foundation, and a
) pedagogy which flows direct and inseparably from "esoteric Christianity"?
) Is this a violation of the Establishment Clause even though it is promoted
) as a secular methodology? Shades of Malnak v. Yogi in New Jersey perhaps?
)
) )Apparently, it is too easy to confuse the issue of anthroposophical content
) )in the lessons (clearly a no-no, but something that has happened from time
) )to time) with the issue of anthroposophy serving as a basis for curriculum
) )choices and teaching methods.
)
) The anthroposophical basis for Waldorf education leads directly to
) anthroposophical content and methodology. It is good to see that this is
) "clearly a no-no," but it must also be recognized that this is illegal.
)
) )When "religious" is used as a general term (applying to whatever pertains
) )to faith or worship), I find it inapplicable to waldorf education.
)
) But the question is not simply how if anthroposophy/waldorf education seem
) religious to a Waldorf teacher. Religious studies scholars and scholarly
) reference works on religion commonly classify anthroposophy as a religion
) and an influential one on today's "new spirituality" of the New Age
) movement (along with groups such as Rosicrucianism, etc.). In addition,
) even if this argument should fail, the courts are taking accepting a
) broader definition of religion in order to allow for the growth and
) influence of the new spirituality along with more traditional theistic
) faiths. As a case in point, the Science of Creative
) Intelligence/Transcendental Meditation was offered in the New Jersey public
) school system as a secular relaxation technique. When a lawsuit was brought
) before the New Jersey federal court, in spite of the fact that TM said it
) was not religious, and that several clergy and TM practitioners said they
) saw nothing religious in the practice, the courts ruled that TM in the
) public schools advanced the cause of a Hindu sect in violation of the
) Establishment Clause. (See my article, "Reading, Writing...and 'Spiritual
) Science?:' The Religious Pedagogy of Waldorf Education," in the next issue
) of TruthQuest Journal for an elaboration on these points.)
)
) The Waldorf case in Sacramento, CA is one to watch....
I suspect the case in Sacramento will take into consideration the case
that was ruled by the Wisconsin Supreme Court which cited other
state cases concerning different private and religious school vouchers.
However, if the plaintiffs appealed to the US Supreme Court
their reply will be the same.
Even if the plaintiffs make some strange case that Waldorf Public
Schools are somehow religious, and I do not believe they are, my
feeling is that the court will rule as all the other courts have.
Which basically is: "...it has a secular purpose, it does not have the
primary effect of advancing religion, and it does not lead to
an extensive entanglement between the state and sectarian schools."
The First Amendment states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
The important issue here is: "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
I agree with many political leader concerning vouchers:
"People said, 'How could you do that? It will violate separation of
church and state.' Well, I don't believe our founders meant to
separate religion from our public life. What they meant is that the
state shouldn't impose any particular religion on the people."
"... five years from now, every major city in the country will have
religious school vouchers, and "10 years from now it won't even be
controversial."
If you think about it... We give federal grant money to college students
who attend private, public, and religious schools, why not
open the doors and have some healthy competition and allow parents to
have a real choice?
I even know of a Public University that offers 4 years of TM, coupled
with some other cultural studies, students can apply this as a
minor.
I have even seen religious programing not to mention New Age material
weekly on both PBS and NPR. They receive large amounts of money
form the federal government, what makes the elementary and high schools,
both private and religious, any different when it comes to
federal and state funding?
my .02
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.4 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 06:43:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
John Morehead follows up on my question:
)At 06:44 AM 4/4/99 -0400, you wrote:
))Does something that is "controlled" or directed by anthroposophy contradict
))a school's statement that anthroposophy is not taught?
)
)What about something that has anthroposophy as its foundation, and a
)pedagogy which flows direct and inseparably from "esoteric Christianity"?
Certainly, "esoteric Christianity" is part of anthroposophy. As much as
anthroposophy serves as a basis for curriculum choices and teaching
methods, esoteric Christianity is part of that--but esoteric Christianity
is not taught in the classroom, any more than anthroposophy is taught in
the classroom.
)Is this a violation of the Establishment Clause even though it is promoted
)as a secular methodology? Shades of Malnak v. Yogi in New Jersey perhaps?
If the courts determine that it is such a violation, so be it. I don't
support waldorf public schools in their practice, and would welcome this
conclusion.
)
))Apparently, it is too easy to confuse the issue of anthroposophical content
))in the lessons (clearly a no-no, but something that has happened from time
))to time) with the issue of anthroposophy serving as a basis for curriculum
))choices and teaching methods.
)
)The anthroposophical basis for Waldorf education leads directly to
)anthroposophical content and methodology. It is good to see that this is
)"clearly a no-no," but it must also be recognized that this is illegal.
The anthroposophical basis for waldorf education leads directly to
anthroposophical methodology. If a teacher oversteps his or her bounds, it
also leads directly to anthroposophical content in lessons.
I doubt that you are qualified to judge the issue of its legality in public
education.
(snip)
)The Waldorf case in Sacramento, CA is one to watch....
I'm sure it is. What is the TruthQuest Institute? Is the TruthQuest
Institute a dispassionate observer, or do you have some kind of a stake in
the outcome? Have you contributed to the PLANS legal fund, personally or
as an institution?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.5 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:33:21 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904032254.OAA21169 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904042302.QAA29712 lists1.best.com)
Ezra Beeman wrote a reallllllyyyy looooonnnngggg pppaarrraaaagrraaapphh
with hardly a pause for a deep breath, about his biodynamic gardening
experiences at Waldorf school, humanity's deep psychological need for
"connecting" with the land, and his view of his other classes at Waldorf
school:
[snip most of it]
)To the degree a society divorces itself from the soil (nature), classic
))schizophrenic tendencies of hopelessness, alienation, psychosis and
)universal )disorientation will become pronounced in the population.
Michael KOPP says:
Thank you doctor Freudius Beemanius.
Now, is this a personal belief, or an observation of life in California
cities, or is there some statistical and -- dare I say it, since you hate
science so much -- scientific evidence for this grandiose, sweeping
statement?
Sarcasm at your apparently deep understanding of the human psyche for a
person of your tender years aside, can you please give us something to back
up this assetion?
BEEMAN:
)The more one feels connected to nature, the more one will belong. (This is
))something often broached by futurists).
KOPP:
The more one will belong to _what_? Again, can you please explain, and cite?
BEEMAN:
)Pol Pot (and maniacs like him) aside, an appreciation for Nature is
))fundamental for our understanding of the Universe and how we fit it.
KOPP:
Yes, definitely, Pol Pot (and maniacs like him) aside, please. What does
Pol Pot have to do with, or why do you mention him in context with, "our
understanding of the Universe and how we fit in"?
If you mean an appreciation of Nature -- that is, real existence -- then I
thank you for the ringing endorsement of science as a means of apprehending
the Universe.
If you mean an acquaintance with rural landscape, pastorality, birds, bees,
fish and fur, then I think you are wrong. Large numbers of city-born and
-bred people who never venture far beyond the city limits have made big
contributions to our understanding of the Universe, through science. And
large numbers of people live happily in cities all their lives without
becoming psychopaths.
BEEMAN:
)You can examine all
)the literature you want, study all the abstracted texts you care to, none
)will
)approach the satisfied understanding a gardener reaps as he tills the soil,
)plants the seeds and observes his garden grow.
KOPP:
But these are ridiculous opposites: no one reads garden books as a
replacement for green thumbs and dirt under the fingernails. And reading
about scientific understanding of the universe (presuming this is the
analogy you're straining at) is certainly a satisfactory substitute for my
being able to do science itself. I don't need to get my fingernails dirty
with garden soil to understand the Universe from Hawking.
BEEMAN:
)At the time I did not like gardening much, but weeding in the garden still
)beat
)most academic classes in terms of enjoyment. I think my classmates were
)the
)richer for it too.
)e
KOPP:
I thought you said your school was an enchanting academic environment, and
you enjoyed every minute of every class, and were enriched by all of it?
You mean to say you have the same view of your classes -- taught by the
Steiner pedagogy that is supposed to inculcate love of learning -- as those
supposedly schizophrenic, psychotic, hopeless kids growing up in inner-city
San Francisco schools have of theirs?
Well, again, thank you for the admission, Ezra. You're more helpful than
you know.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1195.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (long, with science cites, no rant)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:01:02 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904042300.QAA28732 lists1.best.com)
Ezra Beeman wrote:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)) Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
)) agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
)) credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
))
)) In the meantime, huge and increasing numbers of gullible people who WANT
))to
)) believe in *something*, *anything*, magical, supernatural, or more than
))is
)) real in our everyday lives, and the entrepreneurs and religious cultists,
)) will turn these fringe "discoveries" -- pseudo-science -- into cash cows
)) and orthodox dogmas.
))
)
)) Cheers from Godzone,
))
)) Michael Kopp
)) Wellington, New Zealand
And BEEMAN reacted:
)Is that a fact? Please tell me where your beloved, cherished and
)benevolent
)scientific community has proven HIV causes AIDS? You cannot, because such
)a
)proof does not exist (if you believe a select group of skeptics.) Yet this
)is
)now assumed in all the scientific literature. Please explain this little
)idiosyncrasy of the scientific method in action to me?
Michael KOPP says:
It is very interesting that Ezra, who says in other posts of the
impossibility of science "proving" _anything_, uses the supposed fact that
science hasn't "proved" that HIV causes AIDS in his broadside. It would
seem to me that Ezra (and the many others who argue like him on this list,
all of them defenders or proponents of Anthroposophy) can't logically have
it both ways.
I don't recall saying that science was MY "community", nor that to me it
was "beloved, cherished and benevolent".
I am a science reporter, not a scientist. I have no vested interest in
science, and I have written and reported a number of stories critical of
mainstream, orthodox science and scientists.
In the post you are reacting to, I described science as being human, having
human flaws, but also being the most self-correcting, rational method of
knowing and dealing with our world.
What has the HIV/AIDS argument -- whatever either of us thinks of it -- to
do with the pseudoscience I have described here which is the product of
and/or favoured by you and other Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy people?
My posts challenge YOUR side to provide evidence of, or general acceptance
of, YOUR "scientific" beliefs. To date no one has done this, with any of
them.
So why do you wildly strike out at orthodox science as being a bullying,
repressive villain?
This sounds typical of the anti-science rhetoric of people who have had
poor educations in rational thought, and who have bought the "science is
responsible for all modern evils" mantra of pseudo-scientists, charlatans,
spiritualists and anarchists.
I would have thought better of you, Ezra. I didn't know you were such a
science hater.
BEEMAN:
)Your explanation of science represents an Old Guard mentality. It is
)powerful )in that it is in power, nothing more. There is nothing
)inherently powerful )about it as a paradigm (you often confuse your
)conservative methods for what )they attempt to conserve). In fact, it is
)as facile as anything else dictated )by inertia.
KOPP:
Science is a powerful _method_ (not a "paradigm") because it works and
provides the best answers to our questions about the nature of ourselves
and the Universe. Medical science has improved our lives, despite the
misuse by some of scientific knowledge.
Can you please explain what your last sentence means? I'm sorry to be so
obtuse, but I can't figure it out.
And what has replaced the "old guard" mentality of rational, skeptical,
scientific thought and method?
Irrational, wanna-believe, pseudo-scientific, and, if your vituperation is
any indication, science-hating, acceptance of attractive, but meaningless
-- and often harmful -- ideas and practices? That's the way it seems to me.
BEEMAN:
)e
)PS If others wish to investigate more about an alternative hypothesis of
)HIV,
)please search for a Professor Duesberg at Berkeley. I 'cherry picked'
)Feynman
)from his site.
)
KOPP:
But your uses of Feynman's words were non-sequiturs in terms of your
arguments against modern, orthodox science. Feynman did not disagree with
the scientific method, or with the practice of science, or its
establishment. He was not a "fringe" scientist, nor a practitioner of
metaphysical intuition. He WAS a profoundly human and funny and inspiring
scientist who advanced physics. He was also a member of the Manhattan
Project.
As for DUESBERG'S "alternative" research on HIV and AIDS, the question is
not how many other researchers line up behind him in his view that HIV is
not the cause of AIDS; the question is "how good is his science"? And the
answer has been, "not very", according to the referees and onlookers from
the orthodox scientific community.
AIDS, alone among diseases, is a political issue, as well as a scientific
and medical one. Despite more and more new science which shows that HIV is
indeed responsible for AIDS, there are even some researchers who claim that
HIV is not even a virus. Duesberg, having lost the respect of the
scientific community, has won what is almost a cult following.
Caught in the middle of the political and scientific debates are those
people who are unfortunate to have the disease -- whatever it is. The
official line on AIDS in the U.S. is that it is caused by the AIDS virus,
and that it is treatable by certain medical methods which are themselves
indicted by Duesberg and others as the cause of AIDS, rather than the virus.
Ezra got his information from Duesberg's own Web site, apparently. The
first site I saw (and, to be fair, it includes many views) is one which
says its purpose it to tell people `what the government and big science
don't want them to know'. It is heavily on Duesberg's side. One of the
people quoted there even claims that the CIA genetically engineered the HIV
virus in about 1974 -- before genetic engineering was advanced enough to do
so!
The anti-orthodox side of this argument is fond of conspiracies: Duesberg
is the victim of a campaign to deny him publicity or funding; big science
and big drug companies are protecting their vested financial interest in
the HIV-AIDS "industry"; and worse.
I think Ezra is a little behind the times with regard to evidence that HIV
virus causes AIDS. As one of the sources critical of Duesberg, who founded
an HIV/AIDS information centre (see Delaney, below), puts it: no, there
_isn't_ a single scientific paper proving HIV causes AIDS: there've been
*hundreds* of them over a period of 15 years. Therapies based on this
orthodox scientific consensus -- some of them admittedly very unpleasant --
have prolonged the lives of hundreds of thousands of human beings who would
otherwise have had an almost certain death. Duesberg says the therapy
causes AIDS, not HIV.
Just in the last six months two new (orthodox) research papers have
contradicted Duesberg (and gone beyond earlier explanations accepted by the
scientific community) by showing that HIV does not damage the immune system
by killing protective cells, but by causing the immune system to fail to
produce enough of them. (See citations at the end of this message from
"Project Inform".
AIDS is the biggest killer of American males in the 25-45 age range. A
half-millionn people have died of it in the U.S. Millions more, in America
and around the world, have the HIV virus present in their bodies. Some, who
read the Duesbergs and other anti-science polemicists, refuse to
acknowledge their HIV positive status -- and go on to infect others.
Tell me, Ezra, have you ever watched anyone die of AIDS? I have -- I was
one of the first journalists to write about AIDS in New Zealand, and to
publish the story of a brave AIDS patient who was one of the first to allow
public scrutiny of his life and death. I photographed him as he faced
death, and he wrote about the experience.
Would you, Ezra -- a libertarian -- want to be responsible for recommending
that people with AIDS avoid the standard medical treatment, that has been
most successful so far of all the alternatives? On the basis of the
"science" of Duesberg and others whose work is so unorthodox? On the basis
of your obvious despising of rational, orthodox science?
----------------------
For those who are interested, below my signature are a number of clippings,
with URLs, used in the preparation of this article.
For the record, I do not agree with any proposal (see Delaney, below) to
censor Duesberg or prevent him from taking his case directly to the public.
Censure is not my business; censorship is. The antidote to Duesberg's
incredible publicity is increased public education and unhysterical
response to him by the entire scientific community.
-----------------------
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
-----------------------
The SCI.SKEPTIC faq on AIDS: http://burtcom.com/mtrsn/sfaq_009.htm
The biggest anti-orthodox-science site and Duesberg booster outside of his
own site: http://www.virusmyth.com/
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/äily-Summaries-2.html
------------
Some historical reports:
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-AIDS-Daily-
Summaries-2.html
"Researchers Doubt Maverick AIDS Theory"
Reuters (12/08/94)
In a series of articles released on Thursday, the respected journal Science
described its three-month investigation into the status of claims made by
University of California virologist Peter Duesberg that drug abuse, not
HIV, is responsible for AIDS. Science found that while Duesberg has been
promoting his theory for several years and has some followers, his theories
are not generally accepted by fellow scientists. There is increasing
evidence that reinforces the widely-accepted theory that HIV causes AIDS.
The journal reviewed recent research on hemophiliacs, on the spread on AIDS
in Thailand, and on the side effects of illegal drug use. The editors
concluded that the studies do not support Duesberg's ideas. Some
researchers, said Science, believe that enough is known about AIDS and HIV
for the disease to pass "Koch's postulates"- the standard in medicine for
providing that a specific microbe causes a disease.
--------------------
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/äily-Summaries-2.html
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-AIDS-Daily-
Summaries-2.html
"The Duesberg Phenomenon"
Science, (12/09/94) Vol. 266, No. 5191, P. 1642; Cohen, Jon
Peter Duesberg, a retrovirologist at the University of California, claims
that such factors as illicit drug use and AZT cause AIDS. While most
mainstream AIDS researchers ignore Duesberg's ideas, he has a vocal group
of supporters. Among them are Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis and Robert
Willner, the doctor who recently pricked his finger with a bloody needle he
had just stuck into an HIV-infected man to prove that HIV is not the cause
of AIDS. This publication conducted a three-month investigation into
Duesberg's claims, interviewing more than 50 supporters and detractors. The
study concluded that there is extensive evidence in hemophiliacs-the group
that Duesberg acknowledges provides the best case for the HIV
hypothesis-that HIV causes disease and death. According to some AIDS
researchers, HIV now satisfies the classic postulates of disease causation
established by Robert Koch. The study also found that while Duesberg cites
the AIDS epidemic in Thailand as confirmation of his theories, the role of
HIV is confirmed instead. Finally, neither AZT nor illicit drugs cause the
immune deficiency characteristic of AIDS. Duesberg, who has difficulty
obtaining grants because of views, said that he would alter his views if he
found one article that suggested to him he was wrong.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
"Duesberg and the New View of HIV"
Nature, (01/19/95) Vol. 373, No. 6511, P. 189; Maddox, John
The new findings on the dynamics of HIV infection are, or should be, an
embarrassment to Professor Peter Duesberg of Berkeley, Calif., writes John
Maddox in Nature magazine. The findings resolve the paradox that although
the concentration of CD4 cells may decline with the persistence of
infection, there was no dramatic increase in the frequency of infected T
cells as infection gave way to overt disease. The new developments show
that the T cells in an infected person's blood are likely to have been
created in the previous few days. Only a small proportion will have had the
time to become infected. The cells that harbor the virus will be killed off
very soon. Thus, the scarcity of T cells is consistent with the claim that
the immune system is in overdrive from the onset of HIV-infection. Duesberg
is correct to have argued that the usually slow decline of CD4 cells is not
consistent with what is expected from a specific cytotoxic viral mechanism.
The explanation is that the CD4 population has at any time been freshly
created. Maddox wonders why it has only now been found that the response of
the immune system to HIV-infection is hyperactivity, and not the opposite.
Further studies of the viral dynamics will be eagerly awaited, now that the
basis for the low CD4 T-cell count in AIDS patients is clear.
--------------------
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/jmnewview.htm
DUESBERG AND THE NEW VIEW OF HIV
By John Maddox
Nature, 19 January 1995
This journal has offered Dr. Peter Duesberg and his associates an
opportunity to comment on last week's publications suggesting that the
immune system reacts hyperactively to HIV infection.
The publication last week of two important articles on the dynamics of the
infection of people by HIV is agreed to have been a important landmark in
the process of understanding the disease called AIDS, but not everybody
will be aware of that. Reporting of the event has been curiously selective.
In particular, the British newspaper The Sunday Times, which as recently as
a year ago was replete with accounts of how HIV can have little or nothing
to do with the causation of AIDS, chose not even to mention the new
developments in last Sunday's edition.
Is it planning a major account of how it came to be so misled, thus to
mislead its readers? Or is it waiting for a sign from Professor Peter
Duesberg, of Berkeley, California, who started the hare the newspaper
followed eagerly for two years?
The reasons why the new developments are (or should be) an embarrassment
for Duesberg are simply put. Almost from the outset of AIDS as a recognized
disease in the early 1980s, the objective index of an infected person's
state of health has been the concentration in the blood of T lymphocytes
carrying the CD4 antigen. The more advanced the infection, the smaller the
concentration of CD4+ cells.
But Duesberg was quick to point to a paradox in the observations: although
the concentration of CD4+ cells might decline with the persistence of
infection, there was no dramatic increase of the frequency of infected T
cells as infection gave way to overt disease. Cell death by inter-cellular
infection could hardly be consistent with that state of affairs.
In essence, the new developments resolve the paradox by showing that the T
cells in an infected person's blood are likely to have been created only in
the few days previously. There will not have been time enough for more than
a small proportion of them to have become infected, while those that
harbour virus will be killed off very soon. So the scarcity of T cells from
which virus can be recovered in test-tube experiments is consistent with
the assertion that the immune system is in overdrive from the onset of
infection by HIV.
On this (new) view, the progressive decline of the CD4+ concentration with
the duration of infection is rather a symptom of the underlying infection
than the crux of its mechanism. What seems to matter is that there should
be cells (including T cells) somewhere in the body (the lymph nodes are
likely candidates) from which virus particles continue to leak into the
blood plasma. In other words, Duesberg is right to have argued all along
that the usually slow decline of CD4+ cells is not consistent with what one
would expect from a specific cytotoxic viral mechanism. The explanation is
that the CD4+ population in the blood at any time has been freshly created.
Despite this journal's severe line, some months ago, on Duesberg's right of
reply to critics of his position, it is now in the general interest that
his and his associates' views on the new developments should be made
public. Duesberg was not available to take a single telephone call one day
last week, nor able to return it, but one of his associates appeared to
welcome the idea of a comment on the articles by Wei et al. and Ho et al.
(Nature 373, 117-122 & 123-126; 1995). That will be eagerly awaited and
will be published with the usual provisos-that it is not libelous or
needlessly rude, that it pertains to the new results and that it should not
be longer than it needs to be.
[snip]
What does this mean for basic research on AIDS, the cause eloquently
advocated a year ago by Dr. Bernie Fields (Nature 369, 95; 1994)? Wei et
al. and Ho et al. have provided the basis for a much more pointed programme
of investigation from which, no doubt, a complete picture of the dynamics
of this hitherto perplexing disease will emerge. A return to basics seems
already to have happened. The prospects of therapy are much more difficult
to tell, but has a fuller understanding ever failed to deliver improvements
of technique? The danger for the Duesbergs of this world is that they will
be left high and dry, championing a cause that will have ever fewer
adherents as time passes. Now may be the time for them to recant. *
--------------------
U.S. Centers for Disease Control AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
"No Data Have Proved that HIV Causes AIDS"
Wall Street Journal (02/16/95) P. A15; Ellner, Michael
The Wall Street Journal failed to report the evidence that prompted Michael
Murphy, publisher of the newsletter Overpriced Stock Service, to conclude
that HIV does not cause AIDS and that AZT kills those who take it, writes
the Rev. Dr. Michael Ellner in a letter to the editors of that paper.
Ellner is the president of the Health Education AIDS Liaison (HEAL).
Murphy's equation of scientific opinion with fact insults Dr. Peter
Duesberg, Ellner contends. It also mocks the many dedicated health
activists, physicians/scientists, journalists, and people of conscience
throughout the world who are working to alert the public to fake science
that supposedly shows that HIV causes AIDS, and the medicine it engenders.
NIH's Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Ellner predicts, is going to crash as soon as
independent researchers examine the lack of scientific evidence and the
true "benefits" of AZT.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
Monday, 5 April 1999
"Congressman Uncovers the HIV Conspiracy"
Science (04/14/95) Vol. 268, No. 5208, P. 191
In a recent letter sent to eight government scientists and authorities who
influence AIDS research and policies, freshman Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R-Minn.)
challenges the "HIV=AIDS hypothesis and its inability to come up with a
cure, vaccine, or effective treatment." His question echoes the arguments
of retrovirologist Peter Duesberg, who claims that HIV is harmless. The
federal AIDS effort "will be seen as the greatest scandal in American
history and will make Watergate look like a no-fault divorce," says
Gutknecht's senior legislative assistant, Brian Harte. If the response of
the government officials who received the letter reflects the views of the
scientific community, Harte says that Gutknecht will push for hearings by
the House basic research subcommittee, of which Gutknecht is a member.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
Monday, 5 April 1999
"HIV an Illusion"
Nature (05/18/95) Vol. 375, No. 6528, P. 197; Duesberg, Peter; Bialy, Harvey
In a letter to the editor published in the journal Nature, Peter Duesberg
and Harvey Bialy respond to two recent papers on HIV-1 dynamics. The
authors assert that the articles' central claim--that 100,000 HIV virions
per ml of plasma can be detected in AIDS patients with various nucleic-acid
assays--is misleading. The lead author of a paper by Wei et al. has
previously stated that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method they used
overestimates by at least 60,000 times the real titre of infectious HIV. If
that figure is divided into 100,000, the resulting 1.7 infectious HIVs per
ml is hardly the "virological mayhem" to which Wain-Hobson alluded in
another issue of
Nature. Ho and another group of researchers have also recently demonstrated
that more than 10,000 "plasma virions" correspond to less than one
infectious virus per ml. Finally, Loveday et al. found only 200 HIV "virion
RNAs" per ml of serum from AIDS patients. This is 1,000 times less than Ho
and Wei, the
--------------------
http://www.livelinks.com/sumeria/aids/howei.html
June 27, 1995
RESPONDING TO "DUESBERG AND THE NEW VIEW OF HIV"
by Peter H. Duesberg and Harvey Bialy
(NOTE -- Exponents are typed in the following manner: 10 to the power of 4
appears as 10^4)
The editor of Nature, John Maddox, has issued a published invitation to
"Peter Duesberg and his associates... to comment" on two new studies by Wei
et al [1] and Ho et al [2] that he feels lend strong support to the
hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS [3]. Maddox credits us for having
identified two paradoxes of this hypothesis, (i) "Duesberg was quick to
point to a paradox... [that] there was no dramatic increase of the
frequency of infected T-cells as infection gave way to overt disease", and
that (ii) "Duesberg is right to have argued all along that the unusally
slow decline of CD4+ cells [T-cells] is not consistent with... a specific
cytotoxic viral mechanism." [3]
According to Maddox, "the new developments are (or should be) an
embarrassment for Duesberg", because they "resolve the paradox". But we do
not see any reason why a scientist should be embarrassed for having pointed
out paradoxes in the past, which ever way these paradoxes are subsequently
solved. We also object to rhetoric personalizing a scientific debate.
However, it is embarrassing that in the name of science clinical, public
health, journalistic, and political decisions have been made in the past,
based on a hypothesis that -- we all agree now -- was unproven at that
time.
Since the HIV-AIDS hypothesis makes many assumptions that are paradoxical,
if not bewildering, for pre-HIV virologists, and since the new studies do
not clearly define the HIV hypothesis, we shall first state the hypothesis
and then explain why, in light of these new studies, it remains
paradoxical.
In 1984 it was proposed that the retrovirus HIV can cause such
diametrically different diseases as Koposi's sarcoma, pneumonia, dementia,
diarrhea, and weight loss [4,5]. All of these diseases and over two dozen
more are now collectively called acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)
[6], if antibody to HIV is present. But many of these diseases, including
Kaposi's sarcoma, lymphoma, dementia and weight loss, are neither
consequences of, nor consistently associated with, immunodeficiency [7,8].
[snip]
The hypothesis fails to shed any light on the causation of
non-immunodeficiency AIDS diseases, like Kaposi's sarcoma, dementia,
lymphoma and weight loss, which make up 39% of all American AIDS cases
[8,33]. Today this HIV-AIDS hypothesis stands unproven and has failed to
produce any public health benefits [34-36].
The new studies are claimed by two News and Views articles from Maddox [3]
and Wain-Hobson [43] to resolve the paradox, (1) how HIV kills T-cells, (2)
how HIV causes AIDS, and (3) why HIV needs 10 years to cause AIDS. But we
argue that the new studies have failed to resolve any of these paradoxa; in
fact they have added new ones:
[snip]
The new papers have indeed resolved this paradox by shifting the paradigm:
[snip]
It is consistent with this "new view of HIV" that there is no correlation
between virus titers and T-cell counts in the patients that Wei et al and
Ho et al have studied.
[snip]
But in typical AIDS patients HIV is so rare, that even leading AIDS
retrovirologists from the US, like Robert Gallo, and in the UK, like Robin
Weiss, failed for years to isolate HIV from AIDS patients [45,46].
Likewise, virus-infected cells are so rare that they could not be found by
George Shaw, the senior investigator of the new study by Wei et al, Gallo
and their collaborators in most AIDS patients [27] -- until the rare
proviral DNA could be amplified with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
[31,44,47].
[snip]
The simplest interpretation of the slow decline of T-cells in Ho's and
Wei's AIDS patients is a non-viral cause, e.g. long-term intoxication [7].
Take for example the slow decline of liver cells in long-term alcoholics or
of lung cells in long-term smokers.
Maddox seems concerned that "reporting of the new event has been curiously
selective". Perhaps even science reporters begin to wonder how much further
the virus-AIDS hypothesis can be stretched to explain its most obvous
failures and inconsistencies: Why is there no vaccine? Why does
American/European AIDS stay in the classical risk groups, male homosexual,
intravenous drug users and transfusion recipients? Why do AZT-treated
HIV-positives get AIDS? [55,56] Why do 918 HIV-positive male homosexuals
who had "avoided experimental medications on offer" and chose to abstain or
significantly reduce their use of recreational drugs..." remain AIDS-free,
long-term survivors? [57] Why did the T-cells of 29% of 1020 HIV-positive
male homosexuals and former intravenous drug users from the placebo arm of
a clinical AZT trial increase up to 22% over two years -- despite the
presence of HIV? [58] Why did the T-cells of 14 out of 31 HIV-positive
hemophiliacs treated with highly purified factor VIII increase up to 25%
over three years -- despite the presence of HIV? [59] Why is there not a
single study showing that HIV-positive 20 to 50-year-old men or women who
are not drug users or recipients of transfusions ever get AIDS? [60]
Why did neither Ho et al nor Wei et al identify the risk groups their
patients came from or indicate whether they had Kaposi's sarcoma, dementia,
or diarrhea or lymphoma? Can they exclude that recreational drugs used by
AIDS risk groups, like nitrate inhalants, amphetamines, and cocaine are
immunotoxic or carcinogenic? [61] Why is it that among 10 long-term (10 to
15 years) survivors of HIV recently described by Ho et al [50] "none had
received antiretroviral therapy..."? Can Wei et al and Ho et al exclude
that the DNA chain terminators, AZT and ddI, that their patients received
in addition to the new experimental drugs, do not play any role in the
"slow decline of CD4+ cells"? Are they aware that the manufacturer of AZT
says in the Physician's Desk Reference that "it was often difficult to
distinguish adverse events possibly assoiated with zidovudine [AZT]
administration from underlying signs of HIV diseases..."? [62] Are they
aware that the DNA chain terminators were developed 30 years ago to kill
growing human cells for chemotherapy, not as anti-HIV drugs?
It seems to us that the "new developments" of Wei et al and Ho et al are a
Mayday of AIDS virologists -- rather than a "virological mayhem." [43]
_______________________
[For more-recent research and comment -- January 1999 -- that contradicts
Duesberg and shows an HIV infection mechanism, see the last several
citations at the bottom of this section, from "Project Inform".]
--------------------
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/mgglanka.htm
INTERVIEW STEFAN LANKA
Challenging BOTH Mainstream and Alternative AIDS Views
By Mark Gabrish Conlan Zenger's December 1998
While most people in the U.S. and Western Europe go right on believing that
the so-called Human Immunodeficiency Virus [HIV] is the sole cause of AIDS,
debate rages even within the alternative AIDS community over whether HIV
exists at all.
Though Peter Duesberg, Ph.D. -- virtually the only alternative AIDS
theorist with any significant public reputation -- continues to insist that
HIV exists but is harmless, other alternative AIDS researchers and
activists are coming to the conclusion that the virus doesn't exist.
The main proponents of this view are Australian researcher Eleni
Papadopulos-Eleopulos and her colleagues, who argue that HIV has never been
isolated according to the Pasteur Institute criteria of 1973, and therefore
it's probably what's called an "endogenous retrovirus" -- a creation of the
body's own genetic material that looks and functions partly like a virus,
but is not an infection because it comes from the body's own cells.
Stefan Lanka, Ph.D. takes the challenge to HIV's existence even further. A
German researcher, Dr. Lanka is usually referred to as a virologist. But
that hardly begins to describe his wide-ranging fields of study. Based on
experiences in marine biology, biochemistry, evolutionary biology and
virology, he's worked out a whole new view of HIV and AIDS. He believes
that all so-called retroviruses are actually the body's own creations; that
hepatitis is an autoimmune disorder (a disease in which the body is
attacked by components of its own immune system) rather than a viral
disease; that AIDS has nothing to do with immune suppression; and that it
should really be called Acquired Energy Deficiency Syndrome -- AEDS --
because its true cause is a breakdown in the delivery of oxygen to the
blood and/or body tissues. Dr. Lanka did a West Coast tour in October and
spoke to H.E.A.L.- San Diego on October 20. Zenger's interviewed him hours
before that event.
--------------------
The following URL may be used to search in AltaVista.
AltaVista: Advanced Query duesberg AND HIV
http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=aq&kl=en&d0=1%2fOct%2f98
&d1=31%2fDec%2f98&q=duesberg+AND+HIV&r=duesberg+HIV+AIDS&stq=20&c9k
--------------------
Delaney's Letter to the National Academy of Science
http://alumni.umbc.edu/~akoont1/tmh/delaney.html
HIV=AIDS Controversy: Letters Department
The following is a copy of the letter being distributed by Martin Delaney
of Project Inform which seeks to silence Prof. Peter Duesberg. James M.
Scutero puts Delaney and PI in perspective in his expose, "Project
Dis-Inform: PI's [Project Inform, see below] Martin Delaney is the Pied
Piper of the AIDS Establishment".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Bruce Alberts
President, National Academy of Sciences 2101 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20418
July 31, 1997
Dear Dr. Alberts,
I am writing as the head of a nationally known AIDS organization and as a
representative of a larger group of AIDS service providers. I am also a
member of the NIAID Council and a member of the former Medicine Roundtable
on the Developments of Drugs and Vaccines for AIDS. I am writing today to
seek your attention and advice on a matter which has come to trouble almost
all of us working in the AIDS service field.
Our concern is the continuing public campaign of Peter Duesberg to convince
the public, people at risk of HIV infection, and people already infected
that they are in no danger from this virus, that AIDS is solely a
behavioral disease, and that current treatments for the disease and
recreational drug abuse are in fact the cause of the disease. I have
followed this debate for more than a decade and have yet to see any
meaningful scientific evidence that supports these views.
Instead, over the years I've seen a rapid accumulation of evidence that
conclusively disproves his viewpoint. His views have long ceased to be a
topic of serious discussion within the scientific community. Having lost
the debate with his peers, he has taken his campaign to the public and
directly to the people most vulnerable- young and poorly-informed people
struggling with HIV infection. He fans a natural inclination toward denial
on the part of such people, giving them a seemingly legitimate way to
ignore a positive HIV antibody test, to cast aside the difficult behavioral
changes associated with safe sex, and to forego the complex challenge of
multi-drug combination therapy.
Obviously, such a deceptively attractive package will find a ready
audience.
No one opposing his views wishes to discourage his academic freedom, nor do
I see evidence that this has been done in any way. Though he claims his
views on AIDS are responsible for the loss of NIH grants, it is far more
likely that this is due to his lack of contribution and publication in his
own field over the last decade. The scientific community has shown
unprecedented tolerance for his behavior, as well-meaning people hoped that
the airing of his views would lead him to see his errors. Such is not the
case. Just as the right of free speech doesn't sanction the person who
yells "fire" in a crowded theater, neither does academic freedom provide
blanket protection for irresponsible behavior by scientists which adversely
affects the public health.
Perhaps most troubling is the degree to which his current campaign has come
to flaunt [sic -- he means flaut] the scientific method. His disregard for
accuracy and integrity in the scientific process is amply demonstrated in
the lengthy review published in 1995 in Science Magazine by Jon Cohen. In
this and in Duesbergs own recent book, even the most junior of trained
observers can see how he chooses to overlook all data which contradicts his
conclusions, while misstating and distorting the data on several aspects of
the disease. I had the misfortune of debating Professor Duesberg and his
cohort Kary Mullis together in 1995 and found both strangely ignorant of
some of the simplest principles of drug Developments and clinical research.
A most recent example of how badly he has come to flaunt [sic] the values
of science can be found in the attached material. I have included here an
ad, placed personally by Professor Duesberg, announcing a public
presentation of his views at the Metropolitan Community Church, a gay
community facility in San Francisco. The audience is hardly the scientific
community. Instead, it is aimed at enticing another generation of younger
gay men -- in whom new HIV infections are already running rampant -- into
seeing things his way.
The most remarkable aspect of this is the effort he has taken to make the
program look like an official program of the University of California at
Berkeley, right down to the use of the University Seal. It also features
his 1986 appointment to the NAS [National Academy of Sciences]. It most
certainly is not a university function.
Moreover, the entire text of the ad is deceptive, disguised to look like an
ad for one of the many community forums held about the new therapies,
research advances, and viral load. There isn't a hint anywhere as to what
the real agenda is, or how he will do his best to discourage the use of the
new drugs and diagnostic measures which have given so much hope and new
life to so many people.
He will be there to try to convince an unwitting and otherwise uninformed
audience that there is serious scientific support for his contrarian view
and that all those who hold other views are somehow puppets of the
pharmaceutical industry and a conspiratorial research establishment.
Undoubtedly, he will succeed with some of those present, and no doubt
hasten their deaths. In these days when AIDS therapy has shown such great
promise, it is difficult to distinguish his actions from those of a mass
murderer.
I am writing to you as the chief executive of the National Academy of
Sciences because Professor Duesberg is a member of your distinguished body,
whose mission is to serve the public interest. His actions, I believe, are
an affront to everything the NAS stands for. They mock your Academy's
commitment to the scientific method and to the principle that scientists
should fight their battles in a peer setting, not by public relation
efforts in the public. As members of the public aggrieved by his actions,
we call upon the National Academy of Sciences to raise the question of
whether he is fit for continued membership in your group. I would like to
propose a few possible topics for debate by the NAS:
1. Given a thorough review of his scientific and public behavior in the
AIDS epidemic, should Peter Duesberg remain a member in good standing of
the NAS?
2. Should the NAS issue a public statement, perhaps reaffirming his
academic freedom, but condemning his efforts to sway the public rather than
his peers?
3. Should the NAS broker a settlement with Professor Duesberg which would,
minimally, prohibit him from further promotion of his potentially harmful
views to the public until he presents convincing evidence to the NAS that
the common view of HIV and AIDS are in error?
I would like to set up a meeting between yourself and several
representatives of AIDS service organizations to discuss this matter in
greater detail. I will call your office to seek an appointment.
Sincerely,
Martin Delaney Founding Director, Project Inform
Organizational Endorsements:
1. Act-up Golden Gate, Oakland, Ca. 2. AIDS Action Committee,
Boston, Ma. 3. APLA/AIDS Project Los Angeles 4. AIDS Research
Alliance, LA 5. AIDS Service Center, Pasadena, Ca. 6. AIDS
Treatment Initiatives, Atlanta, Ga 7. Being Alive, LA 8. Center for
AIDS Prevention Studies, UCSF AIDS Research Institute 9.
CRIA/Community Initiative on AIDS, NYC 10. Critical Path AIDS
Project, Phil., PA 11. Denver Buyers Club 12. FAIR 13. Florida
AIDS Action Council, Miami 14. Kraus Medical Group, LA 15.
Multicultural AIDS Coalition, Boston, Ma. 16. Project Inform 17.
PWA Coalition Colorado 18. Research Sanctuary, LA 19.
"Resolute: Dedicated to Surviving HIV/AIDS", Denver 20.
Robert Smith Medical Group, San Diego 21. San Francisco AIDS
Foundation 22. Test Positive Aware Network, Chicago 23. United
foundation for AIDS, Miami 24. Women Alive, LA
--------------------
HIV Infection and AIDS, NIAID Fact Sheet (Government stance on cause of
AIDS)
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/hivinf.htm
HIV Infection and AIDS
AIDS - acquired immune deficiency syndrome - was first reported in the
United States in 1981 and has since become a major worldwide epidemic. AIDS
is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). By killing or
impairing cells of the immune system, HIV progressively destroys the body's
ability to fight infections and certain cancers. Individuals diagnosed with
AIDS are susceptible to life-threatening diseases called opportunistic
infections, which are caused by microbes that usually do not cause illness
in healthy people.
--------------------
Project Inform's What's New Memo February 1999 ä
http://www.projinf.org/whatsnew/wn-9902.html#Basic%20HIV%20Science
%20Update:%20New%20Information%20on%20How%20HIV%20Affects%20the%20
Immune%20System
Basic HIV Science Update: New Information on How HIV Affects the Immune
System
In a recent article in the scientific journal Nature Medicine, researchers
at the University of California at San Francisco's Gladstone Institute
published information shedding light on how HIV may be causing immune
suppression in people living with HIV. Dr. Mike McCune of the Gladstone
Institute, working with Dr. Hellerstein of UC Berkeley, used a new
technology to look at the rates of cell destruction and production in
people living with HIV compared to uninfected volunteers. Their findings
add support to a theory of how HIV causes immune suppression, a theory
which is not often talked about but which has been posed since the very
early days of the AIDS pandemic. The theory is that the major cause of
immune suppression in HIV is not so much a consequence of the destruction
of existing immune cells, (although certainly this is happening to some
degree) but rather a consequence of a failure of the immune system to
produce new cells at an adequate rate.
--------------------
Project Inform's What's New Memo February 1999 ä
http://www.projinf.org/whatsnew/wn-9902.html#Basic%20HIV%20Science
%20Update:%20New%20Information%20on%20How%20HIV%20Affects%20the%20
Immune%20System
Commentary
As depicted in the press, the research published in Nature Medicine was a
breakthrough theory on how HIV causes immune suppression, which runs
contrary to conventional beliefs about how HIV causes AIDS. Pitting Dr.
McCune's new data against Dr. Ho's earlier theory made for good press, if
not good science. The reality is perhaps somewhat less dramatic. The new
data shown by Dr. McCune and his colleagues makes a strong case that there
appears to be an impairment in the ability of the immune system to produce
new cells. In truth, there is nothing absolutely contradictory between
these and Dr. Ho's findings, and also nothing new about them. Both are
efforts to measure and quantify what is happening to the immune systems of
HIV infected people. Both are probably accurate and both still support the
need for antiviral therapy. In fact, among people living with HIV compared
to healthy uninfected individuals, McCune and his colleagues noted a
significant increase in cell death, just as Dr. Ho stated (if not quite as
dramatic in numbers). What is new, however, is that a new technology was
used which strongly suggests that there is also a defect in the rate at
which new cells are being produced to replace lost cells in people living
with HIV.
While Dr. McCune's work is important for the field of AIDS research and has
implications for future directions in AIDS research, the *information does
not support a change in the current guidelines for the treatment of HIV
infection in adults and children*. Clearly, people are experiencing
profound improvements in immune status and general health as a consequence
of triple-combination anti-HIV drug therapy. Dr. McCune has emphasized this
point in numerous interviews and conversations with activists and AIDS
treatment information providers. Obviously if there is an impairment in new
cell production, making efforts to preserve the immune system that exists
is key toward preventing disease progression.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
Dear Friend:
In recent years, many stories have appeared in the media highlighting the
views of individuals who claim that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. These
articles are always "good copy" in the sense that they generate controversy
and reader response. Many AIDS educators and public health officials are
concerned, however, that such views, presented without context or
challenge, undermine efforts to teach safer sexual behaviors needed for
reducing the spread of HIV. Others fear that they may discourage people
from seeking useful treatment available from their doctors and serve to
confuse people about important medical matters which may affect their lives
in the most profound ways.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
In light of the fact that yet another book is being released by the HIV
critics, we are supplying the attached document for your information. It is
an official summary of the evidence collected over the last 15 years which
has lead to the nearly universal consensus that HIV is the primary cause of
AIDS (on the NIH Web Site). It represents the work of hundreds of
scientists and references several hundred scientific papers on this matter.
HIV critics make the argument that "there isn't a single scientific paper
which proves that HIV is the cause of AIDS." In a sense, they are correct.
The argument is made not by a single paper, but by hundreds of them.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
We believe this is a serious matter which deserves careful and serious
consideration every time it comes up. We urge you to read this document, as
well as to consider the possible consequences if people are mistakenly
given the notion that the views for and against HIV causality are in any
way equally valid. As we see it, from a scientific viewpoint, the
alternative view is akin to the notion that the earth is flat, or the
belief that creationism is somehow a valid alternative to evolutionary
science.
Sincerely,
Martin Delaney
Founding Director, Project Inform
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1195 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1196 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (long, with science cites, no rant)
002 - BruceyJ aol.com - David Mollett's Flyer
003 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
004 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
005 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
006 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
007 - "Kathy" (ksutphen jps.net - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
008 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
009 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
010 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (long, with science cites, no rant)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:56:14 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To all WC list subscribers:
I have sent a very long post with the above subject and beginning as below.
If you did not receive the long post because your e-mail server or client
rejects messages over a certain length, and you wish to see the post,
please send me a note, and I will resubmit the post in two separate parts
(one, my response to Ezra Beeman, and one the citations regarding Duesberg
and HIV/AIDS).
And I apologize in advance if anyone is offended by the length of the post;
most of it is the citations.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp,
Wellington, New Zealand
Ezra Beeman wrote:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)) Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
)) agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
)) credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
[snip]
And BEEMAN reacted:
)Is that a fact? Please tell me where your beloved, cherished and
)benevolent
)scientific community has proven HIV causes AIDS? You cannot, because such
)a
)proof does not exist (if you believe a select group of skeptics.) Yet this
)is
)now assumed in all the scientific literature. Please explain this little
)idiosyncrasy of the scientific method in action to me?
Michael KOPP says:
It is very interesting that Ezra, who says in other posts of the
impossibility of science "proving" _anything_, uses the supposed fact that
science hasn't "proved" that HIV causes AIDS in his broadside.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.2 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: David Mollett's Flyer
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 07:07:00 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Or would it be possible to make a copy available online? On the PLANS site
for example?
Bruce
In einer eMail vom 05.04.99 07:43:31 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
asf peakpeak.com:
) Would it be possible to send one to me?
)
) Alan S. Fine MD
)
) - I've sent out fliers describing material based on the
) )Waldorf approach (without anthroposophy) to every school in the USA (over
) the
) )years well over a million). We are now working through sending another
five
) )thousand with another 45,000 to be sent thru' the year. This coming week I
) go
) )to another part of the USA to give 4 presentations (with acknowledgement
to
) )Waldorf) at a major conference. Similarly I've given 6 such presentations
) )during the last 6 months at national conferences here in the USA. No
) problems
) )whatsoever.
) )
) )David
) )Dr. David Mollet
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.3 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1188
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 02:09:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904050516.WAA25384 lists1.best.com)
Me too, please. Dan Dugan
)Would it be possible to send one to me?
)
) Alan S. Fine MD
)
)- I've sent out fliers describing material based on the
))Waldorf approach (without anthroposophy) to every school in the USA (over
(snip)
))Dr. David Mollet
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.4 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 16:10:36
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
At 06:43 AM 4/5/99 -0400, you wrote:
)Certainly, "esoteric Christianity" is part of anthroposophy. As much as
)anthroposophy serves as a basis for curriculum choices and teaching
)methods, esoteric Christianity is part of that--but esoteric Christianity
)is not taught in the classroom, any more than anthroposophy is taught in
)the classroom.
Critics argue that not only does anthroposophy serve as the foundation of
Waldorf education, which leads to the religious methodology, but that
anthroposphy *is* implicit in the classroom curricula as well. This will be
brought out in the California courts, examples of which have been given at
Mr. Dugan's website.
)If the courts determine that it is such a violation, so be it. I don't
)support waldorf public schools in their practice, and would welcome this
)conclusion.
Time will tell.
)The anthroposophical basis for waldorf education leads directly to
)anthroposophical methodology. If a teacher oversteps his or her bounds, it
)also leads directly to anthroposophical content in lessons.
)
)I doubt that you are qualified to judge the issue of its legality in public
)education.
Thanks for the vote of confidence! I have read the text of the lawsuit of
Malnak v. Yogi, and it does seem as if there is a parallel in the Waldorf
case. Perhaps you are not qualified to judge this either, which would make
your denial here mere opinion as well.
In any event, I am qualified in religious studies, specializing in new
religious movements and the "new spirituality" of the New Age movement.
Hence my conclusion that anthroposophy is religious, that it serves as the
basis for Waldorf education, and that this is a violation of the
Establishment Clause. I will let me pending article on this issue stand on
its own merit, as well as cumulative weight of the evidence in the
prosecution's case against Waldorf in Sacramento.
)What is the TruthQuest Institute? Is the TruthQuest
)Institute a dispassionate observer, or do you have some kind of a stake in
)the outcome? Have you contributed to the PLANS legal fund, personally or
)as an institution?
I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis. TruthQuest
is a nonprofit evangelical educational organization specializing in new
religious movements. We have no financial stake in the outcome. We have not
contributed to the PLANS legal fund, as an institution, or personally.
Neither have we received any funds from PLANS. At any rate, even if this
were not the case, it would not necessarily skew the conclusions we have
reached on Waldorf education. To raise such a question smacks of an ad
hominem designed to skirt criticism.
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.5 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 21:31:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
))I doubt that you are qualified to judge the issue of its legality in public
))education.
)
)Thanks for the vote of confidence! I have read the text of the lawsuit of
)Malnak v. Yogi, and it does seem as if there is a parallel in the Waldorf
)case. Perhaps you are not qualified to judge this either, which would make
)your denial here mere opinion as well.
I do have a law degree, which leaves me just enough in the know to
recognize it's better left to specialists.
))What is the TruthQuest Institute? Is the TruthQuest
))Institute a dispassionate observer, or do you have some kind of a stake in
))the outcome? Have you contributed to the PLANS legal fund, personally or
))as an institution?
)
)I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
)presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
)presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis. TruthQuest
)is a nonprofit evangelical educational organization specializing in new
)religious movements. We have no financial stake in the outcome. We have not
)contributed to the PLANS legal fund, as an institution, or personally.
)Neither have we received any funds from PLANS. At any rate, even if this
)were not the case, it would not necessarily skew the conclusions we have
)reached on Waldorf education. To raise such a question smacks of an ad
)hominem designed to skirt criticism.
Or maybe it just smacks of a hunger for information that was not available
in your first post.
But it still isn't clear to me: what's an "evangelical educational
organization"? Are you affiliated with a church?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.6 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 21:45:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
)In any event, I am qualified in religious studies, specializing in new
)religious movements and the "new spirituality" of the New Age movement.
What are your specific qualifications?
)I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
)presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
)presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis.
So what are your personal presuppositions?
What are the presuppositions of the TruthQuest Institute?
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.7 ---------------
From: "Kathy" (ksutphen jps.net)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 18:41:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Robert Flannery posted:
))Your objection, Kathy (and I apologize if I have misunderstood it), is that
))even if biodynamic farming is the best in existence, and even if it could
))save the ozon layer and the rain forests and the ecology, you would still
))protest against students learning about it in public schools because it is
))rooted in the spiritual-religious anthroposophical conception about natural
))laws, such as etheric and astral forces connected with the planets and
))phases of the moon.
If Biodynamic farming was the "best in existence . . . save the ozone . . .
rain forests . . . ecology . . ." what could I possibly have against it.
Surely, if controlled tests proved the validity of these assertions, so what
if it were rooted in Anthroposophical beliefs. The same holds true for the
Pythagorean Theorem. It works and has an objective basis in testable reality
- it is useful and holds true over time and application . . .
But, as far as I know, none of the Anthroposophical *spiritual scientific*
beliefs can make this claim. The "heart is not a pump", "blood is pure
spirit", biodynamic gardening is the best . . ." is all based on religious
beliefs - not testable and proven theses.
))By the same token, the law of the triangle works, it's very good geometry.
))Still, Pythagoras believed in the gods and the spiritual universe, and all
))his works are rooted in these views. For that reason, Kathy, the drums of
))the ancient Greeks as well as the drum of Shakespeare are reminders of the
))problem that is inherent in an objection of this kind.
You've lost me here.
I believe that
))everyone involved with American public schools and the separation of church
))and state would feel relieved if this problem would disappear.
Which problem is that? Are you referring to what I perceive as *the* problem
pertinent to this list, i.e.; the illegal funding and inclusion of Waldorf
curriculum in public schools, because doing so violates the US
Constitution's 1st Amendment and the California Constitution?
Kathy
Kathy
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.8 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 18:28:28
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060127.SAA09305 lists1.best.com)
At 09:31 PM 4/5/99 -0400, you wrote:
)I do have a law degree, which leaves me just enough in the know to
)recognize it's better left to specialists.
Yes, and we will see what the legal specialists say in federal court. I
have rendered my opinion in my area of expertise, religious studies.
))I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
))presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
))presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis. TruthQuest
))is a nonprofit evangelical educational organization specializing in new
))religious movements. We have no financial stake in the outcome. We have not
))contributed to the PLANS legal fund, as an institution, or personally.
))Neither have we received any funds from PLANS. At any rate, even if this
))were not the case, it would not necessarily skew the conclusions we have
))reached on Waldorf education. To raise such a question smacks of an ad
))hominem designed to skirt criticism.
)
)
)Or maybe it just smacks of a hunger for information that was not available
)in your first post.
Perhaps, but this is not how it came across. I would be happy to give you
the benefit of the doubt.
)But it still isn't clear to me: what's an "evangelical educational
)organization"? Are you affiliated with a church?
Did you check the website at the URL below my name? There you can read my
brief bio and organizational background info. "Evangelical" means that our
organization studies new religious movements (NRMs) from a theological
perspective, specifically conservative, orthodox, Protestant Christianity.
"Education" means that we conduct research and produce a variety seminars
and other resources to educate churches, the public, the media and others,
about NRMs. TQI is not affiliated with any specific Christian church or
denomination, but is transdenominational.
For the record, I am the executive vice president of TruthQuest Institute,
a licensed minister in the Southern Baptist Convention. I have had training
in NRMs through the SBC's Interfaith Witness program. I have been active in
this field for over 13 years, serve as a member of the board of directors
for Evangelical Ministries to New Religions (www.emnr.org) and have
provided expertise and analysis on NRMs to major media outlets
internationally.
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.9 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 18:31:44
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060138.SAA22397 lists1.best.com)
At 09:45 PM 4/5/99 -0400, you wrote:
)
))In any event, I am qualified in religious studies, specializing in new
))religious movements and the "new spirituality" of the New Age movement.
)
)What are your specific qualifications?
See my last response to you, and the websites of TQI and EMNR for further
information. You might also visit Nurel's website at the University of
Calgary for further information where I am included in a list of experts on
NRMs coming from an evangelical Christian perspective.
)
))I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
))presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
))presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis.
)
)So what are your personal presuppositions?
Waldorf education is religious by nature and should not be supported by
public tax dollors or found in the public school setting. Private schools,
fine. Public, no. This is just as true with Christian schools, and it
should be so with Waldorf.
)What are the presuppositions of the TruthQuest Institute?
See the website for information on the background and perspective of TQI.
What are your presuppositions and qualifications to discuss and advocate
Waldorf?
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1196.10 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 21:06:10 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The aggressive salvos of these posts (as well as the more serious ones in
the Balkans) underscore a vital lesson. Spirituality is a very personal
thing. One person's devoutly held beliefs are the next person's nonsense.
What is needed is a respect for spiritual diversity. This involves not only
allowing other's to practice their faith freely, but to respect the
spiritual beliefs of others as being as true, and as vital as one's own.
Can anthroposophy, with its adherence to Steiner's vision being the truest,
the highest and the most complete, make that claim?
And if spirituality diverges from people to people, it is the material world
we all share. The basic material realities. When Anthroposophy spreads
its tenets into the material world, into the world of agriculture, of
cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common ground we all share?
Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
promote?
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1196 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1197 --------------
001 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
002 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
003 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
004 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
005 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
006 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
007 - Daniel Sabsay (danielsabs - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
008 - Daniel Sabsay (danielsabs - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
010 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.1 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:38 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
(199904041156.EAA11907 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904041552.IAA09244 lists1.best.com)
Bob Tolz (to Michael Kopp):
)
) Sorry, I've heard of a Mac, but I've never heard of Sherlock. You mean
)that using a Mac restricts you to using one search engine? I'm
)flabbergasted.
Bob, Sherlock isn't a search engine; it's an application with which you can
search on innumerable engines simultaneously. I use 30 plug-ins, 30 search
engines, on Sherlock. Besides, with Sherlock you can find anything on any
of your disks and drives, and you can search by content, like a phrase in a
document. Let's face it, Mac is the Cadillac in the world of computers, and
Sherlock is the latest in automatic clutch technology. The rest of you are
driving stick shifts.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.2 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199904030954.BAA21770 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904031502.HAA22227 lists1.best.com)
Bob Tolz wrote (about Dan's pet theory about Steiner's anti-semitic
Einstein-bashing):
)Dan,
) All you've done is support the first leg (in time) of what Tarjei
)wrote. You've taken a snapshot rather than given us a movie. Can you
)(or Tarjei) help us out with the "gradually came to admire him" comment
)by Tarjei?
What I had in mind was Steiner's inclusion of Einstein in "Riddles of
Philosophy," and that his criticism seemed to be mainly directed at people
who kept talking about the theory of relativity without understanding any
of it. In "Riddles of Philosophy," Steiner's says that Einstein's ideas are
about physics, but they are so important and revolutionary that they belong
to the realm of philosophy.
The question is, did Steiner understand Einstein? And if he did, was his
criticism valid? This is a question for future generations to explore.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.3 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Pythagoras (Was Re: Biodynamic Gardening)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:25 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199903312202.OAA04020 lists1.best.com)
(199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904030954.BAA21770 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan wrote:
)Steiner participated in the Einstein-bashing that was
)part of the popular anti-intellectualism in Weimar Germany that also fed
)the fires of anti-Semitism.
)
)"The time is now that we ought to speak of such things, all the brilliant
)nonsense which is called relativity theory through which Einstein became a
)great man. This would be able to be rejected if one were to have clear
)concepts about things, concepts which really correspond to the reality. ...
)This idea doesn't have the slightest relationship to reality. This whole
)unhealthy idea lives today as the theory of relativity and enjoys the
)widest acclaim."
)
)[Rudolf Steiner, The True Nature of Substance & Energy, August 7, 1917
)(Rick Mansell translation, tape SL266, Rudolf Steiner Research Foundation,
)Redondo Beach, California) The lecture of 7 Aug 1917 is the second lecture
)in the KARMA OF MATERIALISM.]
I have read this lecture more than once, but it has been a while. It amazes
me what kind of hogwash you cook up in your failure-doomed attempts to
label Steiner as an anti-semite. You have a point what his derogatory
remarks about blacks are concerned, but even in your selected quotes on the
PLANS website about Steiner and the Jews, there isn't a single trace of
anti-semitism. You're beating a dead horse.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.4 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904050500.WAA15684 lists1.best.com)
Alan S. Fine wrote:
)If biodynamic gardening was proven superior by proper scientific methods, I
)doubt anyone would have any objection to the teaching of it, and the
)promotion of it. However, this system of agriculture, as well as many of
)the tenets of anthroposophy are not proven this way, and belong to a
)spiritual belief system, not the material world.
You are contradicting yourself. First you say that you don't think anyone
would object to biodynamic gardening if it were good. Then you object
because it's anthroposophical.
)Such tenets of your belief system have nothing to do with the mathematical
))reality of the pythagorean theorem.
It is not a question of a belief system and its tenets. Spiritual science
is natural science extended to the spiritual realm, taking into account
laws and principles in the universe and in nature that lie beyond the scope
of natural science alone. You may call it anything you want, but so may I.
I don't go along with your definitions, and you don't go along with mine.
Let's leave it at that.
)It is the consistant blurring of the boundaries between the material
)truths we )all share, and the personal spiritual )beliefs of yours (and
)your fellow )anthroposophists) which is at the core of )what makes those
)of us outside of )your faith very uncomfortable.
So you want to be a resident of the material world we all share, but you
don't want to be a resident of the spiritual world, which we also all
share. Well, I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it
or not, and I see the spiritual and the material aspects of nature
inter-acting as parts of one reality - not two separate ones. Take it or
leave it.
It has never been my ambition to make people like yourself less
uncomfortable, and I think it's a big mistake for bourgeois
anthroposophists to try to do so. The truth should feel like a sharp knife
sometimes.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.5 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:58 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904060144.SAA27657 lists1.best.com)
Kathy wrote:
)Robert Flannery posted:
No he didn't. I did.
)If Biodynamic farming was the "best in existence . . . save the ozone . . .
)rain forests . . . ecology . . ." what could I possibly have against it.
)Surely, if controlled tests proved the validity of these assertions, so what
)if it were rooted in Anthroposophical beliefs. The same holds true for the
)Pythagorean Theorem. It works and has an objective basis in testable reality
)- it is useful and holds true over time and application . . .
)
)But, as far as I know, none of the Anthroposophical *spiritual scientific*
)beliefs can make this claim. The "heart is not a pump", "blood is pure
)spirit", biodynamic gardening is the best . . ." is all based on religious
)beliefs - not testable and proven theses.
The question is not whether or not something is testable or provable, but
whether it works or not, and whether it is true or not. If an apple taste
better and is richer in vitamins, I don't care if it cannot be tested.
I wrote:
))I believe that everyone involved with American public schools and the
))))separation of church and state would feel relieved if this problem
))would ))disappear.
Kathy wrote:
)Which problem is that? Are you referring to what I perceive as *the* problem
)pertinent to this list, i.e.; the illegal funding and inclusion of Waldorf
)curriculum in public schools, because doing so violates the US
)Constitution's 1st Amendment and the California Constitution?
The illegality of such funding, if established to be so, is linked to the
constitutional separation of church and state. That is a problem I don't
envy you, on either side of the issue.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.6 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:04:52 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
John Morehead wrote:
)I don't think anyone is a "dispassionate observer." We all have our
)presuppositions, biases, etc. The key is to acknowledge one's
)presuppositions and to be as objective as possible in analysis. TruthQuest
)is a nonprofit evangelical educational organization specializing in new
)religious movements. We have no financial stake in the outcome. We have not
)contributed to the PLANS legal fund, as an institution, or personally.
)Neither have we received any funds from PLANS. At any rate, even if this
)were not the case, it would not necessarily skew the conclusions we have
)reached on Waldorf education. To raise such a question smacks of an ad
)hominem designed to skirt criticism.
This is absolutely fascinating. You're an evangelical organization
specializing in new religious movements. Christian evengelicals are
embracing godless, secular humanists who believe that Jesus was a fool if
he existed at all. They are joining forces with those who are headed
straight for Hell in their unbelief and their denial of Christ, in order to
focus on warfare against the renewal of the Christ-idea. This is good.
As evangelicals, I take it for granted that you are Protestants, and that
you attack the Catholics not only for their Mary-cult, but for their belief
in the purgatory, which they have in common with anthroposophists, Muslims,
and Buddhists. You believe that when a person dies, he or she goes stright
to Heaven or to Hell, or sleeps in the grave until Judgement Day, to be
sent straight to Heaven or to Hell.
I am wondering if in your theology there is room for an exception to the
rules governing redemption and salvation what the secular humanists are
concerned. I understand that the best way you can serve God is to warn
people against New Age, new religions, and the renewal of old religions, in
order to preserve these moldy forms of worship and belief in their old
brittle vessels for eternity. And the secular humanists are truly serving
God in this respect, right? So would Jesus say on the last day, "Hey,
you're a secular humanist who despised me and scorned me, and I should send
you downstairs. But you did a good job beating up on those evil anthropops,
so here's your ticket to watch them fry!" - ?
You must have decided that anthropops, in spite of their longing for and
interest in Christ, will be the first to fry in Hell, and that the secular
humanists belong to the redeemed and the blissful as long as they recognize
that New Age is evil. And when you're fighting for the separation of church
and state to keep Christ away from the school children, I understand that's
what Jesus and Uncle Sam want. By Jesus I mean, of course, your Jesus,
whose full name is Pentagon's UFO-Jesus, which is meant by all those "Uncle
Sam and the Lord" bumber stickers. Let's face it, the Bible and the flag go
hand in hand in the court room, and at executions. Pentagon-Jesus gives the
senators and presidents victory in war when they prey hard enough.
(Separation of church and state my ass.) Pentagon-Jesus loves bombs and
misslies, electric chairs, and lethal injections. He is an astronaut, and
NASA is out there looking for him to give Pentagon a hand. (Of course he is
an astronaut; he promised to return in the same fashion he left - in a
space ship.)
Anyway, politics makes strange bedfellows. Evangelicals and humanists,
Uncle Sam and the Lord. An absolutely fantastic circus.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.7 ---------------
From: Daniel Sabsay (danielsabsay pacbell.net)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 22:40:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
The ever sure of himself Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) wrote )
)The question is not whether or not something is testable or provable, but
)whether it works or not, and whether it is true or not.
Really? How do you know what works, and what is true?
)If an apple tastes better
Let's leave this for a moment, since "tastes better" is not only
subjective, it is subtly influenced by psychological/social conditions,
just like taste and philosophical preferences among Scientologists.
)and is richer in vitamins, I don't care if it cannot be tested.
Ah, but the very definition of vitamins is derived from a scientific
consensus that is based on replicable testing. I fully appreciate that
YOU don't care if it can be tested or not, since you seem both
insensitive and ignorant of the epistemology of so much trusted knowledge
that you take for granted.
-- Daniel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daniel Sabsay, president "Ignorance is the ultimate renewable resource"
East Bay Skeptics Society http://www.eb-skeptics.org
mail eb-skeptics.org
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.8 ---------------
From: Daniel Sabsay (danielsabsay pacbell.net)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 22:44:35 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) wrote )
)It is not a question of a belief system and its tenets. Spiritual science
)is natural science extended to the spiritual realm,
According to St. Rudi.
)taking into account laws and principles in the universe and in nature that lie
)beyond the scope of natural science alone.
According to St. Rudi.
)You may call it anything you want, but so may I.
I call it self-delusional hogwash.
)I don't go along with your definitions, and you don't go along with mine.
)Let's leave it at that.
Oh no, we're not going to leave it at that. This is the essence of what
is wrong with anthroposophy guiding public education. Your attitude is
the evidence.
-- Daniel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daniel Sabsay, president "Ignorance is the ultimate renewable resource"
East Bay Skeptics Society http://www.eb-skeptics.org
mail eb-skeptics.org
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.9 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:06:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904060541.WAA09612 lists1.best.com)
I wrote:
))The question is not whether or not something is testable or provable, but
))whether it works or not, and whether it is true or not.
Daniel Sabsay wrote:
)
)Really? How do you know what works, and what is true?
Empirical experience.
)
))If an apple tastes better
)
)Let's leave this for a moment, since "tastes better" is not only
)subjective, it is subtly influenced by psychological/social conditions,
)just like taste and philosophical preferences among Scientologists.
Sure, even Scientologists eat apples.
)
))and is richer in vitamins, I don't care if it cannot be tested.
)
)Ah, but the very definition of vitamins is derived from a scientific
)consensus that is based on replicable testing.
So you may test the vitamins and ignore the taste. I don't care.
)I fully appreciate that YOU don't care if it can be tested or not, since
)you )seem both insensitive and ignorant of the epistemology of so much
)trusted )knowledge that you take for granted.
If I seem insensitive and ignorant of epistemology, I hope that this
impression of yours may help you sleep a little better. But taste and smell
should not be ignored in a thorough investigation of epistemology. Neither
should spiritual perceptions.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1197.10 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:10:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904060546.WAA14623 lists1.best.com)
)Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no) wrote )
)
))It is not a question of a belief system and its tenets. Spiritual science
))is natural science extended to the spiritual realm,
)
)According to St. Rudi.
and according to Uncle Taz.
)
))taking into account laws and principles in the universe and in nature
))that lie
))beyond the scope of natural science alone.
)
)According to St. Rudi.
and Uncle Taz.
)
))You may call it anything you want, but so may I.
)
)I call it self-delusional hogwash.
I call it apple pie.
)
))I don't go along with your definitions, and you don't go along with mine.
))Let's leave it at that.
)
)Oh no, we're not going to leave it at that. This is the essence of what
)is wrong with anthroposophy guiding public education. Your attitude is
)the evidence.
You have no business deciding who is to guide the education of my children.
And you have no business imposing your set of values and your definitions
on myself and my family. Period.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1197 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1198 --------------
001 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - Reincarnation (Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry))
003 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
005 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
006 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
007 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - RE: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
008 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
009 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
010 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: The world we do share and the world we don't
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.1 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 09:27:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030954.BAA21925 lists1.best.com)
(199904040200.SAA01759 lists1.best.com)
(199904040724.XAA15266 lists1.best.com)
(199904041156.EAA11907 lists1.best.com) (199904060504.WAA10029 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei wrote:
) Mac is the Cadillac in the world of computers, and
) Sherlock is the latest in automatic clutch technology. The rest of you are
) driving stick shifts.
Dear Tarjei,
Using PC and not Mac with its integrated Sherlock, of course I don¥t
agree with you ...;~) Maybe "stick shifts" that work; turning out 64
hits with Altavista/Evreka, are better than pseudo "Cadillacs" that
don¥t; turning out 1 single small hit ...? Even Metacrawler at
http://www.go2net.com/ turnes out 41 hits ...
Cheers!
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Reincarnation (Re: Informed consent (Re: Projective Geometry))
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 11:45:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199904030032.QAA18346 lists1.best.com) (199904030616.WAA10502 lists1.best.com)
I wrote, answering Alan:
) A central "spiritual belief" of anthroposophy is that the spirit of man
) is eternal and that just as we live through a number of days and nights
) through life, also the individual life as a whole constitues a form of
) long "day" upon which follows a form of "night" followed by a new "day".
)
) In Sweden an investigation some years ago showed that about 20% of adult
) Swedes had the same or a similar type of "life feeling" too. Only very
) few of them probably call themselves "anthroposophists". My hunch is
) more the other way around from what you write; that many people outside
) of anthroposophy actually _do_ share the basic views of anthroposophy,
) even if they don¥t call themselves "anthroposophists".
http://www.spiritual-wholeness.org/faqs/reinceur/reineuro.htm with Facts
and Figures of Reincarnation Belief in Europe, at
http://www.spiritual-wholeness.org, a New Age Catholic Web Site (..!)
has more information on the situation.
"Belief in the migration of souls has taken root in our western culture.
This fact is all the more remarkable because of a double clash: a clash
with the traditional Christian view of afterlife, and a clash with the
secular, scientific world view. Reincarnation seems to defy the logic of
the moment."
"Is the belief in reincarnation on the increase? The answer is: yes.
When we look at findings that span European convictions from 1968 -
1990, we see a steady increase in the acceptance of reincarnation. In
1968 23% of people in France believed in reincarnation; in 1990 that
figure had risen to 28%. In Britain it rose during the same period from
18% to 30%; in the Netherlands from 10% to 18%. This increase is all the
more striking since during that same period belief in God declined.
While fewer people express belief in God, more are prepared to express
belief in reincarnation."
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.3 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 06:11:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904060144.SAA27657 lists1.best.com)
Kathy, I didn't post this. It's Ezra, if I recall correctly.
)Robert Flannery posted:
)
)))Your objection, Kathy (and I apologize if I have misunderstood it), is that
)))even if biodynamic farming is the best in existence, and even if it could
)))save the ozon layer and the rain forests and the ecology, you would still
)))protest against students learning about it in public schools because it is
)))rooted in the spiritual-religious anthroposophical conception about natural
)))laws, such as etheric and astral forces connected with the planets and
)))phases of the moon.
(snip Kathy's response)
)))By the same token, the law of the triangle works, it's very good geometry.
)))Still, Pythagoras believed in the gods and the spiritual universe, and all
)))his works are rooted in these views. For that reason, Kathy, the drums of
)))the ancient Greeks as well as the drum of Shakespeare are reminders of the
)))problem that is inherent in an objection of this kind.
)I believe that
)))everyone involved with American public schools and the separation of church
)))and state would feel relieved if this problem would disappear.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 06:52:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Tarjei Straume [mailto:tastraum online.no]
)
) document. Let's face it, Mac is the Cadillac in the world of
) computers, and
) Sherlock is the latest in automatic clutch technology. The
) rest of you are
) driving stick shifts.
There you go, showing your prejudices again!
Besides, I've always preferred a stick shift, and I just *love* to
tinker under the hood.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.5 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:19:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060138.SAA22397 lists1.best.com)
(199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060237.TAA08530 lists1.best.com)
John Morehead returns the favor, and asks:
)What are your presuppositions and qualifications to discuss and advocate
)Waldorf?
Good question. I began by looking up "presupposition".
"To suppose or presume beforehand, take for granted in advance."
"To imply or require as an antecedent condition."
At first glance, I found waldorf compelling because I saw the pedagogy as
an answer to aspects of public school education which I had experienced as
narrow. I was the primary caregiver for my three children at that point,
and was very interested in any viable alternative.
Homeschooling was initially appealing, but it became apparent that my
oldest daughter desperately needed a wider social sphere, right about the
time she was ready for first grade.
*Anthroposophy* (please distinguish from waldorf, here) was fascinating.
The child model was playing out before my eyes at home, and I saw Steiner's
views as more germane than those of Spock, Brazelton, Leech, et al. It
represented a coherent (to my view) body of knowledge that I had seen
nowhere else outside of law school.
The spiritual element in all this was low-key, but powerful on a personal
level. I was a "forced-march" Catholic as a child, and saw repressive
elements in that theology which still disturb me (as my wife takes my
daughters off to First Holy Communion classes). I left the active practice
of Catholicism very early in adolescence. Until I encountered waldorf and
anthroposophy in my mid-thirties, I would not have described myself as any
kind of a spiritual seeker or pilgrim. No Young Life, no Krishna
Consciousness, no campus Christian athletic organizations, no gothic
impulses in music. I had pretty much retreated into a comfortable atheism.
Now, all these presuppositions were extant only for a very short time after
I encountered waldorf around 1992. I followed up on them immediately, and
found out all I could about waldorf schools and anthroposophy in the
intervening days and years. What I've found since the early part of this
decade just builds out of the interest generated by those presuppositions.
Qualifications?
I hold a B.A. in Natural Sciences and Mathematics--which represents four
years of concentration in mathematics, chemistry, and other natural
sciences at Washington and Lee University in Virginia. It is and was a
good school (albeit very elitist), with a strong pre-med, pre-law, and
business concentration. I think it gives me enough of a background in
science and math to teach a junior-high component in a waldorf school and
critique it.
The J.D. I mentioned in an earlier post is from the University of
Baltimore. I never ended up practicing law, so it's useful as the near
equivalent of a graduate degree in English. Like the B.A., I expect to
rely on it a lot when I get to higher-level English work in the middle
school. Law school also developed capacities in logic and argument, which
come in handy at times.
I enlisted early in the '80s, and spent four years in the Marine infantry
as a machine-gunner. I learned a lot there about group dynamics,
responsibility, and discipline. That time also gave me some personal
experience with issues of repression, mind control, groupthink, and cult
behavior. Somewhere around here I rediscovered that there are things worth
fighting for.
I was then a stay-at-home parent for seven years, with primary
responsibility for my three daughters from birth on. I learned how to
nurture children and what that means for them, picked up a lot of
on-the-job training in household management, and experienced early
childhood again from the perspective of a father. Discovered waldorf
education at some point here, and spent a couple of years doing legal and
insurance work on the board of a young waldorf school in southern
California.
Completed two years of waldorf teacher training at Sunbridge College in New
York. Currently trying to complete a M.S.Ed in Waldorf Education from the
same institution.
Employed full-time as a waldorf teacher since '96, with primary
responsibility for a class of youngsters that has varied in number from 29
to 34.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.6 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:45:46 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060144.SAA27657 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904061004.DAA21400 lists1.best.com)
Robert Flannery wrote:
)Kathy, I didn't post this. It's Ezra, if I recall correctly.
The post was mine.
Tarjei
)
))Uncle Taz posted:
))
))))Your objection, Kathy (and I apologize if I have misunderstood it), is that
))))even if biodynamic farming is the best in existence, and even if it could
))))save the ozon layer and the rain forests and the ecology, you would still
))))protest against students learning about it in public schools because it is
))))rooted in the spiritual-religious anthroposophical conception about natural
))))laws, such as etheric and astral forces connected with the planets and
))))phases of the moon.
)
)(snip Kathy's response)
)
)
))))By the same token, the law of the triangle works, it's very good geometry.
))))Still, Pythagoras believed in the gods and the spiritual universe, and all
))))his works are rooted in these views. For that reason, Kathy, the drums of
))))the ancient Greeks as well as the drum of Shakespeare are reminders of the
))))problem that is inherent in an objection of this kind.
)
))I believe that
))))everyone involved with American public schools and the separation of church
))))and state would feel relieved if this problem would disappear.
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.7 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: RE: Neurocardiology (Was: Re: malarky)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:53:17 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904061046.DAA08115 lists1.best.com)
Bob wrote:
) There you go, showing your prejudices again!
) Besides, I've always preferred a stick shift, and I just *love* to
)tinker under the hood.
Automatic transmissions were invented in 1940, but Norway lives in the
automotive stone age with primitive stick shifts in 90 per cent of its
cars. So I paid thirteen thousand kroners (eighteen hundred dollars) extra
for my automatic so I can roll my joints and change my CDs in peace in
stop-and-go city traffic.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.8 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:36:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: John & Wendy Morehead [mailto:morehead mail2.quiknet.com]
)
) )[Robert Flannery]I do have a law degree, which leaves me just enough in
the know to
) )recognize it's better left to specialists.
)
) Yes, and we will see what the legal specialists say in
) federal court. I
) have rendered my opinion in my area of expertise, religious studies.
I hear an echo of a discussion I had on this list with Steve Premo,
sometime Waldorf Critic, and sometime Waldorf Critic Critic. Both he and I
are lawyers, and both he and I agreed that the issue of whether or not
anthroposophy is a religion is one which the judge will decide, mostly based
on the facts, and not because some "specialist" offers one conclusion or
another.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.9 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 10:10:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904060546.WAA14623 lists1.best.com)
None dare call it fascism.
e
Daniel Sabsay wrote:
) )You may call it anything you want, but so may I.
)
) I call it self-delusional hogwash.
)
) )I don't go along with your definitions, and you don't go along with mine.
) )Let's leave it at that.
)
) Oh no, we're not going to leave it at that. This is the essence of what
) is wrong with anthroposophy guiding public education. Your attitude is
) the evidence.
)
) -- Daniel
)
) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
) Daniel Sabsay, president "Ignorance is the ultimate renewable resource"
) East Bay Skeptics Society http://www.eb-skeptics.org
) mail eb-skeptics.org
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1198.10 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 10:45:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904060315.UAA10526 lists1.best.com)
As a non anthro, and admitted materialist, I am curious as to which post are
perceived as aggressive? Is this aggression any less deplorable if it is
perpetrated under less than spiritual guidance?
You seem to enjoy emphasizing (as do most of the critics), what is different
about anthros, not what they have in common with everyone else (about 99.99% of
'materially measurable' genes, activities, hobbies, interests etc.). If anthro
was a mutually exclusive proposition, I might be more sympathetic to your
challenge. In fact it is not. (They are asking for the choice, not taking away
the choice from others)
Often exchanges on this list are 'through the looking glass', where critic
behavior mimics those very same activities anthros (or WE, since critics do not
differentiate: they are all 'less than scientific') stand accused of committing
(bullying, fascism and the like.) Now, it seems to me, you are perpetrating
fascism in the name of freedom. I find this utterly unacceptable.
e
PS I have a friend in Serbia, who I last visited in Belgrade about a year ago,
who is terrified (and pissed off) for her life now. This is above all a war of
intolerance, and need I remind ANYONE on this list which group here is the
intolerant one?
"Alan S. Fine MD" wrote:
) And if spirituality diverges from people to people, it is the material world
) we all share. The basic material realities. When Anthroposophy spreads
) its tenets into the material world, into the world of agriculture, of
) cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common ground we all share?
)
) Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
) promote?
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1198 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1199 --------------
001 - Bob Jones (b2251 yahoo.co - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
002 - Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordw - RS on Einstein (Was: Re: Pythagoras (Was ...))
003 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
004 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RS on Einstein (Was: Re: Pythagoras (Was ...))
006 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
007 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
008 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
009 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
010 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.1 ---------------
From: Bob Jones (b2251 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
--- "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) wrote:
)
)
) ) -----Original Message-----
) ) From: John & Wendy Morehead
) [mailto:morehead mail2.quiknet.com]
) )
) ) )[Robert Flannery]I do have a law degree, which
) leaves me just enough in
) the know to
) ) )recognize it's better left to specialists.
) )
) ) Yes, and we will see what the legal specialists
) say in
) ) federal court. I
) ) have rendered my opinion in my area of expertise,
) religious studies.
)
) I hear an echo of a discussion I had on this list
) with Steve Premo,
) sometime Waldorf Critic, and sometime Waldorf Critic
) Critic. Both he and I
) are lawyers, and both he and I agreed that the issue
) of whether or not
) anthroposophy is a religion is one which the judge
) will decide, mostly based
) on the facts, and not because some "specialist"
) offers one conclusion or
) another.
)
) Bob
It is raining, which is good. My oats are in, and so I have a day off.
I am not a lawyer, but I have had experience with the civil law in my
life.
It is my understanding that a judge obtains his facts from specialists
& experts. These people with knowledge in selected areas are deposed,
under oath, in the presence of the lawyers from both sides. This is
called discovery. There is some challange allowed in the deposition
procedure of the witness by the opposing lawyer, as well as counsel
allowed from the witnesses' lawyer. At the actual trial, the contents
of the depositions are presented into evidence and cross-examination is
allowed, as is rebuttal.Other witnesses, some of them designated
"expert" will be allowed to testify & be cross-examined at the trial.
It is the job of the lawyers from each side to present the facts
discovered via deposition, testimony and entered from other credible
sources, public and private, in a manner beneficial to their client's
case and to cast doubt and aspersion on the facts beneficial to the
case of the opponent. This is why our system is called adversarial.
To the best of my knowledge, judges do not gather their own facts nor
render a personal opinion based on what they think or feel. Judges must
weigh the evidence, it's credibility and the credibility of the
presenters of that evidence and render a verdict based on the above and
the precedent of case law, as well as the canon of law and the
statutes.
In the American civil law, there is a right of appeal by whichever side
loses in the first round. It is the job of the attorneys for both sides
to keep records of every aspect of the initial depositions and
presentations, as well as trial procedure to use in the appeal process.
Appeals go to a higher level of the Judiciary and are not granted
automatically.
It is normally the advice of counsel for both sides that the plaintiff
and defendants refrain from discussing the details of a case while the
litigation is in process.
Mr. Tolz appears to be on a fishing expedition, on one hand, and to be
engaged in a psych-out, on the other.
Mr Flannery, who has a law degree, but has never practiced law, appears
to be correct: this is best left to the specialists. It would appear
that Mr Morehead is such a specialist. Why is his Baptist affiliation
not granted the same credibility and validity as the Anthroposophical
affiliations of AWSNA or RSC?
Whether either group's theological beliefs agree with the other's is
immaterial: Mr. Morehead can give a detailed, factual analysis of
Anthroposophical beliefs, compare and contrast them with the beliefs of
a multitude of other denominations or totally separate religions, and
present an informed opinion on what constitutes a religion.
If the majority of credible evidence shows Anthroposophy to be a
religion, then a pedagogy based upon it may or may not be in violation
of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution Of the United States.
The trickiest judgement call here, IMO, will be whether that basis
alone is grounds for excluding Waldorf pedagogy from public
classrooms.It will come down to the question of the influence of
Anthroposophy upon the content and the manner of presentation of the
curriculum.
However, the educational content of the curriculum is also being
examined. The factual content of education, at least in Wisconsin, must
meet a minimum standard set by the State. This is an issue locally. It
is the District's responsibility to assure that all students, public,
private, and homeschooled, meet a minimum standard. The electorate has
the right to demand an educated populace. Children have the right to
an education that allows them to transfer to public school at any time
or level, and to be given the skills that allows them to compete in the
workplace. Political ideology is not an issue in that matter. Neither
is anecdotal evidence of single student's experiences that is not
controlled for socioeconomic status or for the admissions practices of
many private and public colleges and Universities, where diversity can
trump coursework competence. Some schools allow the entrant to take
proficiency exams.
In addition, the issues of discipline and of compliance with safety
codes and truancy law is at issue in Wisconsin. I do not know if this
an issue in California.As far as can be determined to date, here, it is
the Anthroposphical underpinnings of WE that determines discipline,
compliance with community safety standards & truancy.
In Wisconsin, the Waldorf High School, being unaccredited, can only
grant a GED. This is a second-class diploma.
I believe this is the shared material world Dr. Alan Fine has cited. Mr
Moorhead's personal cosmology is not the issue. Nor is the cosmology of
Rudolf Steiner. It is the definition of cosmology and religion that is
at issue. While debateable, the field of debate is much more
circumscribed than are the actual belief systems.
Rather than second-guessing a judge who has not even heard any evidence
to date,if, indeed, a judge has already been assigned the case, we
would be better off discussing the virtues and faults of the Waldorf
pedagogy. The inclusion of Waldorf Education into the public system in
the United States is the charter of this list.
BJ
)
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.2 ---------------
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: RS on Einstein (Was: Re: Pythagoras (Was ...))
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 16:41:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199903312050.MAA02641 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199903311502.HAA25797 lists1.best.com)
(199903311538.HAA14984 lists1.best.com)
(199904030954.BAA21770 lists1.best.com) (199904060504.WAA10170 lists1.best.com)
Tarjei wrote:
) What I had in mind was Steiner's inclusion of Einstein in "Riddles of
) Philosophy,"
[snip]
) The question is, did Steiner understand Einstein? And if he did, was his
) criticism valid? This is a question for future generations to explore.
"Riddles of Philosophy" is an enlarged version, written on the verge of
the 1st WW in 1914, of a treatise from the turn of the century by RS
("At the end of a century, looking back at a century of spiritual
development", Bd XIV and XIX, Berlin: Verlag S Crohnbach 1900).
It describes about 150 philosophers from the time of Antiquity to 1914
and ends with a short description of the place of the theory of
relativity up to that time, as RS saw it, for the understanding of the
theme of the book, that he describes as:
"The expositions of this book should show to what extent the knowledge
of philosophy has arrived at a world picture, in which the selfconscious
soul can find such a place for itself, that it can understand its
meaning and importance in the world."
What RS has to say there is (my translation, as I don¥t have the English
version):
"A new thought tradition has been initiated through the transformation
of basic physical concept that Einstein has tried. This strife is also
important for the development of the world view.
Physics has so far studied its objects in such a way that it structured
its thoughts about them in relation to the empty three dimensional space
and the one dimensional time. Space and time were thought of as
something having their existence outside of the objects and processes.
They were thought of as independent, stiff quantities. For objects,
distance in space was measured, for processes, their duration in time.
According to this view, distance and duration belonged as qualities to
space and time, not to the objects and the processes.
The theory of relativity of Einstein stands in opposition to this view.
For this theory, the distance between two objects is something that
belongs as a quality to the objects themselves. Just as an object has
other qualities, it also has this quality of being at a specific
distance from a second object. Except for this relation to one another,
that objects have as part of their nature, something as a space in
itself does not exist.
The hypothesizing of a space makes a thought geometry for this space
possible. This geometry can then be used on the objects of the world. It
arises in the pure world of thoughts. The objects have to obey it. You
can say that the state of things must follow the laws established
_before_ the observation of objects.
In the sense of the theory of relativity, this geometry is dethroned.
Only the objects exist, and they stand in a relation to one another that
stands out as geometrical. Geometry becomes a part of physics. But then
you can¥ t say any more that its laws are possible to establish _before_
the observation of objects. No object has a position in space, only
distances in relation to other objects.
Something similar is hypothesized for time. No process exists at a
specific point in time, but at a certain distance in time from another
process. In this way the temporal and spatial distances between the
objects flow into one another as something similar. Time becomes a
fourth dimension that is similar to the three dimensions of space. A
process of an object can only be determined as something that takes
place at a distance in time and space to other processes. The movement
of an object becomes something that can only be thought of in relation
to other objects.
One expects that only this view can led to non contradictory
explanations of certain physical processes, whereas such processes lead
to contradictory thoughts if you assume an independently existing space
to be a reality.
If you consider that to many thinkers only that was taken to be
scientific about nature that could be described in mathematical terms,
the theory of relativity is nothing less than an invalidation of the
reality of such a science. Because the scientific in mathematics was
only seen in that it could be established independently of the
observation of the laws of space and time. Now the objects and processes
of nature are to determine the states of space and time. The only
certainty is abandoned because of its uncertainty.
According to this view, any thought of an essenciality, that determines
itself out of itself in the world, is excluded from man¥s relation to
nature. Everything only exists in relation to something else.
Inasfar as man looks at himself as part of the objects and processes of
nature, the conclusions of this theory of relativity stand out as
inevitable. But if you, as the experience of your own essence (Wesen)
makes necessary, don¥t want to get lost in a psychic impotence, you must
not continue to search for that which is "essential-in-itself" in
nature, but in the raising over nature to the world of the spirit.
The theory of relativity is inevitable for the physical world; it drives
you to the knowledge of the spirit (Geist-Erkenntnis). The importance of
the theory of relativity lies in its pointing to the necessity of a
knowledge of the spirit that is searched for on spiritual ways
independently of the observation of nature. Its value for the
development of the world view lies in its making such a thinking
necessary."
Regards,
Sune
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.3 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 11:01:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com) (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
Following such a logic renders everyone's beliefs implicit in all their actions
(an idea I might agree with).
What then is your point?
A curious predicament is obtained when your rationale is followed to its logical
conclusion: Should all god fearing individuals who happen to teach be forced to
attend belief system cleansing courses? What of Hindus, Jews and Muslims in
education? If anthros are banned from the classroom, who is next? What would
you say to an anthro teaching in a state school?
If one is to believe your allegations (and those of PLANS) how is it that other
god fearing (i.e. religious) individuals manage to keep their belief systems out
of the classroom? Are they not imbued with an equal proportion spirituality? Is
there some special property of anthro, separating it from other religions (so
now it is religion+), which by its very nature is contagious?
Finally, since I was exposed to this spiritual pathogen for some twelve years,
and if it is possible to spread this dreaded religion+, would I not have a
serious case of this dread condition?
I would be happy to testify, in a court of law, I show no such symptoms
(attributed to anthro).
e
John & Wendy Morehead wrote:
) Critics argue that not only does anthroposophy serve as the foundation of
) Waldorf education, which leads to the religious methodology, but that
) anthroposphy *is* implicit in the classroom curricula as well. This will be
) brought out in the California courts, examples of which have been given at
) Mr. Dugan's website.
)
) )If the courts determine that it is such a violation, so be it. I don't
) )support waldorf public schools in their practice, and would welcome this
) )conclusion.
)
) Time will tell.
)
Yeah, and the truth will set you free.
)
) John Morehead
)
) =========================
) John W. Morehead
) Executive Vice President
) TruthQuest Institute
) http://www.truthquest.org
) (tqi quiknet.com)
) P.O. Box 227
) Loomis, CA 95650
) (916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.4 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 17:16:44 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060546.WAA14623 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904061404.HAA20663 lists1.best.com)
Ezra Beeman
)None dare call it fascism.
It's Nazism. The man who set the tone for all subsequent criticism of WE
and anthroposophy was Dietrich Eckart with his anti-semitic fanzine "Auf
Gut Deutsch." Eckart (1868-1923) was an early friend and comrade of Adolf
Hitler, and he began his virulent and slanderous attacks against Steiner
and anthroposophy in 1919.
Dietrich Eckart (1868-1923) is the original Father of Concern over Waldorf
Schools and Anthroposophy, which is proven by the fascist character
surfacing in certain posts.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RS on Einstein (Was: Re: Pythagoras (Was ...))
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:21:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Sune Nordwall [mailto:Sune.Nordwall home.se]
) The theory of relativity is inevitable for the physical
) world; it drives
) you to the knowledge of the spirit (Geist-Erkenntnis). The
) importance of
) the theory of relativity lies in its pointing to the necessity of a
) knowledge of the spirit that is searched for on spiritual ways
) independently of the observation of nature. Its value for the
) development of the world view lies in its making such a thinking
) necessary."
)
Sune,
Forgive me for not being astute or patient enough to wade through
the prose, but does the last paragraph (quoted above) constitute something
of an "endorsement" by Steiner of Einstein and relativity theory? Or does
it mean something else?
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.6 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 11:39:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904061004.DAA21400 lists1.best.com)
Definitely not me, I would never spell out anthro.
e
Robert Flannery wrote:
) Kathy, I didn't post this. It's Ezra, if I recall correctly.
)
) )Robert Flannery posted:
) )
) )))Your objection, Kathy (and I apologize if I have misunderstood it), is that
) )))even if biodynamic farming is the best in existence, and even if it could
) )))save the ozon layer and the rain forests and the ecology, you would still
) )))protest against students learning about it in public schools because it is
) )))rooted in the spiritual-religious anthroposophical conception about natural
) )))laws, such as etheric and astral forces connected with the planets and
) )))phases of the moon.
)
) (snip Kathy's response)
)
) )))By the same token, the law of the triangle works, it's very good geometry.
) )))Still, Pythagoras believed in the gods and the spiritual universe, and all
) )))his works are rooted in these views. For that reason, Kathy, the drums of
) )))the ancient Greeks as well as the drum of Shakespeare are reminders of the
) )))problem that is inherent in an objection of this kind.
)
) )I believe that
) )))everyone involved with American public schools and the separation of church
) )))and state would feel relieved if this problem would disappear.
)
) Robert Flannery
) New York
) litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.7 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:45:17 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
ou are contradicting yourself. First you say that you don't think anyone
)would object to biodynamic gardening if it were good. Then you object
)because it's anthroposophical.
I am saying that i support the objection to it being taught in schools
without parents consent, because it is a spiritual concept and not a
scientifically proven concept.
))It is the consistant blurring of the boundaries between the material
))truths we )all share, and the personal spiritual )beliefs of yours (and
))your fellow )anthroposophists) which is at the core of )what makes those
))of us outside of )your faith very uncomfortable.
)
)So you want to be a resident of the material world we all share, but you
)don't want to be a resident of the spiritual world, which we also all
)share. Well, I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it
)or not, and I see the spiritual and the material aspects of nature
)inter-acting as parts of one reality - not two separate ones. Take it or
)leave it.
What you call "the spiritual world", I call YOUR spiritual world. So when
you say "I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it or
not", I interpret that as "I see you as a part of MY spiritual world whether
you like it or not". I hope you can see how those of different faiths might
feel disturbed by this point of view. This perspective of yours is not
unique among anthroposophists. It is why I would not entrust my child to a
Waldorf school, and it is why I support the principles of critics on this
list.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.8 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:26:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904061441.HAA03629 lists1.best.com)
Bob Jones says:
)Mr Flannery, who has a law degree, but has never practiced law, appears
)to be correct: this is best left to the specialists. It would appear
)that Mr Morehead is such a specialist. Why is his Baptist affiliation
)not granted the same credibility and validity as the Anthroposophical
)affiliations of AWSNA or RSC?
)
) Whether either group's theological beliefs agree with the other's is
)immaterial: Mr. Morehead can give a detailed, factual analysis of
)Anthroposophical beliefs, compare and contrast them with the beliefs of
)a multitude of other denominations or totally separate religions, and
)present an informed opinion on what constitutes a religion.
I can't speak for the courts as to how Mr. Morehead would stack up in
relative terms against AWSNA or RSC, but here's what his own website has to
say about the issue of credibility:
"TruthQuest's emphasis on contrasting belief systems of various groups with
biblical Christianity, while necessary and important, will carry little
weight in a court of law."
(From the TruthQuest website, on the FAQ page, near the heading "Does
TruthQuest support Deprogramming?")
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.9 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: 6 Apr 1999 12:25:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Alan S. Fine MD posted;
)The aggressive salvos of these posts (as well as the more serious ones in
)the Balkans) underscore a vital lesson. Spirituality is a very personal
)thing. One person's devoutly held beliefs are the next person's nonsense.
It may seem obvious to others as well that you entirely believe and support this statement. The question is do we have the right to label someone else's "belief" as "nonsense"? Couldn't we , as reasonable human beings, leave it more judgement neutral, like say "different" or "other"? We expose (and provide credence for) prejudicial tendencies by expressing ourselves this way, when other words could have been used.
)What is needed is a respect for spiritual diversity. This involves not only
)allowing other's to practice their faith freely, but to respect the
)spiritual beliefs of others as being as true, and as vital as one's own.
)Can anthroposophy, with its adherence to Steiner's vision being the truest,
)the highest and the most complete, make that claim?
Try as you might to make a "straw group" out of Anthroposophists by first lumping them into an easily targetable and fictitious homogeneous mass and then making up some outlandish absolutes about them and what they supposedly value, it only serves to show what a bigot you are. (or for the Micheal Kopp tricky but not so subtle ad hominem version "it only serves to show the bigotry in your writing" (you know playing the ball not the man, yeah right) I await your general apology.
)And if spirituality diverges from people to people, it is the material world
)we all share. The basic material realities.
Which material world is that Alan, the lowest common denominator world of the elements of some sort of grand unified theory (not much to build a society of human beings out of in that, is there) or some other human infused-with-value regime which you decide to label as "the material world"? I think you might find that we do not all share the same "material" world although we all inhabit the same planet.
) When Anthroposophy spreads its tenets into the material world, into the )world of agriculture, of cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common )ground we all share?
How about this Alan, when you and your tenets unilaterally establish an exclusionary lowest common denominator aren't you restricting the potential "common ground" available in the first place?
What is this common ground you keep referring to? All you seem to be doing is conveniently and arbitrarily drawing a circle around everything that *you think* is not anthroposophical and pointing at what *you think* is left and saying (writing) "how come you are so different?" (Hey Deby, do those words sound familiar) More bigotry. My impression is that (your posts read as if) you are tolerant of "these people" as long as they don't try to do anything that you find uncomfortable, like potentially exploring whether or not the "common ground" we might share can be expanded.
Alan, I find your bigotry uncomfortable would you stop that? (The difference here, is that I am addressing a person (Alan S. Fine M.D.). You, on the other hand, are addressing not only nobody in particular, but also you often caricaturize this "group" in ridiculously absolutist ways so that no one (or not many) would want to be a stand-in for "that group which he describes but don't feel apart of".
FWIW, this is the basic problem with the so-called disclosure document, not many will bother to respond to it because it doesn't describe who they are, and since it is intended as a negative caricaturization, why would anyone want to be associated with it. But that is the general purpose of it (write something that no one would want to discuss so that it can stand there intentionally frightening people away.)
)Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
)promote?
You Athroposophists! Dammit Alan stop being such a bigot. Address some individual or shut up!
Aren't you potentially making a distinction where their may be none?
Here is part of your own post reprinted down here:
)What is needed is a respect for spiritual diversity. This involves not only
)allowing other's to practice their faith freely, but to respect the
)spiritual beliefs of others as being as true, and as vital as one's own.
Now what were you saying again? Oh yeah, as long as what you don't like remains in the quaint existence state of personal faith (but not even potentially part of reality), everything is great.
Luke
not an anthroposophist
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1199.10 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:57:52 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904061557.IAA10819 lists1.best.com)
(!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN")
(html)
(head)
(style type="text/css")(!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--)(/style)
(title)
Re: Biodynamic Gardening
(/title)
(/head)
(body)
(div)Alan S. Fine wrote:(/div)
(div)(br)
>What you call "the spiritual world", I call YOUR
spiritual world. So when(br)
>you say "I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether
you like it or(br)
>not", I interpret that as "I see you as a part of MY
spiritual world whether(br)
>you like it or not". (/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)If it were MY spiritual world, I would be God Almighty. Being of
a less megalomaniac disposition, however, I recognize that I am just
a small part of it.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(font color="#000000") All things were made by him;
and outside him was not any thing(br)
made that was made. (John 1:3)(/font)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)>I hope you can see how those of different faiths might feel
disturbed by this >point of view. (/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Sure. But I won't keep my tongue or change my words to please
them. If my utterances offend anyone, or many, so be it. It has never
been my ambition to be inoffensive.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)>This perspective of yours is not unique among
anthroposophists. It is why I >would not entrust my child to a
Waldorf school,(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)I am not asking you to entrust your child to anyone,(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)>and it is why I support the principles of critics on this
list.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Some anthropops find that disturbing and uncomfortable,
especially the fascist elements.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Tarjei(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)http://www.uncletaz.com/(/div)
(/body)
(/html)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1199 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1200 --------------
001 - Ezra Beeman (ezra save-am - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
003 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
004 - MomOf2Gals aol.com - Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
005 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
007 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
008 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
009 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
010 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.1 ---------------
From: Ezra Beeman (ezra save-america.org)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 13:59:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199904061557.IAA10819 lists1.best.com)
Debate is not a scientifically proven, or provable, concept.
Please cease and desist all such foolishness.
e
"Alan S. Fine MD" wrote:
) I am saying that i support the objection to it being taught in schools
) without parents consent, because it is a spiritual concept and not a
) scientifically proven concept.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:08:34 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
) -----Original Message-----
) From: Bob Jones [mailto:b2251 yahoo.com]
) Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 10:44 AM
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
)
)
) I am not a lawyer, but I have had experience with the civil law in my
) life.
)
I just had to laugh when I saw your comment. I've been in charge of
bringing my law office into a state of the art system, and most of the
people here are being exposed to email for the very first time. I thought
it would be amusing for them to receive a listing of the various email
acronyms and emoticons they might encounter.
I told them that they might see the common acronym of "IANAL" --
which, of course, translates to "I am not a lawyer." I indicated that in
almost all cases that acronym would immediately be followed by the word
"but".
Sorry, nothing personal.
Now, let me turn to your description of the U.S. judicial system. I
invite Steve Premo to step in to correct me wherever necessary, for though
I've conducted my share of litigation, Steve works much more closely with
the judicial system than I.
) It is my understanding that a judge obtains his facts from specialists
) & experts.
Incorrect.
A judge obtains his facts from persons who have witnessed the facts.
Specialists and experts are sometimes employed by one side or another to
interpret facts and render opinions where facts cannot otherwise be readily
understood or interpreted in the absence of technical expertise.
) These people with knowledge in selected areas are deposed,
) under oath, in the presence of the lawyers from both sides. This is
) called discovery. There is some challange allowed in the deposition
) procedure of the witness by the opposing lawyer, as well as counsel
) allowed from the witnesses' lawyer. At the actual trial, the contents
) of the depositions are presented into evidence and
) cross-examination is
) allowed, as is rebuttal.Other witnesses, some of them designated
) "expert" will be allowed to testify & be cross-examined at the trial.
) It is the job of the lawyers from each side to present the facts
) discovered via deposition, testimony and entered from other credible
) sources, public and private, in a manner beneficial to their client's
) case and to cast doubt and aspersion on the facts beneficial to the
) case of the opponent. This is why our system is called adversarial.
Your description is substantively correct, but keep in mind that
"expert witnesses" are different from ordinary witnesses to the facts.
One other thing -- the contents of depositions are not ordinarily
entered into evidence. The testimony of witnesses is taken at trial, and
much of it may be duplicative of the testimony which was taken at the
depositions. Ordinarily, the most common use of depositions at trial
include (1) confronting a witness on cross-examination with an inconsistency
between present testimony and that which had been given before in the
deposition (this is called "impeaching credibility") and (2) where a witness
is otherwise unavailable or the parties agree to submit the deposition in
lieu of testimony. Judges much prefer live testimony over written testimony
if they are going to weigh the credibility of the witness.
)
) To the best of my knowledge, judges do not gather their own facts nor
) render a personal opinion based on what they think or feel.
) Judges must
) weigh the evidence, it's credibility and the credibility of the
) presenters of that evidence and render a verdict based on the
) above and
) the precedent of case law, as well as the canon of law and the
) statutes.
Depends.
In a non-jury trial, the judge is the finder of facts. That doesn't
mean that the judge goes out to gather facts. Rather, the judge sifts
through the facts which have been presented and makes a finding as to the
"ultimate" facts. In making that finding, the judge has to connect the dots
and draw the picture, and connecting the dots often requires a judge to
supply missing information and arguments based upon the judge's own thinking
processes, including whatever prejudices or political ideas which might be
inside that judge's mind. You are correct that they are not supposed to
render a "personal" opinion (there was a recent minor uproar that one of our
Supreme Court justices used the word "I" rather than "we" in a written
opinion), but I've seen more than one lawyer leaving a courtroom muttering
under his breath that he wondered whether the judge's home life or what he
ate for breakfast had affected a judicial decision.
)
) Mr. Tolz appears to be on a fishing expedition, on one hand, and to be
) engaged in a psych-out, on the other.
)
You've completely lost me there. What in heavens name do you think
I'd be fishing for, and what kind of "psych-out" are you describing?
) Mr Flannery, who has a law degree, but has never practiced
) law, appears
) to be correct: this is best left to the specialists.
Mr. Flannery will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the
"specialists" he's referring to are the lawyers, not those who hold
themselves as specialists in what constitutes a religion.
) It would appear
) that Mr Morehead is such a specialist. Why is his Baptist affiliation
) not granted the same credibility and validity as the Anthroposophical
) affiliations of AWSNA or RSC?
I doubt that the judge in the PLANS case would give much credence to
either side's "specialists" on what constitutes a religion.
)
) If the majority of credible evidence shows Anthroposophy to be a
) religion, then a pedagogy based upon it may or may not be in violation
) of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution Of the United States.
) The trickiest judgement call here, IMO, will be whether that basis
) alone is grounds for excluding Waldorf pedagogy from public
) classrooms.It will come down to the question of the influence of
) Anthroposophy upon the content and the manner of presentation of the
) curriculum.
)
I agree with you 100% on your legal analysis. In my opinion, what
you've said there is succinct and squarely on point.
Keep in mind though, that there are non-federal issues in the PLANS
lawsuit which could result in a determination in favor of PLANS without
there being a finding one way or the other on the U.S. Constitutional
issues.
) However, the educational content of the curriculum is also being
) examined. The factual content of education, at least in
) Wisconsin, must
) meet a minimum standard set by the State. This is an issue locally.
Right you are. That's a local issue, not a constitutional question.
Each locality is entitled to set its own standards and requirements for
education.
)
) Rather than second-guessing a judge who has not even heard
) any evidence
) to date,if, indeed, a judge has already been assigned the case, we
) would be better off discussing the virtues and faults of the Waldorf
) pedagogy. The inclusion of Waldorf Education into the public system in
) the United States is the charter of this list.
Nah. It's too much fun discussing the legal issues, and I think a
large number of the non-legal contributors to this list would agree. The
PLANS lawsuit is a critical component of its activity. I highly doubt that
Dan Dugan would consider such discussions to be off-topic.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.3 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: 6 Apr 1999 15:28:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
another gem from Alan S. Fine MD;
)I am saying that i support the objection to it being taught in schools
)without parents consent, because it is a spiritual concept and not a
)scientifically proven concept.
What ever happened to hypotetical concept or proposition or area under research or investigation? Why must you distinquish things only into spiritual and scientifically proven? Is it because by labelling it spiritual you hope to exclude it from people considering it in light of the possibility of science trying to understand it? I am not saying that science will understand it, but I am saying that science has not falsified it yet. (although I could be wrong)
)))It is the consistant blurring of the boundaries between the material
)))truths we )all share, and the personal spiritual )beliefs of yours (and
)))your fellow )anthroposophists) which is at the core of )what makes those
)))of us outside of )your faith very uncomfortable.
))
))So you want to be a resident of the material world we all share, but you
))don't want to be a resident of the spiritual world, which we also all
))share. Well, I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it
))or not, and I see the spiritual and the material aspects of nature
))inter-acting as parts of one reality - not two separate ones. Take it or
))leave it.
)What you call "the spiritual world", I call YOUR spiritual world. So when
)you say "I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it or
)not", I interpret that as "I see you as a part of MY spiritual world whether
)you like it or not". I hope you can see how those of different faiths might
)feel disturbed by this point of view. This perspective of yours is not
)unique among anthroposophists. It is why I would not entrust my child to a
)Waldorf school, and it is why I support the principles of critics on this
)list.
Let's try this:
What you call"*the* material world", I call *your* potentially limited material world. So when you say something like "I am disturbed by your definition of reality" I interpret that as "I am distrurbed by your unwillingness to accept only my definition of reality". I hope you can see how those of different opinions as to what may constitute the material world might feel disturbed by this point of view. This perspective of yours is not unique to self-righteous people like yourself. It is why I would not entrust my child to you and it is why I love reading your anti-anthroposophy and apparently by osmosis anti-waldorf posts.
Luke
(still waiting for the falsification to justify the denigration)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.4 ---------------
From: MomOf2Gals aol.com
Subject: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 17:18:51 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To Dan and the other anti-SWA cult out there who post on this list!
(But mostly to Dan, who, in a lame but appreciated effort to be nice,
nonetheless insulted my intelligence ...)
Just because I have embraced some of the tenets of SWA does not make
me a robotic, brainwashed idiot! Despite what you WISH to believe, there are
those of us out there who are intelligent, free-thinking, open-minded
individuals who happen to find that some of the teachings of a man named
Rudolf Steiner make sense to us in our lives as human beings in a very real,
very meaningful way.
Dan, you said that I am not to blame for being ``taken in '' (or
somesuch language as that) by the rantings of Joseph Chilton Pearce and
company because it is hard for consumers to distinguish between truth and
fantasy. You obviously believe that YOU can distinguish between the two
yourself, but that those of us who might find that some of what JCP and
others have to say resonates with our reality cannot. That is such an
ego-maniacal, stuck-up and conceited viewpoint that I was awestruck that you
would have the nerve to talk down to me in such a way! Before this, I was
impressed by the level of dialogue -- even heated dialogue -- o n this list.
After reading that particular post, though, I found myself feeling angry. I
am a college educated woman, 40 years old, with close to 20 years of
experience as an investigative reporter for newspapers. I am a specialist in
science and medical reporting -- yet you talk down to myself and others as if
you and you alone know anything at all about telling truth from falsehood.
***I have a question for you, Dan, and for others like you: If you so
much believe that anthroposophy/Steiner/Waldorf education is a bogus cult,
nonesense or just not worthwhile, why in the name of God do you spend so much
time arguing with people about it? Why not just ignore it, cut it out of your
reality, and move on with your own lives?
My feeling is that you recognize that somewhere within it there lies
some meaningful -- if uncomfortable -- universal truths. Because you are
uncomfortable with these things, you feel you must wrestle them down one by
one. You must work hard to make sure others do not believe in them, or give
them any credence.
I would very much like a straightforward response to that question:
Why spend so much time (and online, time is money) trying to steer people
away from SWA?
OK, my steam is blown off. I am ready to move on. I hope you are,
too.
--Lisa
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.5 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:56:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-----Original Message-----
From: Luke Schelly (lschelly JackRouse.com)
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Date: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 11:20 AM
Subject: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
)
)Alan S. Fine MD posted;
)
)
))))What is needed is a respect for spiritual diversity. This involves not only
))allowing other's to practice their faith freely, but to respect the
))spiritual beliefs of others as being as true, and as vital as one's own.
))Can anthroposophy, with its adherence to Steiner's vision being the truest,
))the highest and the most complete, make that claim?
)
)Try as you might to make a "straw group" out of Anthroposophists by first lumping them into an easily targetable and fictitious homogeneous mass and then making up some outlandish absolutes about them and what they supposedly value, it only serves to show what a bigot you are. (or for the Micheal Kopp tricky but not so subtle ad hominem version "it only serves to show the bigotry in your writing" (you know playing the ball not the man, yeah right) I await your general apology.
I am not an intolerent person. In my posts I am trying to identify what i consider to be the key factors in this debate. If this constitutes "outlandish absolutes" I am very open to clarification.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:55:19 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
(199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904061456.HAA09288 lists1.best.com)
Ezra Beeman wrote [Ezra, you promised to reset your mail client's line
length, you Naughty boy] in aswer to John Morehead (quoted at the end of
this post):
)Following such a logic renders everyone's beliefs implicit in all their
)actions
)(an idea I might agree with).
)What then is your point?
)A curious predicament is obtained when your rationale is followed to its
)logical
)conclusion: Should all god fearing individuals who happen to teach be
)forced to
)attend belief system cleansing courses? What of Hindus, Jews and Muslims
)in
)education? If anthros are banned from the classroom, who is next? What
)would
)you say to an anthro teaching in a state school?
)If one is to believe your allegations (and those of PLANS) how is it that
)other
)god fearing (i.e. religious) individuals manage to keep their belief
)systems out
)of the classroom? Are they not imbued with an equal proportion
)spirituality?
Michael KOPP says:
Public educators who have strong beliefs often _don't_ keep their personal
beliefs out of the classroom.
In some locales in the U.S. (and elsewhere) this suits the prevailaing
nature of the population. This is true in the "Bible Belt", for example,
those states where fundamentalist Christian religion is preponderant in the
population.
Some states even enshrined religion in classes by law, earlier in this
century. Remember the Scopes trial?
But in any locale, those people who don't want religion in their kids'
public classrooms -- no matter what religion -- have a remedy in law: the
establishment clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
When parents who become aware of religious practice in public schools --
either by individual teachers acting on their own initiative, or by
officially sanctioned policy -- take those issues to the authority of a
court of law, they almost invariably succeed in having those religious
practices banned.
This is the "belief system cleansing course" of which you speak, and it is
not, which is the course PLANS seeks to follow in dealing with Steiner/
Waldorf/ Anthroposophical/ (SWA) infiltration into public classrooms. So
PLANS, and SWA critics, are adherents of a political system which controls
public schools.
It is a system which was developed by profoundly religious people who
wanted to build a new state which not only gave them the freedom to
_practice_ religion in any way they wished, but would protect other people
from the imposition of any religion imposed by the state.
In the case of teachers' religious beliefs, its only purpose is to ensure
that teachers do not overtly or covertly proselytize about their beliefs.
It has no right or ability to affect their holding those beliefs or
practicing them outside their classrooms, and neither it nor the secular
people who rely on it wish to or try to use it to control people's beliefs.
By calling PLANS people and SWA critics fascists, you are calling the
system under which they -- and you -- live a fascist political system. This
may be in character with your political libertarianism, but, as ordinary
people understand fascism, the U.S. legal system is not fascist.
Fascism prevents people from believing or acting on beliefs in private as
well as public spheres. Neither I nor PLANS nor any other critic I have
read on this list or anywhere else wishes to prevent SWA people from
believing whatever they wish, and practicing it in private.
The difference with Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposohical infiltration of the
public school system is that SWA people are extremely slippery when it
comes to saying exactly what SWA is.
BEEMAN:
)Is
)there some special property of anthro, separating it from other religions
)(so
)now it is religion+), which by its very nature is contagious?
)
)Finally, since I was exposed to this spiritual pathogen for some twelve
)years,
)and if it is possible to spread this dreaded religion+, would I not have a
)serious case of this dread condition?
)
)I would be happy to testify, in a court of law, I show no such symptoms
)(attributed to anthro).
)e
KOPP:
Well, if you hold up a mirror to yourself -- or read over the body of work
you have produced on this list -- I think you will see that you _are_
infected. No, I take that back: you can't see beyond the end of your own
arrogant nose.
I am glad to hear, though, you agreeing that Anthroposophy is a religion.
Perhaps you can be called as an expert witness in the PLANS suit, as Bob
Jones has outlined for the legal-beagle Robert Flannery, who doesn't
understand what judges do, in a country that does not use the Napoleonic
system of justice.
I think, however, that your statement that you might be considered a
"hostile witness" if you volunteer to testify that you show no symptoms of
SWA belief.
I'd love to see a good lawyer cross examine you. Your performance in your
rants against criticism of your ideas on this list indicates that you would
be dead meat, like William Jennings Bryan was to Clarence Darrow in the
Scopes trial.
And before you or some slick willie from the Defenders points out the irony
that Darrow and Scopes lost anyway (and Tennessee is still one of the most
backward states educationally in regard to science and rationality), let me
point out that times have changed, and this case will be heard in (I
believe) a federal court, in California, in 2000.
)John & Wendy Morehead wrote:
)
)) Critics argue that not only does anthroposophy serve as the foundation of
)) Waldorf education, which leads to the religious methodology, but that
)) anthroposphy *is* implicit in the classroom curricula as well. This will
))be
)) brought out in the California courts, examples of which have been given
))at
)) Mr. Dugan's website.
))
)) )If the courts determine that it is such a violation, so be it. I don't
)) )support waldorf public schools in their practice, and would welcome this
)) )conclusion.
))
)) Time will tell.
))
)
)Yeah, and the truth will set you free.
)
))
)) John Morehead
))
)) =========================
)) John W. Morehead
)) Executive Vice President
)) TruthQuest Institute
)) http://www.truthquest.org
)) (tqi quiknet.com)
)) P.O. Box 227
)) Loomis, CA 95650
)) (916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.7 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 16:08:35
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060237.TAA08530 lists1.best.com)
(199904060138.SAA22397 lists1.best.com)
(199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904061112.EAA18167 lists1.best.com)
At 07:19 AM 4/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
)John Morehead returns the favor, and asks:
)
))What are your presuppositions and qualifications to discuss and advocate
))Waldorf?
)
)Good question.
Mr. Flannery,
Thank you for the response and the exchange.
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.8 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 16:12:05
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904061332.GAA09240 lists1.best.com)
At 09:36 AM 4/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
)
)
)) -----Original Message-----
)) From: John & Wendy Morehead [mailto:morehead mail2.quiknet.com]
))
)) )[Robert Flannery]I do have a law degree, which leaves me just enough in
)the know to
)) )recognize it's better left to specialists.
))
)) Yes, and we will see what the legal specialists say in
)) federal court. I
)) have rendered my opinion in my area of expertise, religious studies.
)
) I hear an echo of a discussion I had on this list with Steve Premo,
)sometime Waldorf Critic, and sometime Waldorf Critic Critic. Both he and I
)are lawyers, and both he and I agreed that the issue of whether or not
)anthroposophy is a religion is one which the judge will decide, mostly based
)on the facts, and not because some "specialist" offers one conclusion or
)another.
)
) Bob
Agreed. You might be interested in my article which deals with this matter
from a religious studies perspective. It will be available in our upcoming
TruthQuest Journal (send a snail mail address for a free subscription), on
our website, and on PLANS site as well.
John
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.9 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 16:24:08
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904061441.HAA03629 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904061627.JAA26570 lists1.best.com)
At 12:26 PM 4/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
)I can't speak for the courts as to how Mr. Morehead would stack up in
)relative terms against AWSNA or RSC, but here's what his own website has to
)say about the issue of credibility:
)
)"TruthQuest's emphasis on contrasting belief systems of various groups with
)biblical Christianity, while necessary and important, will carry little
)weight in a court of law."
)
)(From the TruthQuest website, on the FAQ page, near the heading "Does
)TruthQuest support Deprogramming?")
Ouch! Sounds like we're still questioning credibility here. (Incidentally,
I did give a deposition in the Sacramento lawsuit and will provide
testimony if it goes to trial. For those who doubt my credibility, consult
my article which will stand on its own merits. I will allow the courts to
decide the value of my credibility and testimony.)
And please put this statement from our website in proper context. We
frequently get requests for assistance in reclaiming family members from
authoritarian religious groups, and are asked if we support deprogramming.
We do not support deprogramming, but we do recommend a voluntary, ethical,
information-based method called exit counseling. The point of the above
quote, in context, is that in regards to this particular issue, the courts
would likely give more weight to an organization which takes a behavioral
or psychological approach and definition to "cults," rather than
theological, although this is not necessarily so. Many fine evangelical
scholars write and testify on these issues (e.g., Ron Enroth of Westmont
College, an evangelical sociologist). This does not mean that my testimony,
or that of TQI, will be suspect in the issue of Anthroposophy as a religion.
Perhaps we can move beyond the questioning of personal backgrounds and move
to the real issues at hand, such as Is Anthroposophy religious?, Does it
serve as the foundation for Waldorf education?, and if so, Should it be in
public education? These are the issues which must be addressed based upon
the facts, and not by a mere appeal to authority.
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1200.10 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 16:06:19
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904060507.WAA11876 lists1.best.com)
At 07:04 AM 4/6/99 +0200, you wrote:
)This is absolutely fascinating. You're an evangelical organization
)specializing in new religious movements.
Yes. There are many such organizations which research from a theological
position.
Christian evengelicals are
)embracing godless, secular humanists who believe that Jesus was a fool if
)he existed at all. They are joining forces with those who are headed
)straight for Hell in their unbelief and their denial of Christ, in order to
)focus on warfare against the renewal of the Christ-idea. This is good.
It sounds as if you are mistakenly equating Steiner's "esoteric
Christianity," an occultic, unbiblical and unhistorical counterfeit series
of teachings, with more in common with Gnosticism, long regarded by
orthodoxy as heretical, than with historic orthodox Christianity. There is
no contradiction between holding to orthodox Christianity and working with
secularists to oppose a religious-based education in public schools in
violation of the Establishment Clause.
)As evangelicals, I take it for granted that you are Protestants, and that
)you attack the Catholics not only for their Mary-cult, but for their belief
)in the purgatory, which they have in common with anthroposophists, Muslims,
)and Buddhists. You believe that when a person dies, he or she goes stright
)to Heaven or to Hell, or sleeps in the grave until Judgement Day, to be
)sent straight to Heaven or to Hell.
)
)I am wondering if in your theology there is room for an exception to the
)rules governing redemption and salvation what the secular humanists are
)concerned. I understand that the best way you can serve God is to warn
)people against New Age, new religions, and the renewal of old religions, in
)order to preserve these moldy forms of worship and belief in their old
)brittle vessels for eternity. And the secular humanists are truly serving
)God in this respect, right? So would Jesus say on the last day, "Hey,
)you're a secular humanist who despised me and scorned me, and I should send
)you downstairs. But you did a good job beating up on those evil anthropops,
)so here's your ticket to watch them fry!" - ?
This is a ranting ad hominem which does not address the issues or the
purpose of this list. Please try to stay on track and offer cogent
arguments in support of any positions you may be advocating.
John Morehead
=========================
John W. Morehead
Executive Vice President
TruthQuest Institute
http://www.truthquest.org
(tqi quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 652-7804
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1200 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1201 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 2)
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (Response to Ezra on HIV/AIDS)
003 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
004 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 1)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1201.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 2)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:08:54 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
http://www.livelinks.com/sumeria/aids/howei.html
June 27, 1995
RESPONDING TO "DUESBERG AND THE NEW VIEW OF HIV"
by Peter H. Duesberg and Harvey Bialy
(NOTE -- Exponents are typed in the following manner: 10 to the power of 4
appears as 10^4)
The editor of Nature, John Maddox, has issued a published invitation to
"Peter Duesberg and his associates... to comment" on two new studies by Wei
et al [1] and Ho et al [2] that he feels lend strong support to the
hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS [3]. Maddox credits us for having
identified two paradoxes of this hypothesis, (i) "Duesberg was quick to
point to a paradox... [that] there was no dramatic increase of the
frequency of infected T-cells as infection gave way to overt disease", and
that (ii) "Duesberg is right to have argued all along that the unusally
slow decline of CD4+ cells [T-cells] is not consistent with... a specific
cytotoxic viral mechanism." [3]
According to Maddox, "the new developments are (or should be) an
embarrassment for Duesberg", because they "resolve the paradox". But we do
not see any reason why a scientist should be embarrassed for having pointed
out paradoxes in the past, which ever way these paradoxes are subsequently
solved. We also object to rhetoric personalizing a scientific debate.
However, it is embarrassing that in the name of science clinical, public
health, journalistic, and political decisions have been made in the past,
based on a hypothesis that -- we all agree now -- was unproven at that
time.
Since the HIV-AIDS hypothesis makes many assumptions that are paradoxical,
if not bewildering, for pre-HIV virologists, and since the new studies do
not clearly define the HIV hypothesis, we shall first state the hypothesis
and then explain why, in light of these new studies, it remains
paradoxical.
In 1984 it was proposed that the retrovirus HIV can cause such
diametrically different diseases as Koposi's sarcoma, pneumonia, dementia,
diarrhea, and weight loss [4,5]. All of these diseases and over two dozen
more are now collectively called acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)
[6], if antibody to HIV is present. But many of these diseases, including
Kaposi's sarcoma, lymphoma, dementia and weight loss, are neither
consequences of, nor consistently associated with, immunodeficiency [7,8].
[snip]
The hypothesis fails to shed any light on the causation of
non-immunodeficiency AIDS diseases, like Kaposi's sarcoma, dementia,
lymphoma and weight loss, which make up 39% of all American AIDS cases
[8,33]. Today this HIV-AIDS hypothesis stands unproven and has failed to
produce any public health benefits [34-36].
The new studies are claimed by two News and Views articles from Maddox [3]
and Wain-Hobson [43] to resolve the paradox, (1) how HIV kills T-cells, (2)
how HIV causes AIDS, and (3) why HIV needs 10 years to cause AIDS. But we
argue that the new studies have failed to resolve any of these paradoxa; in
fact they have added new ones:
[snip]
The new papers have indeed resolved this paradox by shifting the paradigm:
[snip]
It is consistent with this "new view of HIV" that there is no correlation
between virus titers and T-cell counts in the patients that Wei et al and
Ho et al have studied.
[snip]
But in typical AIDS patients HIV is so rare, that even leading AIDS
retrovirologists from the US, like Robert Gallo, and in the UK, like Robin
Weiss, failed for years to isolate HIV from AIDS patients [45,46].
Likewise, virus-infected cells are so rare that they could not be found by
George Shaw, the senior investigator of the new study by Wei et al, Gallo
and their collaborators in most AIDS patients [27] -- until the rare
proviral DNA could be amplified with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
[31,44,47].
[snip]
The simplest interpretation of the slow decline of T-cells in Ho's and
Wei's AIDS patients is a non-viral cause, e.g. long-term intoxication [7].
Take for example the slow decline of liver cells in long-term alcoholics or
of lung cells in long-term smokers.
Maddox seems concerned that "reporting of the new event has been curiously
selective". Perhaps even science reporters begin to wonder how much further
the virus-AIDS hypothesis can be stretched to explain its most obvous
failures and inconsistencies: Why is there no vaccine? Why does
American/European AIDS stay in the classical risk groups, male homosexual,
intravenous drug users and transfusion recipients? Why do AZT-treated
HIV-positives get AIDS? [55,56] Why do 918 HIV-positive male homosexuals
who had "avoided experimental medications on offer" and chose to abstain or
significantly reduce their use of recreational drugs..." remain AIDS-free,
long-term survivors? [57] Why did the T-cells of 29% of 1020 HIV-positive
male homosexuals and former intravenous drug users from the placebo arm of
a clinical AZT trial increase up to 22% over two years -- despite the
presence of HIV? [58] Why did the T-cells of 14 out of 31 HIV-positive
hemophiliacs treated with highly purified factor VIII increase up to 25%
over three years -- despite the presence of HIV? [59] Why is there not a
single study showing that HIV-positive 20 to 50-year-old men or women who
are not drug users or recipients of transfusions ever get AIDS? [60]
Why did neither Ho et al nor Wei et al identify the risk groups their
patients came from or indicate whether they had Kaposi's sarcoma, dementia,
or diarrhea or lymphoma? Can they exclude that recreational drugs used by
AIDS risk groups, like nitrate inhalants, amphetamines, and cocaine are
immunotoxic or carcinogenic? [61] Why is it that among 10 long-term (10 to
15 years) survivors of HIV recently described by Ho et al [50] "none had
received antiretroviral therapy..."? Can Wei et al and Ho et al exclude
that the DNA chain terminators, AZT and ddI, that their patients received
in addition to the new experimental drugs, do not play any role in the
"slow decline of CD4+ cells"? Are they aware that the manufacturer of AZT
says in the Physician's Desk Reference that "it was often difficult to
distinguish adverse events possibly assoiated with zidovudine [AZT]
administration from underlying signs of HIV diseases..."? [62] Are they
aware that the DNA chain terminators were developed 30 years ago to kill
growing human cells for chemotherapy, not as anti-HIV drugs?
It seems to us that the "new developments" of Wei et al and Ho et al are a
Mayday of AIDS virologists -- rather than a "virological mayhem." [43]
_______________________
[For more-recent research and comment -- January 1999 -- that contradicts
Duesberg and shows an HIV infection mechanism, see the last several
citations at the bottom of this section, from "Project Inform".]
--------------------
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/mgglanka.htm
INTERVIEW STEFAN LANKA
Challenging BOTH Mainstream and Alternative AIDS Views
By Mark Gabrish Conlan Zenger's December 1998
While most people in the U.S. and Western Europe go right on believing that
the so-called Human Immunodeficiency Virus [HIV] is the sole cause of AIDS,
debate rages even within the alternative AIDS community over whether HIV
exists at all.
Though Peter Duesberg, Ph.D. -- virtually the only alternative AIDS
theorist with any significant public reputation -- continues to insist that
HIV exists but is harmless, other alternative AIDS researchers and
activists are coming to the conclusion that the virus doesn't exist.
The main proponents of this view are Australian researcher Eleni
Papadopulos-Eleopulos and her colleagues, who argue that HIV has never been
isolated according to the Pasteur Institute criteria of 1973, and therefore
it's probably what's called an "endogenous retrovirus" -- a creation of the
body's own genetic material that looks and functions partly like a virus,
but is not an infection because it comes from the body's own cells.
Stefan Lanka, Ph.D. takes the challenge to HIV's existence even further. A
German researcher, Dr. Lanka is usually referred to as a virologist. But
that hardly begins to describe his wide-ranging fields of study. Based on
experiences in marine biology, biochemistry, evolutionary biology and
virology, he's worked out a whole new view of HIV and AIDS. He believes
that all so-called retroviruses are actually the body's own creations; that
hepatitis is an autoimmune disorder (a disease in which the body is
attacked by components of its own immune system) rather than a viral
disease; that AIDS has nothing to do with immune suppression; and that it
should really be called Acquired Energy Deficiency Syndrome -- AEDS --
because its true cause is a breakdown in the delivery of oxygen to the
blood and/or body tissues. Dr. Lanka did a West Coast tour in October and
spoke to H.E.A.L.- San Diego on October 20. Zenger's interviewed him hours
before that event.
--------------------
The following URL may be used to search in AltaVista.
AltaVista: Advanced Query duesberg AND HIV
http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=aq&kl=en&d0=1%2fOct%2f98
&d1=31%2fDec%2f98&q=duesberg+AND+HIV&r=duesberg+HIV+AIDS&stq=20&c9k
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1201.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (Response to Ezra on HIV/AIDS)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:59:12 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
NOTE: Citations and quotes this post was based on are in three succeeding
posts, labelled "Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 1-2-3)". I am
reposting the original, which was 45 Kilobytes, and may have been rejected
by some people's e-mail programmes, so that everyone will get them. If you
already received the full post, with my response to Ezra _and_ the cites,
please forgive me. Next time I'll split them up first. This post is
relatively short.
Ezra Beeman wrote:
)Michael Kopp wrote:
)
)) Only when the community of science is able to replicate the research and
)) agree on an acceptable theory for it does an idea gain acceptance and
)) credence among rational, skeptical, scientifically-thinking people.
))
)) In the meantime, huge and increasing numbers of gullible people who WANT
))to
)) believe in *something*, *anything*, magical, supernatural, or more than
))is
)) real in our everyday lives, and the entrepreneurs and religious cultists,
)) will turn these fringe "discoveries" -- pseudo-science -- into cash cows
)) and orthodox dogmas.
))
)
)) Cheers from Godzone,
))
)) Michael Kopp
)) Wellington, New Zealand
And BEEMAN reacted:
)Is that a fact? Please tell me where your beloved, cherished and
)benevolent
)scientific community has proven HIV causes AIDS? You cannot, because such
)a
)proof does not exist (if you believe a select group of skeptics.) Yet this
)is
)now assumed in all the scientific literature. Please explain this little
)idiosyncrasy of the scientific method in action to me?
Michael KOPP says:
It is very interesting that Ezra, who says in other posts of the
impossibility of science "proving" _anything_, uses the supposed fact that
science hasn't "proved" that HIV causes AIDS in his broadside. It would
seem to me that Ezra (and the many others who argue like him on this list,
all of them defenders or proponents of Anthroposophy) can't logically have
it both ways.
I don't recall saying that science was MY "community", nor that to me it
was "beloved, cherished and benevolent".
I am a science reporter, not a scientist. I have no vested interest in
science, and I have written and reported a number of stories critical of
mainstream, orthodox science and scientists.
In the post you are reacting to, I described science as being human, having
human flaws, but also being the most self-correcting, rational method of
knowing and dealing with our world.
What has the HIV/AIDS argument -- whatever either of us thinks of it -- to
do with the pseudoscience I have described here which is the product of
and/or favoured by you and other Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophy people?
My posts challenge YOUR side to provide evidence of, or general acceptance
of, YOUR "scientific" beliefs. To date no one has done this, with any of
them.
So why do you wildly strike out at orthodox science as being a bullying,
repressive villain?
This sounds typical of the anti-science rhetoric of people who have had
poor educations in rational thought, and who have bought the "science is
responsible for all modern evils" mantra of pseudo-scientists, charlatans,
spiritualists and anarchists.
I would have thought better of you, Ezra. I didn't know you were such a
science hater.
BEEMAN:
)Your explanation of science represents an Old Guard mentality. It is
)powerful )in that it is in power, nothing more. There is nothing
)inherently powerful )about it as a paradigm (you often confuse your
)conservative methods for what )they attempt to conserve). In fact, it is
)as facile as anything else dictated )by inertia.
KOPP:
Science is a powerful _method_ (not a "paradigm") because it works and
provides the best answers to our questions about the nature of ourselves
and the Universe. Medical science has improved our lives, despite the
misuse by some of scientific knowledge.
Can you please explain what your last sentence means? I'm sorry to be so
obtuse, but I can't figure it out.
And what has replaced the "old guard" mentality of rational, skeptical,
scientific thought and method?
Irrational, wanna-believe, pseudo-scientific, and, if your vituperation is
any indication, science-hating, acceptance of attractive, but meaningless
-- and often harmful -- ideas and practices? That's the way it seems to me.
BEEMAN:
)e
)PS If others wish to investigate more about an alternative hypothesis of
)HIV,
)please search for a Professor Duesberg at Berkeley. I 'cherry picked'
)Feynman
)from his site.
)
KOPP:
But your uses of Feynman's words were non-sequiturs in terms of your
arguments against modern, orthodox science. Feynman did not disagree with
the scientific method, or with the practice of science, or its
establishment. He was not a "fringe" scientist, nor a practitioner of
metaphysical intuition. He WAS a profoundly human and funny and inspiring
scientist who advanced physics. He was also a member of the Manhattan
Project.
As for DUESBERG'S "alternative" research on HIV and AIDS, the question is
not how many other researchers line up behind him in his view that HIV is
not the cause of AIDS; the question is "how good is his science"? And the
answer has been, "not very", according to the referees and onlookers from
the orthodox scientific community.
AIDS, alone among diseases, is a political issue, as well as a scientific
and medical one. Despite more and more new science which shows that HIV is
indeed responsible for AIDS, there are even some researchers who claim that
HIV is not even a virus. Duesberg, having lost the respect of the
scientific community, has won what is almost a cult following.
Caught in the middle of the political and scientific debates are those
people who are unfortunate to have the disease -- whatever it is. The
official line on AIDS in the U.S. is that it is caused by the AIDS virus,
and that it is treatable by certain medical methods which are themselves
indicted by Duesberg and others as the cause of AIDS, rather than the virus.
Ezra got his information from Duesberg's own Web site, apparently. The
first site I saw (and, to be fair, it includes many views) is one which
says its purpose it to tell people `what the government and big science
don't want them to know'. It is heavily on Duesberg's side. One of the
people quoted there even claims that the CIA genetically engineered the HIV
virus in about 1974 -- before genetic engineering was advanced enough to do
so!
The anti-orthodox side of this argument is fond of conspiracies: Duesberg
is the victim of a campaign to deny him publicity or funding; big science
and big drug companies are protecting their vested financial interest in
the HIV-AIDS "industry"; and worse.
I think Ezra is a little behind the times with regard to evidence that HIV
virus causes AIDS. As one of the sources critical of Duesberg, who founded
an HIV/AIDS information centre (see Delaney, below), puts it: no, there
_isn't_ a single scientific paper proving HIV causes AIDS: there've been
*hundreds* of them over a period of 15 years. Therapies based on this
orthodox scientific consensus -- some of them admittedly very unpleasant --
have prolonged the lives of hundreds of thousands of human beings who would
otherwise have had an almost certain death. Duesberg says the therapy
causes AIDS, not HIV.
Just in the last six months two new (orthodox) research papers have
contradicted Duesberg (and gone beyond earlier explanations accepted by the
scientific community) by showing that HIV does not damage the immune system
by killing protective cells, but by causing the immune system to fail to
produce enough of them. (See citations at the end of this message from
"Project Inform".
AIDS is the biggest killer of American males in the 25-45 age range. A
half-millionn people have died of it in the U.S. Millions more, in America
and around the world, have the HIV virus present in their bodies. Some, who
read the Duesbergs and other anti-science polemicists, refuse to
acknowledge their HIV positive status -- and go on to infect others.
Tell me, Ezra, have you ever watched anyone die of AIDS? I have -- I was
one of the first journalists to write about AIDS in New Zealand, and to
publish the story of a brave AIDS patient who was one of the first to allow
public scrutiny of his life and death. I photographed him as he faced
death, and he wrote about the experience.
Would you, Ezra -- a libertarian -- want to be responsible for recommending
that people with AIDS avoid the standard medical treatment, that has been
most successful so far of all the alternatives? On the basis of the
"science" of Duesberg and others whose work is so unorthodox? On the basis
of your obvious despising of rational, orthodox science?
----------------------
For those who are interested, in the second part of this post are a number
of clippings, with URLs, used in the preparation of this article.
For the record, I do not agree with any proposal (see Delaney, below) to
censor Duesberg or prevent him from taking his case directly to the public.
Censure is not my business; censorship is. The antidote to Duesberg's
incredible publicity is increased public education and unhysterical
response to him by the entire scientific community.
-----------------------
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1201.3 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 13:20:47 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904062135.OAA29307 lists1.best.com)
Lisa (Mom-of-2-gals) who won't give her last name, writes (and I'm replying
because I fall into her second category -- critics "other" than Dan Dugan):
) Just because I have embraced some of the tenets of SWA does not
)make
)me a robotic, brainwashed idiot! Despite what you WISH to believe, there
)are
)those of us out there who are intelligent, free-thinking, open-minded
)individuals who happen to find that some of the teachings of a man named
)Rudolf Steiner make sense to us in our lives as human beings in a very
)real,
)very meaningful way.
Michael KOPP says:
You left out "critical" and "skeptical" and "rational" in the thinking
department, which is the difference between Steiner/ Waldorf/
Anthroposophical believers and the rest of us. How's that for arrogance?
The hallmark of SWA proselytization is that it is for people who are
"open-minded" and "free-thinking". Steiner used the guru trick of telling
people they had to find the answers for themselves.
It's no surprise that nobody has gone beyond Steiner in 75 years. Maybe,
like the Catholic cult, it will take centuries for any progress, and the
critics are impatient sods. Maybe, on the other hand, it won't change at
all, since most SWA people on this list write as if they believe Steiner
infallible. So's the Pope.
LISA:
) Dan, you said that I am not to blame for being ``taken in '' (or
)somesuch language as that) by the rantings of Joseph Chilton Pearce and
)company because it is hard for consumers to distinguish between truth and
)fantasy. You obviously believe that YOU can distinguish between the two
)yourself, but that those of us who might find that some of what JCP and
)others have to say resonates with our reality cannot. That is such an
)ego-maniacal, stuck-up and conceited viewpoint that I was awestruck that
)you
)would have the nerve to talk down to me in such a way! Before this, I was
)impressed by the level of dialogue -- even heated dialogue -- o n this
)list.
)After reading that particular post, though, I found myself feeling angry.
KOPP:
The logical conclusion of your last sentence is that now that you are angry
at Dan Dugan you are no longer impressed with the level of dialogue of the
rest of us. Why don't you see if you can separate your anger at Dan Dugan
from your apparent transference of anger to the rest of us.
LISA:
)I am a college educated woman, 40 years old, with close to 20 years of
)experience as an investigative reporter for newspapers. I am a specialist
)in
)science and medical reporting -- yet you talk down to myself and others as
)if
)you and you alone know anything at all about telling truth from falsehood.
KOPP:
I am a college-educated man, 55 years old, with close to 30 years of
experience as an investigative reporter for several media. I was for a time
a specialist in science and medical reporting (I won a national award for
science reporting, given by the scientists themselves, for my Radio New
Zealand work in 1991).
I think I am pretty "open-minded" and "free-thinking"; I acknowledge that
everything that Steiner said may be true, and that there may be a
supernatural world of which I see no evidence.
Lisa wrote to me privately, and I wrote back to Lisa privately -- and not
at all in the manner which she finds objectionable in Dan Dugan --
explaining why *I* was angry about Steiner/ Waldorf/ Anthroposophical
practices. I sent her an earlier post of mine that tells a bit about my
experiences with a Steiner school, and included Dan Saykaly's proposed
"disclosure list".
One of the principles of journalism -- especially investigative journalism
-- is that one requires corroboration and evidence of whatever is subject
to investigation.
The difference between Lisa (and most of the rest of the SWA crowd) and the
critics is that Lisa's and SWAs' "open-mindedness" and "free-thinking"
leads them to _believe_ there _is_ evidence of supernatural things, in the
words of Steiner, and th words of his followers, reporting on *the content
of their minds (or spirits)*.
But an investigative reporter (like a good scientist) insists on having
more than the reports of what others *believe*. But there is no tangible
evidence for a supernatural or spiritual existence, and so the
investigation into SWA comes down to eludidating its beliefs, and the
actions of its adherents and practitioners. Facts and actions speak louder
than beliefs and ideas.
The fact that certain things in SWA or Joseph Chilton Peirce "make sense to
us [Lisa and other SWA believers] in our lives as human beings in a very
real,
very meaningful way" does not constitute the evidence that science -- or
good journalism -- demands.
If Lisa applied her investigative journalistic yardstick to SWA (as do I)
she might see that her anger is misplaced.
(Lisa has not replied to my private messages.)
LISA:
) ***I have a question for you, Dan, and for others like you: If you
)so
)much believe that anthroposophy/Steiner/Waldorf education is a bogus cult,
)nonesense or just not worthwhile, why in the name of God do you spend so
)much
)time arguing with people about it? Why not just ignore it, cut it out of
)your
)reality, and move on with your own lives?
KOPP:
I can't answer for Dugan and the other critics; for me, it's an
investigative journalism project. And yes, I admit to a bias. I admit that
I cannot be completely objective about the issue, because I and my children
have been personally harmed by SWA.
However, any journalist who says they are unbiased and objective is either
a liar or a fool.
What we should seek in journalism is fairness, accuracy of reporting, and
balance, which includes the admission of our biases. (Unlike science, good
journalism does not seek "truth".)
That's what we have on this list: a balance between believers and skeptics.
(Well, as my statistics showed, it's rather an imbalance, in favour of the
SWA side -- I can't keep up with the 5-1 or greater ratio of SWA attacks on
every post I make; I sometimes feel like the Lone Ranger. Seldom do I see
five or more critics responding to some post of the SWA Defenders of the
Faith [TM].)
One of the reasons so many critics can't get SWA out of their systems is
because when they were involved in SWA, they were told much the same thing
as Lisa is suggesting that Dan and other critics do: "if you don't like it,
just leave, because we're so open-minded and free-thinking that you will
never get us to change anything about the way we educate your children, or
what we believe and practice upon them, and we're not the least bit
interested in anything you have to say unless you agree with us 100
percent".
LISA:
) My feeling is that you recognize that somewhere within it there
)lies
)some meaningful -- if uncomfortable -- universal truths. Because you are
)uncomfortable with these things, you feel you must wrestle them down one
)by
)one. You must work hard to make sure others do not believe in them, or
)give
)them any credence.
KOPP:
No critic on this list wants to stop people believing in SWA. Critics
constantly repeat that they believe people have inalienable rights to such
beliefs.
Your characterization of critics as apostate closet believers who can't
live with their own contradictions is an insult to me, personally, as an
intellectual, and a bit arrogant on Lisa's part to be so presumptuous.
For the record, I never said Lisa was a "robotic, brainwashed idiot", and I
don't think anyone else did, either.
LISA:
) I would very much like a straightforward response to that question:
)Why spend so much time (and online, time is money) trying to steer people
)away from SWA?
KOPP:
Online time is cheap, compared to any other medium of public discussion.
Anyone who tries to set limits on discussion on the Internet based on the
supposed expense of e-mail transfer, is either subscribed to the wrong
Internet Service Provider (ISP), or so poor they shouldn't even be able to
afford a computer, or living in a rural area where they have toll charges
to connect. Even there, e-mail is dirt-cheap (as opposed to live browsing
of Web sites or newsgroups, or chatting on-line). That's why e-mail
discussion lists were invented. (Actually, it's not: they predate the World
Wide Web and other Internet services by 20 or more years, back to the time
when it was the ONLY technological way.)
As to critics' motivation: call it consumerism. Critics just want SWA to
come clean about itself in its false advertising and duplicity of parents,
so that those people will be well-informed about what they are getting into.
And, as I'm sure you _must_ understand by now, because critics believe the
SWA religious education has no place in public or publicly-funded schools.
LISA:
) OK, my steam is blown off. I am ready to move on. I hope you are,
)too.
) --Lisa
KOPP:
Okay, I hope it helped. And I hope the answers to your questions will help
you to use your intelligence, education, and professional experience to get
around your beliefs and take a closer, more critical look at SWA. If you
want to go on believing part or all of it, that's fine with me. If you want
to go on believing without taking my advice about critical, skeptical
thinking, or you're offended by my suggesting other ways for you to
approach it, that's fine with me, too, and I apologize if I sound
condescending or patronizing.
Write to me anytime you feel like it.
Just don't ask me to shut up.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1201.4 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 1)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:07:30 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-----------------------
The SCI.SKEPTIC faq on AIDS: http://burtcom.com/mtrsn/sfaq_009.htm
The biggest anti-orthodox-science site and Duesberg booster outside of his
own site: http://www.virusmyth.com/
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/äily-Summaries-2.html
------------
Some historical reports:
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-AIDS-Daily-
Summaries-2.html
"Researchers Doubt Maverick AIDS Theory"
Reuters (12/08/94)
In a series of articles released on Thursday, the respected journal Science
described its three-month investigation into the status of claims made by
University of California virologist Peter Duesberg that drug abuse, not
HIV, is responsible for AIDS. Science found that while Duesberg has been
promoting his theory for several years and has some followers, his theories
are not generally accepted by fellow scientists. There is increasing
evidence that reinforces the widely-accepted theory that HIV causes AIDS.
The journal reviewed recent research on hemophiliacs, on the spread on AIDS
in Thailand, and on the side effects of illegal drug use. The editors
concluded that the studies do not support Duesberg's ideas. Some
researchers, said Science, believe that enough is known about AIDS and HIV
for the disease to pass "Koch's postulates"- the standard in medicine for
providing that a specific microbe causes a disease.
--------------------
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/äily-Summaries-2.html
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-AIDS-Daily-
Summaries-2.html
"The Duesberg Phenomenon"
Science, (12/09/94) Vol. 266, No. 5191, P. 1642; Cohen, Jon
Peter Duesberg, a retrovirologist at the University of California, claims
that such factors as illicit drug use and AZT cause AIDS. While most
mainstream AIDS researchers ignore Duesberg's ideas, he has a vocal group
of supporters. Among them are Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis and Robert
Willner, the doctor who recently pricked his finger with a bloody needle he
had just stuck into an HIV-infected man to prove that HIV is not the cause
of AIDS. This publication conducted a three-month investigation into
Duesberg's claims, interviewing more than 50 supporters and detractors. The
study concluded that there is extensive evidence in hemophiliacs-the group
that Duesberg acknowledges provides the best case for the HIV
hypothesis-that HIV causes disease and death. According to some AIDS
researchers, HIV now satisfies the classic postulates of disease causation
established by Robert Koch. The study also found that while Duesberg cites
the AIDS epidemic in Thailand as confirmation of his theories, the role of
HIV is confirmed instead. Finally, neither AZT nor illicit drugs cause the
immune deficiency characteristic of AIDS. Duesberg, who has difficulty
obtaining grants because of views, said that he would alter his views if he
found one article that suggested to him he was wrong.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
"Duesberg and the New View of HIV"
Nature, (01/19/95) Vol. 373, No. 6511, P. 189; Maddox, John
The new findings on the dynamics of HIV infection are, or should be, an
embarrassment to Professor Peter Duesberg of Berkeley, Calif., writes John
Maddox in Nature magazine. The findings resolve the paradox that although
the concentration of CD4 cells may decline with the persistence of
infection, there was no dramatic increase in the frequency of infected T
cells as infection gave way to overt disease. The new developments show
that the T cells in an infected person's blood are likely to have been
created in the previous few days. Only a small proportion will have had the
time to become infected. The cells that harbor the virus will be killed off
very soon. Thus, the scarcity of T cells is consistent with the claim that
the immune system is in overdrive from the onset of HIV-infection. Duesberg
is correct to have argued that the usually slow decline of CD4 cells is not
consistent with what is expected from a specific cytotoxic viral mechanism.
The explanation is that the CD4 population has at any time been freshly
created. Maddox wonders why it has only now been found that the response of
the immune system to HIV-infection is hyperactivity, and not the opposite.
Further studies of the viral dynamics will be eagerly awaited, now that the
basis for the low CD4 T-cell count in AIDS patients is clear.
--------------------
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/jmnewview.htm
DUESBERG AND THE NEW VIEW OF HIV
By John Maddox
Nature, 19 January 1995
This journal has offered Dr. Peter Duesberg and his associates an
opportunity to comment on last week's publications suggesting that the
immune system reacts hyperactively to HIV infection.
The publication last week of two important articles on the dynamics of the
infection of people by HIV is agreed to have been a important landmark in
the process of understanding the disease called AIDS, but not everybody
will be aware of that. Reporting of the event has been curiously selective.
In particular, the British newspaper The Sunday Times, which as recently as
a year ago was replete with accounts of how HIV can have little or nothing
to do with the causation of AIDS, chose not even to mention the new
developments in last Sunday's edition.
Is it planning a major account of how it came to be so misled, thus to
mislead its readers? Or is it waiting for a sign from Professor Peter
Duesberg, of Berkeley, California, who started the hare the newspaper
followed eagerly for two years?
The reasons why the new developments are (or should be) an embarrassment
for Duesberg are simply put. Almost from the outset of AIDS as a recognized
disease in the early 1980s, the objective index of an infected person's
state of health has been the concentration in the blood of T lymphocytes
carrying the CD4 antigen. The more advanced the infection, the smaller the
concentration of CD4+ cells.
But Duesberg was quick to point to a paradox in the observations: although
the concentration of CD4+ cells might decline with the persistence of
infection, there was no dramatic increase of the frequency of infected T
cells as infection gave way to overt disease. Cell death by inter-cellular
infection could hardly be consistent with that state of affairs.
In essence, the new developments resolve the paradox by showing that the T
cells in an infected person's blood are likely to have been created only in
the few days previously. There will not have been time enough for more than
a small proportion of them to have become infected, while those that
harbour virus will be killed off very soon. So the scarcity of T cells from
which virus can be recovered in test-tube experiments is consistent with
the assertion that the immune system is in overdrive from the onset of
infection by HIV.
On this (new) view, the progressive decline of the CD4+ concentration with
the duration of infection is rather a symptom of the underlying infection
than the crux of its mechanism. What seems to matter is that there should
be cells (including T cells) somewhere in the body (the lymph nodes are
likely candidates) from which virus particles continue to leak into the
blood plasma. In other words, Duesberg is right to have argued all along
that the usually slow decline of CD4+ cells is not consistent with what one
would expect from a specific cytotoxic viral mechanism. The explanation is
that the CD4+ population in the blood at any time has been freshly created.
Despite this journal's severe line, some months ago, on Duesberg's right of
reply to critics of his position, it is now in the general interest that
his and his associates' views on the new developments should be made
public. Duesberg was not available to take a single telephone call one day
last week, nor able to return it, but one of his associates appeared to
welcome the idea of a comment on the articles by Wei et al. and Ho et al.
(Nature 373, 117-122 & 123-126; 1995). That will be eagerly awaited and
will be published with the usual provisos-that it is not libelous or
needlessly rude, that it pertains to the new results and that it should not
be longer than it needs to be.
[snip]
What does this mean for basic research on AIDS, the cause eloquently
advocated a year ago by Dr. Bernie Fields (Nature 369, 95; 1994)? Wei et
al. and Ho et al. have provided the basis for a much more pointed programme
of investigation from which, no doubt, a complete picture of the dynamics
of this hitherto perplexing disease will emerge. A return to basics seems
already to have happened. The prospects of therapy are much more difficult
to tell, but has a fuller understanding ever failed to deliver improvements
of technique? The danger for the Duesbergs of this world is that they will
be left high and dry, championing a cause that will have ever fewer
adherents as time passes. Now may be the time for them to recant. *
--------------------
U.S. Centers for Disease Control AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
"No Data Have Proved that HIV Causes AIDS"
Wall Street Journal (02/16/95) P. A15; Ellner, Michael
The Wall Street Journal failed to report the evidence that prompted Michael
Murphy, publisher of the newsletter Overpriced Stock Service, to conclude
that HIV does not cause AIDS and that AZT kills those who take it, writes
the Rev. Dr. Michael Ellner in a letter to the editors of that paper.
Ellner is the president of the Health Education AIDS Liaison (HEAL).
Murphy's equation of scientific opinion with fact insults Dr. Peter
Duesberg, Ellner contends. It also mocks the many dedicated health
activists, physicians/scientists, journalists, and people of conscience
throughout the world who are working to alert the public to fake science
that supposedly shows that HIV causes AIDS, and the medicine it engenders.
NIH's Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Ellner predicts, is going to crash as soon as
independent researchers examine the lack of scientific evidence and the
true "benefits" of AZT.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
Monday, 5 April 1999
"Congressman Uncovers the HIV Conspiracy"
Science (04/14/95) Vol. 268, No. 5208, P. 191
In a recent letter sent to eight government scientists and authorities who
influence AIDS research and policies, freshman Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R-Minn.)
challenges the "HIV=AIDS hypothesis and its inability to come up with a
cure, vaccine, or effective treatment." His question echoes the arguments
of retrovirologist Peter Duesberg, who claims that HIV is harmless. The
federal AIDS effort "will be seen as the greatest scandal in American
history and will make Watergate look like a no-fault divorce," says
Gutknecht's senior legislative assistant, Brian Harte. If the response of
the government officials who received the letter reflects the views of the
scientific community, Harte says that Gutknecht will push for hearings by
the House basic research subcommittee, of which Gutknecht is a member.
--------------------
CDC AIDS Daily Summaries
http://ausqrd.queer.org.au/qrd/documents/aids/misc/CDC-Aids-Daily-
Summaries-21.html
Monday, 5 April 1999
"HIV an Illusion"
Nature (05/18/95) Vol. 375, No. 6528, P. 197; Duesberg, Peter; Bialy, Harvey
In a letter to the editor published in the journal Nature, Peter Duesberg
and Harvey Bialy respond to two recent papers on HIV-1 dynamics. The
authors assert that the articles' central claim--that 100,000 HIV virions
per ml of plasma can be detected in AIDS patients with various nucleic-acid
assays--is misleading. The lead author of a paper by Wei et al. has
previously stated that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method they used
overestimates by at least 60,000 times the real titre of infectious HIV. If
that figure is divided into 100,000, the resulting 1.7 infectious HIVs per
ml is hardly the "virological mayhem" to which Wain-Hobson alluded in
another issue of
Nature. Ho and another group of researchers have also recently demonstrated
that more than 10,000 "plasma virions" correspond to less than one
infectious virus per ml. Finally, Loveday et al. found only 200 HIV "virion
RNAs" per ml of serum from AIDS patients. This is 1,000 times less than Ho
and Wei, the
--------------------
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1201 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1202 --------------
001 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 3)
002 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Mumbo
005 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Biodynamic Gardening
006 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
007 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
008 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
009 - Robert Flannery (litvas i - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra. - Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.1 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: malarky (Cites to Ezra on HIV/AIDS 3)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:08:39 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
--------------------
Delaney's Letter to the National Academy of Science
http://alumni.umbc.edu/~akoont1/tmh/delaney.html
HIV=AIDS Controversy: Letters Department
The following is a copy of the letter being distributed by Martin Delaney
of Project Inform which seeks to silence Prof. Peter Duesberg. James M.
Scutero puts Delaney and PI in perspective in his expose, "Project
Dis-Inform: PI's [Project Inform, see below] Martin Delaney is the Pied
Piper of the AIDS Establishment".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Bruce Alberts
President, National Academy of Sciences 2101 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20418
July 31, 1997
Dear Dr. Alberts,
I am writing as the head of a nationally known AIDS organization and as a
representative of a larger group of AIDS service providers. I am also a
member of the NIAID Council and a member of the former Medicine Roundtable
on the Developments of Drugs and Vaccines for AIDS. I am writing today to
seek your attention and advice on a matter which has come to trouble almost
all of us working in the AIDS service field.
Our concern is the continuing public campaign of Peter Duesberg to convince
the public, people at risk of HIV infection, and people already infected
that they are in no danger from this virus, that AIDS is solely a
behavioral disease, and that current treatments for the disease and
recreational drug abuse are in fact the cause of the disease. I have
followed this debate for more than a decade and have yet to see any
meaningful scientific evidence that supports these views.
Instead, over the years I've seen a rapid accumulation of evidence that
conclusively disproves his viewpoint. His views have long ceased to be a
topic of serious discussion within the scientific community. Having lost
the debate with his peers, he has taken his campaign to the public and
directly to the people most vulnerable- young and poorly-informed people
struggling with HIV infection. He fans a natural inclination toward denial
on the part of such people, giving them a seemingly legitimate way to
ignore a positive HIV antibody test, to cast aside the difficult behavioral
changes associated with safe sex, and to forego the complex challenge of
multi-drug combination therapy.
Obviously, such a deceptively attractive package will find a ready
audience.
No one opposing his views wishes to discourage his academic freedom, nor do
I see evidence that this has been done in any way. Though he claims his
views on AIDS are responsible for the loss of NIH grants, it is far more
likely that this is due to his lack of contribution and publication in his
own field over the last decade. The scientific community has shown
unprecedented tolerance for his behavior, as well-meaning people hoped that
the airing of his views would lead him to see his errors. Such is not the
case. Just as the right of free speech doesn't sanction the person who
yells "fire" in a crowded theater, neither does academic freedom provide
blanket protection for irresponsible behavior by scientists which adversely
affects the public health.
Perhaps most troubling is the degree to which his current campaign has come
to flaunt [sic -- he means flaut] the scientific method. His disregard for
accuracy and integrity in the scientific process is amply demonstrated in
the lengthy review published in 1995 in Science Magazine by Jon Cohen. In
this and in Duesbergs own recent book, even the most junior of trained
observers can see how he chooses to overlook all data which contradicts his
conclusions, while misstating and distorting the data on several aspects of
the disease. I had the misfortune of debating Professor Duesberg and his
cohort Kary Mullis together in 1995 and found both strangely ignorant of
some of the simplest principles of drug Developments and clinical research.
A most recent example of how badly he has come to flaunt [sic] the values
of science can be found in the attached material. I have included here an
ad, placed personally by Professor Duesberg, announcing a public
presentation of his views at the Metropolitan Community Church, a gay
community facility in San Francisco. The audience is hardly the scientific
community. Instead, it is aimed at enticing another generation of younger
gay men -- in whom new HIV infections are already running rampant -- into
seeing things his way.
The most remarkable aspect of this is the effort he has taken to make the
program look like an official program of the University of California at
Berkeley, right down to the use of the University Seal. It also features
his 1986 appointment to the NAS [National Academy of Sciences]. It most
certainly is not a university function.
Moreover, the entire text of the ad is deceptive, disguised to look like an
ad for one of the many community forums held about the new therapies,
research advances, and viral load. There isn't a hint anywhere as to what
the real agenda is, or how he will do his best to discourage the use of the
new drugs and diagnostic measures which have given so much hope and new
life to so many people.
He will be there to try to convince an unwitting and otherwise uninformed
audience that there is serious scientific support for his contrarian view
and that all those who hold other views are somehow puppets of the
pharmaceutical industry and a conspiratorial research establishment.
Undoubtedly, he will succeed with some of those present, and no doubt
hasten their deaths. In these days when AIDS therapy has shown such great
promise, it is difficult to distinguish his actions from those of a mass
murderer.
I am writing to you as the chief executive of the National Academy of
Sciences because Professor Duesberg is a member of your distinguished body,
whose mission is to serve the public interest. His actions, I believe, are
an affront to everything the NAS stands for. They mock your Academy's
commitment to the scientific method and to the principle that scientists
should fight their battles in a peer setting, not by public relation
efforts in the public. As members of the public aggrieved by his actions,
we call upon the National Academy of Sciences to raise the question of
whether he is fit for continued membership in your group. I would like to
propose a few possible topics for debate by the NAS:
1. Given a thorough review of his scientific and public behavior in the
AIDS epidemic, should Peter Duesberg remain a member in good standing of
the NAS?
2. Should the NAS issue a public statement, perhaps reaffirming his
academic freedom, but condemning his efforts to sway the public rather than
his peers?
3. Should the NAS broker a settlement with Professor Duesberg which would,
minimally, prohibit him from further promotion of his potentially harmful
views to the public until he presents convincing evidence to the NAS that
the common view of HIV and AIDS are in error?
I would like to set up a meeting between yourself and several
representatives of AIDS service organizations to discuss this matter in
greater detail. I will call your office to seek an appointment.
Sincerely,
Martin Delaney Founding Director, Project Inform
Organizational Endorsements:
1. Act-up Golden Gate, Oakland, Ca. 2. AIDS Action Committee,
Boston, Ma. 3. APLA/AIDS Project Los Angeles 4. AIDS Research
Alliance, LA 5. AIDS Service Center, Pasadena, Ca. 6. AIDS
Treatment Initiatives, Atlanta, Ga 7. Being Alive, LA 8. Center for
AIDS Prevention Studies, UCSF AIDS Research Institute 9.
CRIA/Community Initiative on AIDS, NYC 10. Critical Path AIDS
Project, Phil., PA 11. Denver Buyers Club 12. FAIR 13. Florida
AIDS Action Council, Miami 14. Kraus Medical Group, LA 15.
Multicultural AIDS Coalition, Boston, Ma. 16. Project Inform 17.
PWA Coalition Colorado 18. Research Sanctuary, LA 19.
"Resolute: Dedicated to Surviving HIV/AIDS", Denver 20.
Robert Smith Medical Group, San Diego 21. San Francisco AIDS
Foundation 22. Test Positive Aware Network, Chicago 23. United
foundation for AIDS, Miami 24. Women Alive, LA
--------------------
HIV Infection and AIDS, NIAID Fact Sheet (Government stance on cause of
AIDS)
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/hivinf.htm
HIV Infection and AIDS
AIDS - acquired immune deficiency syndrome - was first reported in the
United States in 1981 and has since become a major worldwide epidemic. AIDS
is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). By killing or
impairing cells of the immune system, HIV progressively destroys the body's
ability to fight infections and certain cancers. Individuals diagnosed with
AIDS are susceptible to life-threatening diseases called opportunistic
infections, which are caused by microbes that usually do not cause illness
in healthy people.
--------------------
Project Inform's What's New Memo February 1999 ä
http://www.projinf.org/whatsnew/wn-9902.html#Basic%20HIV%20Science
%20Update:%20New%20Information%20on%20How%20HIV%20Affects%20the%20
Immune%20System
Basic HIV Science Update: New Information on How HIV Affects the Immune
System
In a recent article in the scientific journal Nature Medicine, researchers
at the University of California at San Francisco's Gladstone Institute
published information shedding light on how HIV may be causing immune
suppression in people living with HIV. Dr. Mike McCune of the Gladstone
Institute, working with Dr. Hellerstein of UC Berkeley, used a new
technology to look at the rates of cell destruction and production in
people living with HIV compared to uninfected volunteers. Their findings
add support to a theory of how HIV causes immune suppression, a theory
which is not often talked about but which has been posed since the very
early days of the AIDS pandemic. The theory is that the major cause of
immune suppression in HIV is not so much a consequence of the destruction
of existing immune cells, (although certainly this is happening to some
degree) but rather a consequence of a failure of the immune system to
produce new cells at an adequate rate.
--------------------
Project Inform's What's New Memo February 1999 ä
http://www.projinf.org/whatsnew/wn-9902.html#Basic%20HIV%20Science
%20Update:%20New%20Information%20on%20How%20HIV%20Affects%20the%20
Immune%20System
Commentary
As depicted in the press, the research published in Nature Medicine was a
breakthrough theory on how HIV causes immune suppression, which runs
contrary to conventional beliefs about how HIV causes AIDS. Pitting Dr.
McCune's new data against Dr. Ho's earlier theory made for good press, if
not good science. The reality is perhaps somewhat less dramatic. The new
data shown by Dr. McCune and his colleagues makes a strong case that there
appears to be an impairment in the ability of the immune system to produce
new cells. In truth, there is nothing absolutely contradictory between
these and Dr. Ho's findings, and also nothing new about them. Both are
efforts to measure and quantify what is happening to the immune systems of
HIV infected people. Both are probably accurate and both still support the
need for antiviral therapy. In fact, among people living with HIV compared
to healthy uninfected individuals, McCune and his colleagues noted a
significant increase in cell death, just as Dr. Ho stated (if not quite as
dramatic in numbers). What is new, however, is that a new technology was
used which strongly suggests that there is also a defect in the rate at
which new cells are being produced to replace lost cells in people living
with HIV.
While Dr. McCune's work is important for the field of AIDS research and has
implications for future directions in AIDS research, the *information does
not support a change in the current guidelines for the treatment of HIV
infection in adults and children*. Clearly, people are experiencing
profound improvements in immune status and general health as a consequence
of triple-combination anti-HIV drug therapy. Dr. McCune has emphasized this
point in numerous interviews and conversations with activists and AIDS
treatment information providers. Obviously if there is an impairment in new
cell production, making efforts to preserve the immune system that exists
is key toward preventing disease progression.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
Dear Friend:
In recent years, many stories have appeared in the media highlighting the
views of individuals who claim that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. These
articles are always "good copy" in the sense that they generate controversy
and reader response. Many AIDS educators and public health officials are
concerned, however, that such views, presented without context or
challenge, undermine efforts to teach safer sexual behaviors needed for
reducing the spread of HIV. Others fear that they may discourage people
from seeking useful treatment available from their doctors and serve to
confuse people about important medical matters which may affect their lives
in the most profound ways.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
In light of the fact that yet another book is being released by the HIV
critics, we are supplying the attached document for your information. It is
an official summary of the evidence collected over the last 15 years which
has lead to the nearly universal consensus that HIV is the primary cause of
AIDS (on the NIH Web Site). It represents the work of hundreds of
scientists and references several hundred scientific papers on this matter.
HIV critics make the argument that "there isn't a single scientific paper
which proves that HIV is the cause of AIDS." In a sense, they are correct.
The argument is made not by a single paper, but by hundreds of them.
--------------------
Project Inform - HIV is the cause of AIDS ( HIVä
http://www.projinf.org/cgi-bin/print_hit_bold.pl/fs/hiv+aids.html?
cause%20AND%20aids#first_hit
We believe this is a serious matter which deserves careful and serious
consideration every time it comes up. We urge you to read this document, as
well as to consider the possible consequences if people are mistakenly
given the notion that the views for and against HIV causality are in any
way equally valid. As we see it, from a scientific viewpoint, the
alternative view is akin to the notion that the earth is flat, or the
belief that creationism is somehow a valid alternative to evolutionary
science.
Sincerely,
Martin Delaney
Founding Director, Project Inform
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.2 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 21:36:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com) - 4/5/99 11:06 PM )))
posts:
)[snip] Spirituality is a very personal
thing. One person's devoutly held beliefs are the next person's nonsense.
What is needed is a respect for spiritual diversity. This involves not only
allowing other's to practice their faith freely, but to respect the
spiritual beliefs of others as being as true, and as vital as one's own.
Can anthroposophy, with its adherence to Steiner's vision being the truest,
the highest and the most complete, make that claim?
And if spirituality diverges from people to people, it is the material world
we all share. The basic material realities. When Anthroposophy spreads
its tenets into the material world, into the world of agriculture, of
cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common ground we all share?
Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
promote?(
MRx: Sed contra to Allan Fine's
)it is the material world
we all share.(:
I learned through introspective observation "according to the method of [*ahem*] natural science" suggested in the first part of Rudolf Steiner's book The Philosophy of Freedom that we share, not the material world, but a world of thoughts, including thoughts about that material world; that material world that to a naive realist we seem to share, but only at first, that is, before our questions about it arise. Thinking, the "normally unobserved element" in our mental life, is what makes the experience of "sharing" (always thought-about when in our experience) possible. We experience nothing, hence share nothing, without thinking. And through the observation of our own thinking we isolate the experience of the "I," the threshold to the (shared) spiritual world.
It's worth a read.
On another list, one subscriber's sign-off reads,"Your Maya May Vary" (or YMMV)." I take that to be an understatement, which suggests rather that "your maya MUST vary" -- or else it isn't maya! The concept "triangle" is the universal, shared one, which you and I share when we each separately encounter the always-only-approximate, material, improperly-so-called "triangle" composed of ungeometrically shaped little assemblages of chalk or graphite or pixils; or our feelings, or the content of any of our perceptions.
But do let the author guide you. /MRx
)The basic material realities. When Anthroposophy spreads
its tenets into the material world, into the world of agriculture, of
cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common ground we all share?
Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
promote?(
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 21:44:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com) - 4/6/99 11:45 AM )))
replies to a post segment:
)) Well, I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it
)or not, and I see the spiritual and the material aspects of nature
)inter-acting as parts of one reality - not two separate ones. Take it or
)leave it.
by saying:
)What you call "the spiritual world", I call YOUR spiritual world. So when
you say "I see you as a part of the spiritual world whether you like it or
not", I interpret that as "I see you as a part of MY spiritual world whether
you like it or not". I hope you can see how those of different faiths might
feel disturbed by this point of view. This perspective of yours is not
unique among anthroposophists. It is why I would not entrust my child to a
Waldorf school, and it is why I support the principles of critics on this
list.(
Now (MRx here), what happens if we replace the phrase:
)as a part of MY spiritual world whether
you like it or not".(
by
"through my thinking whether you like it or not"?
Should I still be concerend, Alan Fine; others, if )those of different faiths might
feel disturbed by this point of view.(?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Mumbo
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 23:13:34 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi, Michael; MRx here. Hope you had a good weekend.
On ))) 4/6/99 9:20 PM )))
you wrote to Lisa (Mom-of-2-gals)
)[snip] I can't keep up with the 5-1 or greater ratio of SWA attacks on
)every post I make; I sometimes feel like the Lone Ranger.(
MRx: I hope that is the only reason I've not received your response to my second request to you for
)the full story of the English teacher who fed mystical mumbo jumbo
)about the relationship of the "platonic year" (precession of the equinoxes,
)about 26,000 years) to human physiology and those two to the development of
)Greek epic poetic meter(.
For you may remember that at the end of last week you had instructed me to
), see the archives. Just search on "dactylic
)hexameter".(
to which I replied:
Michael, I'm even slower than you, a judge of such things, realize. My request (did I ask it too slowly?) was that you do indeed "dig it up for any
interested parties" -- namely, moi. You see, I'm real slow, and can't do it for myself. Please make good on your offer, so I can concentrate on the content. I don't want to ask someone else to help me, it would be embarassing.
********
Well, you'll be pleased to know that I taught myself how to search through the archives, but I didn't find a "full story;" perhaps because, for some reason, not every archived month responded to the "Find" command.... Anyway, I got the idea from the several brief references that did turn up, that I might not be satisfied with the accounts there, whether or not I'd be satisfied with the history lesson you refer to (and it would not astonish me to learn that a Waldorf teacher -- like any teacher -- like any human being -- could be fallible).
What interests me more now is the standards by which you evaluate (say) said teacher's being
)[snip] incompetent professionally, cracked mentally, corrupt
)spiritually (for teaching this mumbo jumbo).
As I said last week:
I'm interested in the evidence, not because I doubt your testimony, but because of the topic. [I don't think I'll learn much about the topic this way, but I've filed the subject for future inquiry; thanks for the lead.] And also because then (maybe) I'll ask you (seriously) what constitutes "mumbo-jumbo." (I have a dictionary, and even know how to use it [I think], but I want to hear from YOU, and maybe your colleagues here.) It's been a long time since I (intentionally) dismissed ANYTHING with a term like that, and I want to see if I can achieve that stance, even experimentally, again. Will you help? BTW, I'm REALLY not seeking to convert you; I'm seeking to "try on" your mental outlook. Hope you'll give me a chance. DYKTA, /MRx
******
Judging a practitioner of a particular vocation to be )incompetent professionally( implies that you hold standards to evaluate professional competence; diagnosing someone to be )cracked mentally( indicates that you hold a norm for mental health. Since you offer as grounds for impunging the spiritual purity of this person his )teaching this mumbo jumbo(, I would ask you for signs by which we can recognize such spiritual purity whose privation you decry (as opposed to the corruption you detect), and what exactly you mean by mumbo-jumbo. My reason for asking remains what it was last week, cited in the paragraph above this one.
Hoping to hear from you.
Cordially, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.5 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Biodynamic Gardening
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:12:54 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-)Now (MRx here), what happens if we replace the phrase:
)
) )as a part of MY spiritual world whether
)you like it or not".(
)
)by
)
)"through my thinking whether you like it or not"?
)
)Should I still be concerend, Alan Fine; others, if )those of different
faiths might
)feel disturbed by this point of view.(?
It would depend on what you were thinking.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.6 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Re:The world we do share and the world we don't
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:26:08 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I first want to say that I find your posts to be beautifully written and
thought provoking (although I confess I do not always grasp what you are
saying) This part of the philosophy of freedom is the first thing of
Steiner's I have read. The idea that we all think is certainly something we
have in common, but what we think and what we believe does not always bring
us together.
Alan
S. Fine MD
)I learned through introspective observation "according to the method of
[*ahem*] natural science" suggested in the first part of Rudolf Steiner's
book The Philosophy of Freedom that we share, not the material world, but a
world of thoughts, including thoughts about that material world; that
material world that to a naive realist we seem to share, but only at first,
that is, before our questions about it arise. Thinking, the "normally
unobserved element" in our mental life, is what makes the experience of
"sharing" (always thought-about when in our experience) possible. We
experience nothing, hence share nothing, without thinking. And through the
observation of our own thinking we isolate the experience of the "I," the
threshold to the (shared) spiritual world.
)
)It's worth a read.
)
)On another list, one subscriber's sign-off reads,"Your Maya May Vary" (or
YMMV)." I take that to be an understatement, which suggests rather that
"your maya MUST vary" -- or else it isn't maya! The concept "triangle" is
the universal, shared one, which you and I share when we each separately
encounter the always-only-approximate, material, improperly-so-called
"triangle" composed of ungeometrically shaped little assemblages of chalk or
graphite or pixils; or our feelings, or the content of any of our
perceptions.
)
)But do let the author guide you. /MRx
)
)
) )The basic material realities. When Anthroposophy spreads
)its tenets into the material world, into the world of agriculture, of
)cardiology, of physics, does it not reduce the common ground we all share?
)
)Are you anthroposophists not undermining the very unity you are trying to
)promote?(
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.7 ---------------
From: Tarjei Straume (tastraum online.no)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 08:25:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904060507.WAA11876 lists1.best.com)
(199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904070103.SAA14603 lists1.best.com)
John Morehead wrote:
)It sounds as if you are mistakenly equating Steiner's "esoteric
)Christianity," an occultic, unbiblical and unhistorical counterfeit series
)of teachings, with more in common with Gnosticism, long regarded by
)orthodoxy as heretical, than with historic orthodox Christianity. There is
)no contradiction between holding to orthodox Christianity and working with
)secularists to oppose a religious-based education in public schools in
)violation of the Establishment Clause.
You are saying that I have studied anthroposophy, Gnosticism, and
traditional Christianity for thirty years only to be told by you as a
representativer for "orthodoxy" that I am doing a mistake? Who is the judge
of whether or not I am making mistakes in the spiritual realm?
What kind of authority does "orthodoxy" have over someone like myself and
my family?
)This is a ranting ad hominem which does not address the issues or the
)purpose of this list. Please try to stay on track and offer cogent
)arguments in support of any positions you may be advocating.
I would only like to know what happens to your secular friends when they
die. Please tell.
Tarjei
http://www.uncletaz.com/
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.8 ---------------
From: BruceyJ aol.com
Subject: Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 04:23:41 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Michael Kopp wrote, in reply to Lisa:
) You left out "critical" and "skeptical" and "rational" in the thinking
) department, which is the difference between Steiner/ Waldorf/
) Anthroposophical believers and the rest of us. How's that for arrogance?
I think that's pretty good for arrogance!
Bruce
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.9 ---------------
From: Robert Flannery (litvas icu.com)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 06:30:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199904061112.EAA18167 lists1.best.com)
(199904060237.TAA08530 lists1.best.com)
(199904060138.SAA22397 lists1.best.com)
(199904060015.RAA02648 lists1.best.com)
(199904051036.DAA01217 lists1.best.com)
(199904050322.UAA16130 lists1.best.com)
(199904041038.DAA24261 lists1.best.com)
(199904030012.QAA01257 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904070056.RAA04540 lists1.best.com)
)At 07:19 AM 4/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
))John Morehead returns the favor, and asks:
))
)))What are your presuppositions and qualifications to discuss and advocate
)))Waldorf?
))
))Good question.
)
)Mr. Flannery,
)
)Thank you for the response and the exchange.
)
)John Morehead
)
You're welcome. Looking forward to more of the same.
Robert Flannery
New York
litvas icu.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1202.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp xtra.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 21:17:54 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199904070824.BAA17982 lists1.best.com)
)Michael Kopp wrote, in reply to Lisa:
)
)) You left out "critical" and "skeptical" and "rational" in the thinking
)) department, which is the difference between Steiner/ Waldorf/
)) Anthroposophical believers and the rest of us. How's that for arrogance?
)
)I think that's pretty good for arrogance!
)
)Bruce
Are you having some difficulty with the syntax, Brucey?
Does is sound like a double entendre?
Or are you complimenting me?
You could be a little less obscure in your comments, Brucey.
Cheers from Godzone,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1202 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1203 --------------
001 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
002 - BruceyJ aol.com - Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
005 - MomOf2Gals aol.com - Lisa on Lisa -- and Michael and Dan and et al ..
006 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
007 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
008 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: Guess What?! I am NOT a brainwashed idiot ...
009 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - formatting error
010 - Tarjei Straume (tastraum - Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1203.1 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: What is Anthroposophical Influence?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 07:57:52 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: (199904061441.HAA03629 lists1.best.com)
(199904061627.JAA26570 lists1.best.com)
(199904070102.SAA12430 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199904070102.SAA12430 lists1.best.com)
John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com) wrote:
)Perhaps we can move beyond the questioning of personal backgrounds and move
)to the real issues at hand, such as Is Anthroposophy religious?,
I think the question is better stated as "Is anthroposophy a religion?";
the distinction is important.
This has been hacked back and forth for years. If you give me an
inclusive/exclusive definition of "religion" (i.e. one which will
include all things which are religion and will exclude all those which
aren't), we might be able to agree an answer.
However, as far as legality goes, this is probably irrelevant; the
courts will decide (and, with all due respect to Bob and Steve, legal
decisions are not always "right" -- one of my favourite lunacies from
this side of the pond is the EC legal classification of the carrot as a
fruit, because it can be used to make jam!)
)Does it
)serve as the foundation for Waldorf education?,
Of course it does.
)Should it be in public education?
Is that a legal or a moral question? Only the court can decide the
answer if it is a legal one. If it is a moral one, I ask "why not?" --
the parents of Waldorf pupils pay their taxes just like everyone else --
why shouldn't their children therefore have their education subsidised
just like the children of other tax-payers? And yes, I would extend this
to all forms of education, provided certain educational standards are
met. Only then can there be *real* choice for parents as to the
education their children receive (choice is otherwise restricted to the
wealthy -- hardly egalitarian