return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1433 --------------
001 - Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallst - Is anybody there?
002 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Is anybody there?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1433.1 ---------------
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Is anybody there?
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 14:58:59 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
In-Reply-To: (199908301943.MAA17707 lists1.best.com)
Hello....
have I lost contact with the waldorf-critics lists.best.com or is everybody
just taking a brake? I have had no messages from the list since monday
30/8. Though i have not contributed for some time, I¥m still an interested
lurker and would like to continue like that for the time being.
It takes all sorts....
best regards
Per Hallstr–m
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1433.2 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Is anybody there?
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 07:50:22 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199908301943.MAA17707 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909021346.GAA29896 lists1.best.com)
Hi Per,
We are here. Feel free to begin a new discussion. Busy days...
Deby
)Hello....
)
)have I lost contact with the waldorf-critics lists.best.com or is everybody
)just taking a brake?
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1433 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1434 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
002 - jdaar concentric.net - Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
004 - Andy Walter (andreas_walt - Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
005 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Waldorf Critics Site
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Hi - from a former Waldorf Parent
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - critical article about Waldorf in Swiss paper (in German)
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - [anon] Thank God something is being done
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 22:21:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
PLANS has acquired a copy of *Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie: Rudolf Steiners
okkult-rassistische Weltanschauung* by Guido & Michael Grandt. I think that
would translate "Black Book of Anthroposophy: Rudolf Steiner's
Occult-Racist World-View." I believe that the sale of this book was banned
in Europe by a court order resulting from a suit by Anthroposophists.
Herman, if you're there, can you fill us in on that story?
Here's the back jacket blurb:
"Rudolf Steiner ist der Begr¸nder der Anthroposophie. Nach der von ihm ins
Leben gerufenen Waldorfp”dagogik werden in Deutschland und ÷sterreich heute
fast 80 000 Kinder unterrichtet. Beide, die Anthroposophie und die
Waldorfschulen, haben in der ÷ffentlichkeit einen guten Ruf. Einen sehr
guten Ruf. Doch dieser gute Ruf besteht zu Unrecht, behaupten Guido und
Michael Grandt. Denn Rudolf Steiner war Okkultist, Rassist und auþerdem
leitendes Metglied eines sexualmagischen Geheimordens. Und siene obskure
Weltanschauung wirkt bis heute nach--auch in den Waldorfschulen. Nach
diesem Buch m¸ssen die Anthroposophen Farbe bekennen und die Politiker sich
¸berlegen, ob sie weiterhin mit Steuergeldern die Waldorf-Einrichtungen
unterst¸tzen wollen."
Wish I read German!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.2 ---------------
From: jdaar concentric.net
Subject: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 23:55:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909050520.WAA04378 lists1.best.com)
Jane Rice speaks and writes fluent German. Do you want to forward it to
her. I'm pretty sure that she would not mind translating a paragraph.
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) PLANS has acquired a copy of *Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie: Rudolf Steiners
) okkult-rassistische Weltanschauung* by Guido & Michael Grandt. I think that
) would translate "Black Book of Anthroposophy: Rudolf Steiner's
) Occult-Racist World-View." I believe that the sale of this book was banned
) in Europe by a court order resulting from a suit by Anthroposophists.
) Herman, if you're there, can you fill us in on that story?
)
) Here's the back jacket blurb:
)
) "Rudolf Steiner ist der Begr¸nder der Anthroposophie. Nach der von ihm ins
) Leben gerufenen Waldorfp”dagogik werden in Deutschland und ÷sterreich heute
) fast 80 000 Kinder unterrichtet. Beide, die Anthroposophie und die
) Waldorfschulen, haben in der ÷ffentlichkeit einen guten Ruf. Einen sehr
) guten Ruf. Doch dieser gute Ruf besteht zu Unrecht, behaupten Guido und
) Michael Grandt. Denn Rudolf Steiner war Okkultist, Rassist und auþerdem
) leitendes Metglied eines sexualmagischen Geheimordens. Und siene obskure
) Weltanschauung wirkt bis heute nach--auch in den Waldorfschulen. Nach
) diesem Buch m¸ssen die Anthroposophen Farbe bekennen und die Politiker sich
) ¸berlegen, ob sie weiterhin mit Steuergeldern die Waldorf-Einrichtungen
) unterst¸tzen wollen."
)
) Wish I read German!
)
) -Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.4 ---------------
From: Andy Walter (andreas_walter go.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 08:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
This book contains a lot valuable information, which you may find very useful to back up your case with evidence. I commend it to you. Also don't bother too much about why this book has been banned in Germany; German court rulings are sometimes strange anyhow.
BTW the blurp translates freely about as follows:
*Rudolf Steiner is the founder of anthroposophy. Almost 80000 children in Germany and Austria are being educated by Waldorf pedagogy, which he has created. Both antroposophy and waldorf pedagogy have a good public reputation. Indeed a very good reputation. However Guido and Michel Grandt say that this reputation is not for good reson, because Rudolf Steiner was an occultist, racist and moreover a leading member of a sexual magick occult order. His bizarre world view continues to live on, even in waldorf schools. After this book anthropops must show color and politicians must re-think if waldorf institutions deserve continuing public support with tax-money.*
My 2 cents worth for this...
AW
---jdaar concentric.net
wrote:---
)Jane Rice speaks and writes fluent German. Do you want to forward it to
)her. I'm pretty sure that she would not mind translating a paragraph.
)
)Dan Dugan wrote:
))
)) PLANS has acquired a copy of *Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie: Rudolf Steiners
)) okkult-rassistische Weltanschauung* by Guido & Michael Grandt. I think that
)) would translate "Black Book of Anthroposophy: Rudolf Steiner's
)) Occult-Racist World-View." I believe that the sale of this book was banned
)) in Europe by a court order resulting from a suit by Anthroposophists.
)) Herman, if you're there, can you fill us in on that story?
))
)) Here's the back jacket blurb:
))
)) "Rudolf Steiner ist der Begr¸nder der Anthroposophie. Nach der von ihm ins
)) Leben gerufenen Waldorfp”dagogik werden in Deutschland und ÷sterreich heute
)) fast 80 000 Kinder unterrichtet. Beide, die Anthroposophie und die
)) Waldorfschulen, haben in der ÷ffentlichkeit einen guten Ruf. Einen sehr
)) guten Ruf. Doch dieser gute Ruf besteht zu Unrecht, behaupten Guido und
)) Michael Grandt. Denn Rudolf Steiner war Okkultist, Rassist und auþerdem
)) leitendes Metglied eines sexualmagischen Geheimordens. Und siene obskure
)) Weltanschauung wirkt bis heute nach--auch in den Waldorfschulen. Nach
)) diesem Buch m¸ssen die Anthroposophen Farbe bekennen und die Politiker sich
)) ¸berlegen, ob sie weiterhin mit Steuergeldern die Waldorf-Einrichtungen
)) unterst¸tzen wollen."
))
)) Wish I read German!
))
)) -Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________ ____
Get your Free GO Network Email address at http://mail.go.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.5 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 10:51:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909051535.IAA07159 lists1.best.com)
Andy Walter, thanks for the translation!
)*Rudolf Steiner is the founder of anthroposophy. Almost 80000 children in
)Germany and Austria are being educated by Waldorf pedagogy, which he has
)created. Both antroposophy and waldorf pedagogy have a good public
)reputation. Indeed a very good reputation. However Guido and Michel Grandt
)say that this reputation is not for good reson, because Rudolf Steiner was
)an occultist, racist and moreover a leading member of a sexual magick
)occult order. His bizarre world view continues to live on, even in waldorf
)schools. After this book anthropops must show color and politicians must
)re-think if waldorf institutions deserve continuing public support with
)tax-money.*
Does "show color" correspond to the English idiom "show their colors,"
meaning to identify oneself openly?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Waldorf Critics Site
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 12:05:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (37C388BC.F5896950 pobox.alaska.net)
[Reply to a message posted from a visitor to our web site. -dD-]
Dear Tom (tliv pobox.alaska.net), thanks for your opinion.
)Dan,
)I think you are full of crap. You have stretched the bounds of
)criticism beyond logical limits and greatly exaggerated any rational
)criticism of Waldorf education through numerous deceptive distortions.
)It would serve your cause (gee, is your cause a religion? GOD FORBID!)
)better to edit out the cheap distortions and illogical conclusions.
)I just thought you might want to know that your credibility as a Waldorf
)critic is zip. You and PLANS make too many leaps of faith (sorry 'bout
)the pun...) to be taken seriously.
)Cheers, Tom
What I read above tells me you don't like my attitude, but you make no
substantial rebuttal to what we say on the web site.
Regarding religion, the board of PLANS includes people of mainstream
religions, evangelical Christians, and secular humanists.
)PS: Did you know that federal money goes to sectarian universities in
)the form of paying tuition via the GI Bill and numerous other programs?
)Also, federal medicare/medicaid payments go to sectarian owned health
)care providers? Golly Darn!
Yes, but there are rules that prohibit these institutions from including
sectarian religious content in the services they provide, and "pervasively
sectarian" institutions like Rudolf Steiner College may not receive federal
funds.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
Secretary, PLANS
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Hi - from a former Waldorf Parent
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 12:04:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[The following reply to a private message is posted by permission.--Dan Dugan]
Patti, you wrote,
)Dear Dan Dugan,
)
) I am a former Waldorf parent - my son attended Waldorf School from first
)grade. Six weeks before the end of seventh grade, he refused to go to
)school, and so I enrolled him in public school.
I hope he's happier there. May I borrow your son's lesson books for my
research?
) This will undoubtedly sound very strange, but I got the "ethereal"
)impression, on some "supersensible" level, that my son's spirit was in
)preparation for being devoured, and that I got him out of that school just
)barely in time. Thank God, I honored his refusal to return to that school.
)
) His teacher kept trying to convince me that my son's growing unhappiness
)in the class was somehow attributable to - my son, himself! However, I had
)witnessed how his teacher had expressed certain attitudes toward other
)students in the class over the years, and how the children had naturally
)reflected those attitudes, causing each student she focused her negative
)attentions on profound unhappiness. (My son, in fact, had ultimately been
)each of those students' only friend, even when the teacher's attitudes toward
)them in the classroom caused it to become "unpopular" to befriend them).
)
) My feeling about Waldorf education is that its ideals are good, but that
)its underlying philosophy is inherently diabolical. It is similar to
)Mormonism in effect, in that all the externals appear quite attractive and
)blameless, while the very foundation those externals are built upon is a lie.
) I have learned: any mortal who proposes to know all about the "spirit
)world" is to be avoided like the devil.
Yes, but I'd also include in that category Christians who claim that what
-they- want is "God's will."
)Jesus did not expound upon spiritual
)beings or Heavenly degrees. How can any mere mortal propose to know more?
)
) I feel the "spiritual knowledge" of Waldorf, as with Mormonism, merely
)offers a means of "one-upmanship" to the teacher/devotee, enabling them a
)"position of authority" that is presumed to be greater than that of the
)parents - because of this "profound greater knowledge." Once the family is
)drawn into the Waldorf realm, parents are thus encouraged to trust the
)teacher, believing the teacher "knows better" about the things of this realm.
) But one must "buy" that Rudolf Steiner had access to "supersensible"
)knowledge the same as one must buy that Joseph Smith found some magical
)golden plates....
I agree completely.
) Jesus simply taught that we should serve God. There is no mystical
)mumbo jumbo to that!
For Christians, perhaps. Others may have other opinions.
) I heartily agree with you that Waldorf philosophy, as with any other
)inherently satanic cult philosophy, does not belong in our schools.
Not in public schools. They're welcome to their private schools.
)However,
)I do feel that because our country was founded upon Christianity, any
)"separation between church and state" in regard to Christianity will only
)lead - and is already leading to a collapse of our institutions. This
)worries me.
) What is the purpose of education, if not to better serve God?
)
) Sincerely, Patti Morey
I'll disagree with you there. The founders of our country were wise enough
-not- to found it on Christianity, but upon the rights of the individual,
including the right to worship or not worship as the individual chooses.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: critical article about Waldorf in Swiss paper (in German)
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 17:16:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Weltwoche 6/98, 5.2.1998
Wie schlecht ausgebildete, dogmatische und ueberforderte Lehrer dem
Ruf der Rudolf-Steiner-Schulen schaden
Panzer und Gewehre in der schoenen heilen Welt
Fundamentalistische Stroemungen nehmen an den Steinerschulen ´in
erschreckendem Massª zu.´Es gibt Lehrer, die gnadenlos mobben und
gleichzeitig schoengeistige Vortraege halten.ª
Von Carin Diodý
Die Steinerschulen der Schweiz stecken in einer tiefen Krise: Die
Schulbeitraege der Eltern reichen nicht mehr aus, um die
Millionendefizite einzelner Schulen auszugleichen, die Schuelerzahlen
sind ruecklaeufig, und der fundamentalistische Kern der Lehrerschaft
zementiert mit seiner versteinerten Ideologie die gaengigen
Vorurteile, Anthroposophen seien weltfremde Sektierer.
1919 gruendete Anthroposoph Rudolf Steiner die erste Waldorfschule
fuer die Arbeiterkinder einer deutschen Zigarettenfabrik. Gepraegt von
den Idealen der Romantik und des Jugendstils, wollte Steiner, dass die
Kinder in einer heilen und beschuetzten Umgebung lernen, angstfrei und
ohne Notendruck. Nicht nur der Intellekt, sondern auch die
kuenstlerischen Faehigkeiten eines Kindes muessen gefoerdert werden,
lautete sein Credo. Neben Rollenspiel und Tanz bilden Maerchen,
Fabeln, biblische Erzaehlungen und griechische Mythen das Fundament
des Lehrplans. ´Meine Kinder besuchen die Steiner-schule, weil sie
dort ihre Begabungen entfalten und spaeter die Gesellschaft
menschlicher machen koennenª, erklaert der erste PR-Manager der
Steiner-schulen Schweiz, Robert Thomas.
Waehrend sich die Sproesslinge im Unterricht ganzheitlich entfalten
duerfen, vorausgesetzt, sie passen in das anthroposophische Weltbild
des Klassenlehrers, muessen sich ihre Eltern gefallen lassen, dass
Paedagogen ihnen die erzieherische Kompetenz absprechen und verlangen,
dass sie ihre Muendigkeit vor dem Eingang zur Steinerschule abgeben:
´Backen, basteln, blechen, solange die Eltern da brav mitmachen und
nicht aufmucken, ist die Steinerwelt in Ordnungª, erklaert die Mutter
Judith Zink.
Als ´geschuetzte Werkstatt fuer unfaehige Lehrerª bezeichnet Ehemann
Robert Zink die Steiner schule. Traurig und zornig erinnert er sich an
die Steinerschule Adliswil. Ðberzeugt von der anthroposophischen
Erziehung, wollte der Arzt seinen Soehnen mehr als normiertes
Leistungsdenken und materielles Wissen mitgeben und vertraute sie
Steinerlehrern an. Sein aeltester Sohn aber hatte Muehe, sich in der
schoenen, heilen und weltfremden Umgebung zurechtzufinden, und
rebellierte. In die pastellfarbene Harmonie malte der Bub mit
schwarzer Farbe Gewehre und Panzer, eine Provokation mit Folgen. Die
Klassenlehrerin gab ihm zu verstehen, er sei gestoert und in der
Gemeinschaft nicht laenger akzeptiert. Als ihn auch noch die
Mitschueler plagten, war der Elfjaehrige ueberfordert. ´Er kapselte
sich ab und war voellig verstoertª, erzaehlt seine Mutter.
Die Situation eskalierte, die moralische Verurteilung nicht nur des
aeltesten Sohnes, sondern der ganzen Familie war spuerbar, wurde aber
nicht offen ausgesprochen. Fuer Judith Zink war das Psychoterror.
Rueckblickend glaubt sie, dass die Lehrerin mit der selbstauferlegten
Moral ueberfordert war: ´Das ist die Kehrseite der Harmonie, in den
Steinerschulen herrschen oft unterschwellige Aggressionen.ª Die Eltern
suchten das Gespraech mit der Lehrerin, doch diese wich aus und
erklaerte den Eltern lediglich, ihr Sohn sei fehlentwickelt, denn sie
haetten bei seiner Erziehung klaeglich versagt. Schliesslich weigerte
sie sich, die Eltern ueberhaupt zu empfangen, und wartete einfach
darauf, dass sie den Sohn von der Schule naehmen.
´Sie schickte uns in die Wueste, wir sassen vor einer schwarzen Wandª,
erinnert sich Robert Zink. ´Wenn Eltern diskutieren wollen oder sich
kritisch aeussern, werden sie vom Tisch des heiligen Grals
verstossen.ª Der PR-Beauftragte Robert Thomas, der selbst an der
Plattenstrasse in Zuerich unterrichtet, bedauert, dass solche
Konflikte so haeufig vorkommen: ´Wir waren in der ungluecklichen
Situation, dass Klassenlehrer bei Problemen mit Eltern als Partei und
Richter in einer Person auftraten.ª Aufgeschreckt durch die immer
lauter werdende Kritik und deren Konsequenzen, ueben sich die
Steinerschulen in Schadensbegrenzung.
´Zur Sicherung der paedagogischen und schulischen Qualitaetª wurde ein
Gremium gegruendet, bestehend aus Eltern, Lehrern und
Vorstandsmitgliedern der Schule. Nach anderthalb Jahren Aufbauarbeit
ist das Gremium inzwischen an sechs der siebenunddreissig
Steinerschulen eingefuehrt.
Auch der juengere Sohn der Familie Zink, der bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt
keine Probleme in der Schule hatte, musste buessen: Nach einer
Konferenz stellte sich der Klassenlehrer vor den Zweitklaessler und
warnte ihn: ´Wenn du nicht aufpasst, geht es dir wie deinem Bruder.ª
Fuer die Mutter, selbst ehemalige Steinerschuelerin und ueberzeugte
Anthroposophin, brach eine Welt zusammen. Heute zweifelt sie an dem
starren Schulsystem, das fuer sie nur noch wenig mit Steiners
Paedagogik zu tun hat. Um so mehr, als sie sieht, dass ihr aeltester
Sohn, der heute eine oeffentliche Sekundarschule besucht, keine
Probleme mehr hat.
´Wenn die Steinerschule so weitermacht, schaufelt sie sich ihr eigenes
Grabª, prophezeit die Architektin und Mutter Gertrud Bauer*. Sie
kaempft seit Jahren fuer einen offenen Dialog und wuenscht sich
kritikfaehige Lehrer: Die engagierte Mutter wagt nicht, mit ihrem
richtigen Namen aufzutreten, weil sie ihre Kinder schuetzen will. Sie
befuerchtet, mit ihrer Kritik gewisse Lehrer zu veraergern, deren Zorn
dann die Kinder anstatt sie selbst treffen wuerde. ´Allein in Adliswil
kenne ich fuenf Familien, die ihre Kinder aus der Schule nehmen
mussten, weil die Lehrer unfaehig sind, sich Konflikten zu stellenª,
erzaehlt Robert Zink und fragt sich, wie eine private Schule sich das
leisten kann. Auch Gertrud Bauer kennt dies nur zu gut: ´Es laeuft
wirklich so: Ploetzlich verschwinden Kinder von der Schule, meist kurz
vor den Sommerferien.ª Robert Thomas findet es grundsaetzlich falsch,
wenn ein Kind kurzfristig und ohne Vorgespraeche die Schule verlassen
muss, bezweifelt aber, dass ein Rausschmiss wirklich so ablaeuft: ´Oft
erinnern sich die Eltern einfach nicht mehr an die Vorgespraeche.ª
Wiederholt weigerten sich Lehrer, mit Gertrud Bauer ueber ihre
Anliegen zu diskutieren, doch sie will nicht klein beigeben -
weiterhin glaubt sie an das urspruengliche Prinzip Steiner, allen
Schwierigkeiten zum Trotz. Sie bedauert, dass Eltern, die ihre Kinder
aus der Schule nehmen muessen, nur die Faust in der Tasche machen. Sie
fordert sie auf, die Mauer des Schweigens zu durchbrechen und
erstarrte Anthroposophen wachzuruetteln, auch wenn es sehr viel
Energie kostet.
Die Primarlehrerin Johanna Brunner* wollte ihr Verstaendnis von
anthroposophischer Paedagogik ins verstaubte Anthroposophenstuebchen
tragen und im Unterricht umsetzen. Doch ihr Engagement war nicht
gefragt: Die Intrigen des Lehrerkollegiums wurden unertraeglich. Heute
unterrichtet die staatlich ausgebildete Lehrerin wieder an einer
oeffentlichen Schule und ist entsetzt, was Lehrer im Namen Steiners
anrichten:
´Das Kernproblem ist die fundamentalistische Stroemung, die an
Steinerschulen in erschreckendem Mass zunimmt.ª Es gebe Lehrer, die
gnadenlos mobben und gleichzeitig schoengeistige Vortraege halten.
´Diese Anthroposophen verbarrikadieren sich, wollen die Realitaet
nicht sehen und handeln im Widerspruch zu Steiner.ª
Fuer Brunner sind es unsichere Menschen, die hartnaeckig die
Weiterentwicklung der Welt achtzig Jahre nach Steiner ignorieren. Sie
beten dem Gruender nach, blaettern verzweifelt in seinen Schriften und
erheben ihn ins Dogmatische, was Steiner nie beabsichtigt hatte. Auf
der krampfhaften Suche nach einer Stuetze werden sie
fundamentalistisch: ´Wenn dann jemand kommt und die Haltegriffe
abschrauben will, ist er ein Ketzer.ª
Der PR-Beauftragte Robert Thomas spricht von hohen Idealen und
Anspruechen Steiners, denen Anthroposophen nur durch selbstaendiges
Denken gerecht werden koennen: ´Ist das nicht der Fall, haben wir es
mit Dogmatik zu tun, das war aber bei Gandhis Lehre genauso.ª
In jeder Steinerschule gibt es einen inneren Kern, dem etwa zehn
Prozent der Lehrer angehoeren. ´Dieser Kern besitzt eine unglaubliche
Macht, obwohl gemaess Statuten alle Lehrer gleichberechtigt sindª,
weiss Brunner. Zu diesem Kern gehoert man als Sohn oder Neffe eines
Schulgruenders oder wenn die Mutter Steiner noch persoenlich kannte.
Es existiert eine Art Adelshierarchie, und wenn es einer aus dem
Fussvolk versteht, dem Clan zuzudienen, wird er, wenn er Glueck hat,
in den erlauchten Kreis aufgenommen, ansonsten einfach ausgenuetzt.
Steiners Vision beim Aufbau der Anthroposophischen Gesellschaft war
aber gerade eine Gemeinschaft, in der nicht Hierarchien zaehlen,
sondern die Beziehung gleichwertiger Menschen, die gemeinsam nach
geistiger Erkenntnis streben. Doch der innere Kern beansprucht Macht
und Wahrheit fuer sich. Wer nicht spurt, muss gehen. ´Waehrend meiner
Steinerschulzeit wurde die Haelfte des Kollegiums ausgewechselt, und
ich behaupte, achtzig bis neunzig Prozent wurden vom inneren Kern
gemobbtª, so Brunner. Meist trifft es junge, engagierte Lehrer, die es
wagen, die selbsternannten Hohepriester des Systems zu kritisieren.
Doch schlecht ausgebildete Lehrer ohne Matura muessen kuschen, denn
ihre Existenz haengt von der Schule ab:
´Es ist tragisch, sie sind wie Sklaven, denn in der Privatwirtschaft
haben sie keine Chance und als Lehrer ausserhalb der Steinerschule
schon gar nicht.ª Auch Robert Zink zweifelt an der Kompetenz gewisser
Lehrer und beschwert sich: ´Es fehlt jede Transparenz ueber die
Lehrerausbildung. Als ich nachfragte, erhielt ich keine Antwort.ª
Waehrend Primarlehrer, die an oeffentlichen Schulen unterrichten
wollen, nach der Matura eine dreijaehrige Seminarausbildung vorweisen
muessen, besitzen viele Steinerschullehrer im besten Fall ein Diplom
auf anthroposophischer Stufe. Andere Lehrer haben lediglich einen
Abendkurs intern in einer Steinerschule absolviert. ´Doch die Kantone
tolerieren, dass solche Lehrer unterrichtenª, erklaert Johanna
Brunner.
Heftig widerspricht Robert Thomas dem Vorwurf, diese interne
Schmalspur-Ausbildung genuege nicht, denn ausschlaggebend seien die
kuenstlerischen Faehigkeiten eines Lehrers, und nicht allein
intellektuelle und handwerkliche Begabung. Und die Erziehungsdirektion
des Kantons Zuerich begruendet ihre liberale Haltung gegenueber den
Steinerschulen mit dem Argument, diese setzten andere thematische
Schwerpunkte als die oeffentlichen Schulen. Deshalb sei es nur
logisch, dass die Lehrkraefte diesen Beduerfnissen entsprechend
ausgebildet wuerden.
Inzwischen gibt es eine Alternative zur Steinerschule: Sie befindet
sich in der Aufbauphase und wird diesen Fruehling in Zuerich offiziell
eroeffnet. Der Sekundarlehrer Hanspeter Diboky, ueberzeugt von
Steiners Paedagogik, unterrichtete sieben Jahre an einer
Steinerschule, weil er an eine Reform glaubte. Doch auch er biss sich
am fundamentalistischen Kern die Zaehne aus. Er zog die Konsequenzen
und gruendete die Delta-Primar- und -Sekundarschule. Der Unterricht
wird auf die individuellen Beduerfnisse der Schueler abgestimmt, so
dass auch Hochbegabte ihren Weg gehen koennen. Die Schule enthaelt den
Impuls Steiners, will aber keine weitere anthroposophische
Missionsstation sein.
* Namen von der Redaktion geaendert
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is
distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and
educational purposes only.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 18:31:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Dan,
Thanks so much for the site which I have only just found. I am an ex pupil
based in England who spent twelve years at a Steiner School and so much of
what you have here makes sense.
I would also like to here from anyone who has any information about abuse,
both sexual, physical and verbal. I was witness to a lot of sexual abuse
and victim of physical and verbal abuse myself. The ethos passed down to
us was that this was part of our karma.
I have too many dead, alcoholic and drug dependent school mates to feel
that we were left untainted by this school. As with all groups that create
victims, the victims are the last too be heard.
(snip)
The other thing is there is a book by Charlotte Rudolf pub.1991
"Waldorferziehung Wege zur Versteinerung" which I understand was a prime
reason for the German government pulling its funding of the schools in
Germany. I cannot read it myself, (12 years of german at a Steiner School
does not equip me in any way to speak or read german) and wondered whether
anyone you knew had read it or was in the process of translating it.
Once again thrilled to fnd your site
If you want to post this feel free but if you could drop my name and the
details regarding ... as am in a pretty strong line of fire at the moment
from those who feel I am just being "bitter"
[name withheld]
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1434.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 19:12:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909060133.SAA29312 lists1.best.com)
)Dear Dan,
)
)Thanks so much for the site which I have only just found. I am an ex pupil
)based in England who spent twelve years at a Steiner School and so much of
)what you have here makes sense.
This student has been coresponding with me privately. It is a sad story of
a whole group of students.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1434 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1435 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Atlantic article discussion online
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
007 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Atlantic article discussion online
008 - Christian Czachary (chris - Artikle from last week
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: Atlantic article discussion online
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Artikle from last week
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 22:33:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Todd Oppenheimer's long-winded Waldorf puff-piece is on the web at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/o/issues/99sep/9909waldorf.htm
If you click on "post and riposte" in the top section, and register, you
can get into The Atlantic's web board discussion about the article. There's
already a glowing post from a defender of the faith, and a reply from me.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 03:18:30 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Dan - I'd love to communicate with the person who wrote you this letter!
My son was terribly verbally abused in his class, as were others. Also,
another parent pointed out just the other day how our children remember
nothing of the German they'd learned. Wonder why?
Could you please give this person my e-mail address and let them know I'd
love to share experiences with them? I'm sure it would comfort them, and it
would help give more perspective on what my son must have been experiencing,
as well.
Thanks! Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 03:38:09 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Deby!
Could you please give this person my e-mail address? My son was
terribly verbally abused in his class too, as were many of the students. I
heard that the teacher cussed and yelled at them all. Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 00:17:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909051535.IAA07159 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909051751.KAA22466 lists1.best.com)
My friend Jane Rice (not on the list) contributed this:
In case you haven't already received a response to this question:
yes, Farbe bekennen does mean to show your colors. Otherwise I
wouldn't quibble very much with Andy Walter's (a German, I
assume?) translation, except perhaps the following sentence:
"However Guido and Michael Grandt claim that this good reputation
is unjustified." And Geheimorden is usually translated fairly
literally as "secret order."
-posted by Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 00:56:34 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909060721.AAA01608 lists1.best.com)
)Hi Dan - I'd love to communicate with the person who wrote you this letter!
)My son was terribly verbally abused in his class, as were others. Also,
)another parent pointed out just the other day how our children remember
)nothing of the German they'd learned. Wonder why?
)
)Could you please give this person my e-mail address and let them know I'd
)love to share experiences with them? I'm sure it would comfort them, and it
)would help give more perspective on what my son must have been experiencing,
)as well.
)
)Thanks! Sincerely, Patti Morey
I'll do that. I will forward your post. Thanks for speaking up.
(Kanefer aol.com)
Debra Snell
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Re: [anon] Thank God something is being done
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 01:00:42 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909060739.AAA07373 lists1.best.com)
)Hi Deby!
) Could you please give this person my e-mail address? My son was
)terribly verbally abused in his class too, as were many of the students. I
)heard that the teacher cussed and yelled at them all. Sincerely, Patti Morey
I did. Thanks for your concern and help.
_ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.7 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 06:16:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Dan Dugan]
)
) Todd Oppenheimer's long-winded Waldorf puff-piece is on the web at:
[Bob Tolz]
It must be so frustrating for PLANS to see articles in major
magazines applauding Waldorf Education.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.8 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: Artikle from last week
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 09:22:06 -0500
I found this in my mail:
CLINTON SUPPORTS BAN ON CREATIONISM
EDGARTOWN, Mass., Aug. 27 (UPI) - The White House said (Friday) that
President Clinton, while generally favoring the right of school boards
to set curriculum, accepts the 1987 Supreme Court ruling that schools
are not free to teach creationism. White House press secretary Joe
Lockhart was asked for Clinton's position one day after Vice President
Al Gore refused to take a clear stand on whether public schools should
be required to teach evolution rather than creationism.
But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation by chance?
Christian Czachary
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 10:08:59 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909061011.DAA14857 lists1.best.com)
)[Bob Tolz]
) It must be so frustrating for PLANS to see articles in major
)magazines applauding Waldorf Education.
We're used to it. (g)
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1435.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 19:05:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909061325.GAA00481 lists1.best.com)
On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
) by chance?
Uh, no. I'd explain the difference, but I don't have time to teach you
right now. There are lots of web sites that can help you get a
better grounding in basic biology, though.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1435 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1436 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Artikle from last week
002 - Christian Czachary (chris - Re: Artikle from last week
003 - "Duane Koons" (dkoons gun - Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1436.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 02:50:20 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
) by chance?
I feel that is an awesome insight. Evolution theory is definitely a
"creation theory" -- similar to how atheism is another kind of belief
pertaining to God
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1436.2 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:12:31 -0500
We have always to be very careful whom we believe or what we believe.
If someone tries to make you believe something, there is always an
interest. Especially concerning children the interest is very high, because
they are the future of any civilisation. What mankind has proven in the
last 6000 years (before that there is "no records" about their philosophy)
is that man is not honest. So what are we doing then?
I believe, that the approach to be as neutral as possible in (state-)
schools is what would make sense, although the real problem here is the
definition of 'neutral', and in the praxis no teacher is really 'neutral'
concerning to his/her own belief.
"Science?
The reason why the galaxies are rushing away from ours is because they know
what is going on here."
Christian Czachary
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1436.3 ---------------
From: "Duane Koons" (dkoons gundluth.org)
Subject: Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 17:46:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Please unsubscribe me. Thank you for your time and comments over the past few
months.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1436 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1437 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Re: Artikle from last week
002 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - Religious Doctrine and Scientific Knowledge
003 - AL (al textgenie.com) - How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to critici
004 - eddy (redfish mwt.net) - genetic safety?
005 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to
c
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
010 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Artikle from last week
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 12:04:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909070651.XAA07900 lists1.best.com)
)On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
)
)) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
)) by chance?
)
)I feel that is an awesome insight. Evolution theory is definitely a
)"creation theory" -- similar to how atheism is another kind of belief
)pertaining to God
I know cultural relativism, that claims every kind of knowledge is "just a
story," is popular at some universities, but there is really a big
difference between religious 'belief' and scientific 'belief.'
Religious doctrine is based on revelation from an unquestionable source.
Scientific knowledge is based on evidence, and is revised (or even
overthrown) when new evidence appears.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.2 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: Religious Doctrine and Scientific Knowledge
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 15:57:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Dan Dugan]
)
) Religious doctrine is based on revelation from an
) unquestionable source.
)
) Scientific knowledge is based on evidence, and is revised (or even
) overthrown) when new evidence appears.
)
[Bob Tolz]
I agree with your comments, Dan, but you're juxtaposing two
different things: doctrine and knowledge, so it's easy to contrast them and
diminish the religious side of the comparison. A better comparison would be
scientific knowledge against religious *knowledge* (as opposed to doctrine).
But I suppose you would dismiss the possibility that anything
involving religion could be based on knowledge which is revised as new
evidence appears. I know that our listmate (and PLANS expert witness) John
Morehead seems more comfortable relying on religious doctrine than on
exploring.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.3 ---------------
From: AL (al textgenie.com)
Subject: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to criticism?
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 17:03:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (199909081905.MAA01079 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909081905.MAA01079 lists1.best.com)
Ladies, Gentlemen, If I may:
I have just joined the list and have no access to previous
correspondence (though I would like to see the last six months worth,
if I knew how to apply for it).
I am trying to evaluate the current situation as far as Waldorf
teaching practice in North MAerica goes (and Europe, if available),
in order to nail down two questions:
Has there been any increase in separation between Waldorf teaching in
North America and Steiner's often fantastical scientific theories
since the mid-nineties, in response to critics and the raising of the
issue of separation of religion and education? Or is the situation
the same as it was when Dan Dugan first encountered it and observed
the seepage of anthroposophical theory into the classroom (or its
influence in keeping out teaching of conflicting ideas from modern
science)?
Secondly, to what extent could Waldorf teaching practices (those that
seem to prove out as beneficial in practice, insofar as that is
demonstrated) be separated from Steiner's anthroposophical creed and
still survive, and is this in fact the likely outcome of the
situation in the US?
I have been talking to Waldorf teachers and staff, and outside
consultants, and my impression so far is that the teachers typically
still feel they need it as inspiration, even if when pressed they
have to admit that much of the creed "boggles the mind", as one
senior teacher -- enthusiastic nonetheless -- put it to me.
It seems that they become so emotionally convinced of the
effectiveness of Steiner's influence and approach to education that
they become unable to resolve the conflict between common sense and
modern scientific proven fact (eg that the heart pumps the blood) and
Steiner's beliefs, and just brush the conflict aside with the
all-purpose rubric that Steiner's writings are "difficult" to fathom
but in the end will make sense with enough study.
Whatever the truth of that, I am trying to nail down what has
generally happened in the last five years. Many Waldorf people say
to me that the powers that be in the movement (whoever they are) and
the staff of its schools have realized that there is a need to
explain themselves better to the outside world than they have in the
past.
Has this also resulted in more of a separation between anthroposophy
and Waldorf teaching, or is the true situation the same as before? I
am interested in any evidence either way, or opinion.
Secondly, could they do it and still achieve the beneficial results
they claim and seem to achieve? I cannot see why those innovations
and practices could not be maintained entirely free of anthroposophy,
as Waldorf people have always claimed and as Steiner also publicly
ordained. But I do not know enough about actual classroom practice
since I have never seen it.
Looking forward to any reply,
Best regards,
Anthony L
Looking forward to your reply,
Best regards,
AL
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.4 ---------------
From: eddy (redfish mwt.net)
Subject: genetic safety?
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2000 07:21:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909081953.MAA08781 lists1.best.com)
dearest list...
perhaps this is some common ground here for the waring factions
in any case, it should prove good discussion.
i have not seen anything on GM foods here, in this forum.
i would love to read your opinions.
e
ps GM stands for Genetically Modified
B-GE: Cheaper to ban GM food from schools
Date:
Wed, 08 Sep 1999 13:02:03 +0000
From:
Jonathan (mail icsenglish.com)
To:
Ban gef (Ban-GEF lists.greenbuilder.com)
It seems from this PA news story that those local authorities who
haven't yet banned GM food from their school meals may live to regret
it! Cambridgeshire, incidentally, is a major centre of the biotech
industry in the UK. It's also where Axis, the GE firm that folded
yesterday, was based.
......................................................................................................................................................
A county council is set to ban GM food from school meals because of the
cost of implementing new European Union labelling rules.
Cambridgeshire County Council says it will now serve only non-GM food to
pupils in its 250 schools.
The new rules, due to come into effect in Britain later this month, say
food providers must label any food with a significant GM content.
Cambridgeshire says the cost and complexity of implementing the rules is
too great. Councillors are expected to approve the proposed ban later
this month.
`Labelling all foods which have a significant GM content is a very
difficult exercise when you're serving school meals,'' said a council
spokesman.
``Its not as simple as marking a label on a tin and we're not exactly
sure how we would have gone about implementing the rules.
`
`We've decided that the cost and the hassle of trying to implement the
regulations is just too great so we will now rely on our suppliers to
supply non-GM food.'
----
For instructions on joining, leaving, or otherwise using the Ban-GEF
list, send email to Ban-GEF lists.txinfinet.com with HELP in the SUBJECT
line.
----
footnote...
Genetically Modified Food Controversy -- NPR's Dan Charles reports on
the
controversy surrounding genetically altered foods. Last week food
processing giant Archer Daniels Midland Co. warned its grain suppliers
to
begin segregating genetically modified corn, soybeans and other crops
from
conventional crops. But foods that have been certified as
non-genetically
modified and genetically manipulated are coming from the same plant.
(5.10)
Ý
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.5 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 23:38:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/6/99 5:08 AM )))
responds to
))[Bob Tolz]'s
writing that:
)) It must be so frustrating for PLANS to see articles in major
))magazines applauding Waldorf Education.
by saying that:
)We're used to it. (g)
...which suggests (to me, anyway) that repeated frustrations should reduce their import. My experience (on, say, oh, this list) contradicts that conclusion. But we scientists are always open to new evidence. Sign me: Sisyphus (Who Somehow Managed to Learn Some German in an American Waldorf School) /Michael Ronall
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to
criticism?
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:47:16 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It does seem like aspects of the Waldorf curriculum could be retained without
the anthroposophical basis, though the anthroposiphical basis provides the
rationale for much of the curriculum and the way it is presented. Still,
that rationale is so ethereal, surely a "down-to-earth" rationale for various
aspects of the curriculum could be found in standard literature on child
education. Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:15:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) (bhstudio frontiernet.net) - 9/5/99 10:46 AM )))
translates the )back jacket blurb( of )Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie( for us:
)" Rudolf Steiner is the founder of the Anthroposophie. After the
)Waldorfpaedagogik called by him in the life in Germany and Austria today
)almost 80,000 children are informed. Both, the Anthroposophie and the
)Rudolf Steiner Schools, have a good reputation a very good reputation in
)the public this good reputation exist nevertheless to injustice, maintain
)Guido and Michael Grandt.
)Because Rudolf Steiner was Okkultist, racingist and additionally leading
)Metglied of a sexualmagischen secret medal. And siene obskure world view
)has a lasting effect until today -- also in the Rudolf Steiner Schools.
)After this book the Anthroposophen must admit colour and consider itself
)the politicians whether they support the whale village mechanisms further
)with tax fundses. "
....which last clause finally explains to this Waldorf alumnus why we tenth-graders were forced to labor over Moby Dick. Where would I be without this list? /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.8 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:47:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909090343.UAA07632 lists1.best.com)
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/6/99 5:08 AM )))
))We're used to it. (g)
)
)...which suggests (to me, anyway) that repeated frustrations should reduce
)their import. My experience (on, say, oh, this list) contradicts that
)conclusion. But we scientists are always open to new evidence. Sign me:
)Sisyphus (Who Somehow Managed to Learn Some German in an American Waldorf
)School) /Michael Ronall
I'm still awaiting the judge's decision before I'm willing to admit our
"import" is reduced. Slavery was once popular too.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:55:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909090419.VAA04328 lists1.best.com)
)))) (bhstudio frontiernet.net) - 9/5/99 10:46 AM )))
)....which last clause finally explains to this Waldorf alumnus why we
)tenth-graders were forced to labor over Moby Dick. Where would I be
)without this list? /MRx
Waldorf is more like 'Hansel and Grettle' than 'Mobey Dick'. I wonder why
they didn't tell _that_ story...
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1437.10 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 00:52:44 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Don't think "Love your brother" and concepts of forgiveness could be regarded
as being based on revelation from unquestionable source, but these pertain to
Jesus' doctrine. Scientist might be less willing to love or to forgive
without evidence that he/she Should do so?
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1437 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1438 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
002 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Re: Artikle from last week
003 - AL (al textgenie.com) - Waldorf without Steiner
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Waldorf without Steiner
005 - AL (al textgenie.com) - RE: Waldorf without Steiner
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Waldorf without Steiner
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: genetic safety?
008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: Waldorf without Steiner
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
010 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Waldorf without Steiner
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Schwarzbuch Anthroposophie
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 01:54:14 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I thought it was weird how my son's teacher would tell the little
first-graders fairy tales that included horrific acts - like one, where the
parents hack off their daughter's hands... It seemed to me that such fairy
tales had their relevance to times they arose from, speaking to unconscious
minds of those times; but that they were inappropriate for these more
civilized times.
For example, as a recess supervisor, I noted the change in jump-rope songs
with the changing times, i.e.:
old version, reflecting forced marriage of earlier (60's) era:
Cinderella, dressed in yella, went upstairs to kiss a fella
came back down in a wedding gown, how many children went to town?
one-two-three-etc...
new version, reflecting option of abortion:
Cinderella, dressed in yella, went upstairs to kiss a fella
made a mistake and kissed a snake
how many doctors did it take?
one-two-three-etc...
The first time, I had naturally begun singing the version I grew up with as I
turned the rope, and the kids all looked at me funny! The concept of forced
marriage is simply no longer wholly appropriate to these times - it doesn't
jibe right with the children's unconscious absorption of cultural norms and
values.
It's amazing how much children assimilate unconsciously through things such
as jump rope songs, isn't it? Wonder what that
"hacking-the-girl's-hands-off story did for the kids? Sincerely,
Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.2 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 09:35:52 -0500
)On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
)
)) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
)) by chance?
Dan Dugan wrote:
I know cultural relativism, that claims every kind of knowledge is "just a
story," is popular at some universities, but there is really a big
difference between religious 'belief' and scientific 'belief.'
Religious doctrine is based on revelation from an unquestionable source.
Scientific knowledge is based on evidence, and is revised (or even
overthrown) when new evidence appears.
Christian comments:
Your text is true, this are different kinds of belief. However, this is not
contrary to my statement, because "just another kind of belief" is what you
call scientific 'belief' (vs. religious 'belief'). I think you
misinterpreted the word 'just' as "being (almost) the same in character or
value", instead I used this word rather to describe what you referred later
on to be able to be "revised (or even overthrown) when new evidence
appears", meaning there is no absolute assurance about the infallibility of
the evidence given.
There are many more things playing into this picture. E.g. the individual
perspective of a person, which claims to know something because he/she
'believes' that a certain scientist can (or could) prove a certain theory.
Even if the theory is proven by this scientist, the 'believer' has to rely
on the media, and/or on the word of this scientist, that it is so. (This is
the best case, normally someone decides to believe in something without
really examining the theory at all.)
So even if this person believes in something which is proven by a vast
background of evidence, his individual situation can be the same as of a
believer in another theory, even if the kind of belief is different.
Still he/she has to decide what to teach his or her children. And this
decision is made in 'good belief' in - let's say - 80% of the time? I
couldn't tell.
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.3 ---------------
From: AL (al textgenie.com)
Subject: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 11:34:54 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
In-Reply-To: (199909090345.UAA08832 lists1.best.com)
The day before yesterday, I asked this list whether there was a middle
ground where Waldorf teaching techniques could be applied without the
baggage of anthroposophy, and whether anyone discerned a shift towards this
position in Waldorf schools over the last five years.
Patti Morey was the only response I have received on the list. She wrote:
)It does seem like aspects of the Waldorf curriculum could be retained without
)the anthroposophical basis, though the anthroposiphical basis provides the
)rationale for much of the curriculum and the way it is presented. Still,
)that rationale is so ethereal, surely a "down-to-earth" rationale for various
)aspects of the curriculum could be found in standard literature on child
)education. Sincerely, Patti Morey
This seems a very sensible comment.
Now I have been contacted by someone who claims that this topic is not
allowed on this list, but that there has been much work independent of
Waldorf (eg at San Diego University) on applying the techniques without the
ideology. Is this true? That this topic is not allowed on this list?
If it is, does anyone have any comment on this middle ground approach? My
correspondent claims that it is being obscured by the battle between PLANS
and Waldorf, and that the PLANS site contains inaccuracies. But these
inaccuracies are not specified.
Looking forward to any reply,
Regards,
AL
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:15:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Al wrote]
) Now I have been contacted by someone who claims that this
) topic is not
) allowed on this list, but that there has been much work
) independent of
) Waldorf (eg at San Diego University) on applying the
) techniques without the
) ideology. Is this true? That this topic is not allowed on this list?
The topic has frequently been discussed on this list in the past,
without any admonition by the list moderator.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.5 ---------------
From: AL (al textgenie.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 14:25:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
References: (199909091611.JAA11657 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909091611.JAA11657 lists1.best.com)
)
) The topic has frequently been discussed on this list in the past,
)without any admonition by the list moderator.
)
) Bob Tolz
How does one read past posts on this list?
Anthony L
Looking forward to your reply,
Best regards,
AL
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 14:55:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Anthony L]
)
) How does one read past posts on this list?
)
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/archives/../archives.html is the
index page for the archives. Posts are up through July 1999 at this moment.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: genetic safety?
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:07:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909081953.MAA08781 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909082339.QAA08291 lists1.best.com)
Please drop this thread, it is off-topic for this list.
-Dan Dugan
moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.8 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:30:17 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909091611.JAA11657 lists1.best.com)
(199909091611.JAA11657 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909091825.LAA06828 lists1.best.com)
Hi Anthony,
Welcome to the list - we've been very busy lately and the list has grown
quiet. You can access past posts from PLANS web site at
http://www.waldorfcritics.org .
What spurs your interest in Waldorf education? Are you a prospective or
current Waldorf parent? Tell us a bit about you.
Debra Snell
)
)How does one read past posts on this list?
)
)Anthony L
)
)Looking forward to your reply,
)Best regards,
)AL
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 18:24:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/8/99 4:47 PM )))
cites:
))))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/6/99 5:08 AM )))'s
having written:
)))We're used to it. (g)
and my subsequent:
))...which suggests (to me, anyway) that repeated frustrations should reduce
))their import. My experience (on, say, oh, this list) contradicts that
))conclusion. But we scientists are always open to new evidence. Sign me:
))Sisyphus (Who Somehow Managed to Learn Some German in an American Waldorf
))School) /Michael Ronall
now followed by Debra's:
)I'm still awaiting the judge's decision before I'm willing to admit our
)"import" is reduced. Slavery was once popular too.
********
No, no. Not _your_ import. Rather, _frustration's_ import on, say, _you_, or on any frustrated agent. But let it pass, let it pass. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1438.10 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:48:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909090345.UAA08832 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909091539.IAA22549 lists1.best.com)
AL, you wrote,
)Now I have been contacted by someone who claims that this topic is not
)allowed on this list, but that there has been much work independent of
)Waldorf (eg at San Diego University) on applying the techniques without the
)ideology. Is this true? That this topic is not allowed on this list?
Sounds like David Mollet, a subscriber here who can speak for himself. His
post about that appeared here August 9, but he said on The Atlantic
discussion board that it and another had been blocked. waldorf-critics is
unmoderated. I have no prior control over what is posted and have never
blocked a posting. Maybe Mollet's second message got lost, and he assumed,
incorrectly, that he had been censored.
If anyone has trouble posting, they should contact me directly and I will
solve the problem.
)If it is, does anyone have any comment on this middle ground approach? My
)correspondent claims that it is being obscured by the battle between PLANS
)and Waldorf, and that the PLANS site contains inaccuracies. But these
)inaccuracies are not specified.
I'm sure the controversy is damaging David Mollet's business (publishing
Waldorf curriculum). Whether or not Mollet's curriculum is the answer to
non-Anthroposophical Waldorf I don't know, I haven't seen it.
Unfortunately, the Waldorf movement has been lying about the
Anthroposophical content of the education for 75 years. This makes it
impossible for anyone else to come along and make the same claims of no
Anthroposophy and be believed. Also almost all the resource materials
(excepting Mollet's, for courtesy but without firm knowledge) and all the
teacher training schools are Anthroposophical, so any attempt at
non-Anthroposophical Waldorf seems seriously handicapped. Better to start
over!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1438 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1439 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to
cr
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response
004 - AL (al textgenie.com) - Re: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Waldorf without Steiner
006 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
008 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Where's Waldorf? (Was: Re: RE: Waldorf without Steiner)
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response to
criticism?
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 17:51:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909081905.MAA01079 lists1.best.com)
(199909081905.MAA01079 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909082105.OAA28376 lists1.best.com)
Anthony L, you asked,
)Has there been any increase in separation between Waldorf teaching in
)North America and Steiner's often fantastical scientific theories
)since the mid-nineties, in response to critics and the raising of the
)issue of separation of religion and education? Or is the situation
)the same as it was when Dan Dugan first encountered it and observed
)the seepage of anthroposophical theory into the classroom (or its
)influence in keeping out teaching of conflicting ideas from modern
)science)?
I have recently purchased some newly published Waldorf science teaching
guides, and they are as Anthroposophical as ever.
)Secondly, to what extent could Waldorf teaching practices (those that
)seem to prove out as beneficial in practice, insofar as that is
)demonstrated) be separated from Steiner's anthroposophical creed and
)still survive, and is this in fact the likely outcome of the
)situation in the US?
Certainly there are some good ideas in Waldorf that can be used outside of
the system. I think the likely outcome will be the general recognition that
Waldorf is a religiously-based system and inappropriate for public schools.
The tensions between Steiner dogmatism and independent thinking in private
Waldorf schools will likely continue.
)I have been talking to Waldorf teachers and staff, and outside
)consultants, and my impression so far is that the teachers typically
)still feel they need it as inspiration, even if when pressed they
)have to admit that much of the creed "boggles the mind", as one
)senior teacher -- enthusiastic nonetheless -- put it to me.
)
) It seems that they become so emotionally convinced of the
)effectiveness of Steiner's influence and approach to education that
)they become unable to resolve the conflict between common sense and
)modern scientific proven fact (eg that the heart pumps the blood) and
)Steiner's beliefs, and just brush the conflict aside with the
)all-purpose rubric that Steiner's writings are "difficult" to fathom
)but in the end will make sense with enough study.
Yes, this is the behavior I call cult-like. It's the only "rational" way to
handle an absurd system, to compartmentalize it and avoid challenging it.
)Whatever the truth of that, I am trying to nail down what has
)generally happened in the last five years. Many Waldorf people say
)to me that the powers that be in the movement (whoever they are) and
)the staff of its schools have realized that there is a need to
)explain themselves better to the outside world than they have in the
)past.
)
)Has this also resulted in more of a separation between anthroposophy
)and Waldorf teaching, or is the true situation the same as before? I
)am interested in any evidence either way, or opinion.
What has happened in the last five years has been that dialogue has opened
up a lot within the Waldorf world. An article critical of Waldorf was
published in "Renewal," the Waldorf magazine. It was, of course, thoroughly
rebutted by defenders of the faith, and the editor cut off debate by
summarizing rather than printing the letters received. Critical attitudes
are now appearing on the official Waldorf discussion list (the SJU list)
that would have been suppressed by banning of the posters a year ago. This
opening up is bound to have an effect. There could be a split between
dogmatic Waldorf and "New Waldorf," but the latter remains undefined.
)Secondly, could they do it and still achieve the beneficial results
)they claim and seem to achieve?
The claimed results are not substantiated. I'm sure the benefits of Waldorf
will show up in the graduates, along with the harm, but there just haven't
been studies (beyond the suppressed 1981 German study) to tell us what the
grads are like.
)I cannot see why those innovations
)and practices could not be maintained entirely free of anthroposophy,
)as Waldorf people have always claimed and as Steiner also publicly
)ordained. But I do not know enough about actual classroom practice
)since I have never seen it.
Steiner ordained publicly that there was to be no Anthroposophy in the
lessons, but told his teachers privately to make them as Anthroposophical
as possible. Actual classroom practice varies from teacher to teacher. The
resource materials, with the possible exception of Mollet's, are
Anthroposophical.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 01:40:50 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I freaked out a little yesterday when my son's former Waldorf teacher called
at 7:30 a.m. to wish Chris well for his first day of high school. Another
parent told me the teacher had called her daughter, too, and that she felt it
was sweet. But I was concerned it invoked the dark times just as he made
this important step.
Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response
tocriticism?
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 03:34:49 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi, well, what do anthroposophists think the heart does if not to pump blood?
I've never heard about this one..
Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.4 ---------------
From: AL (al textgenie.com)
Subject: Re: Re: How far have there been Waldorf changes in response
tocriticism?
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 04:06:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1275168075==_ma============"
References: (199909100735.AAA10954 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909100735.AAA10954 lists1.best.com)
--============_-1275168075==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
)Hi, well, what do anthroposophists think the heart does if not to pump bloo=
d?
) I've never heard about this one..
) Patti
My source for that statement is Are Rudolf Steiner's Waldorf Schools=20
`Non-Sectarian'?
Dan Dugan and Judy Daar
=A9 Free Inquiry, Spring 1994 (Vol. 14 No. 2),
at the PLANS site http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Free_Inquiry.html
The paragraph reads: "Any knowledge that conflicts with Steiner's=20
eccentric doctrines is simply omitted. Steiner taught that the heart=20
doesn't pump blood, so although Waldorf students may draw beautiful=20
diagrams of the human circulatory system, they will never learn how=20
it works. He taught that light is pure spirit, and that Newton was=20
wrong: light cannot be divided into colors. Waldorf graduates are=20
unlikely to have a clear notion of the electromagnetic spectrum,=20
despite having taken physics in both grammar and high schools."
I wonder what the source of that statement is, since I haven't come=20
across it yet in my readings of Steiner's books. It seems unlikely=20
that Steiner wrote it, for the reason you imply. Also, I suspect=20
that the statement about color is a misreporting of Goethe's theory=20
of light, which Steiner followed, but I have not checked and I wait=20
to be corrected by Dan Dugan.
Looking forward to your reply,
Best regards,
AL
--============_-1275168075==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(excerpt)Hi, well, what do anthroposophists think the heart does if not
to pump blood?=20
I've never heard about this one..
Patti
(/excerpt)
My source for that statement is (bold)Are Rudolf Steiner's Waldorf
Schools `Non-Sectarian'?=20
Dan Dugan and Judy Daar=20
(/bold)=A9 (italic)Free Inquiry(/italic), Spring 1994 (Vol. 14 No. 2),=20
at the PLANS site
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Free_Inquiry.html
The paragraph reads: (bigger)"Any knowledge that conflicts with
Steiner's eccentric doctrines is simply omitted. Steiner taught that
the heart doesn't pump blood, so although Waldorf students may draw
beautiful diagrams of the human circulatory system, they will never
learn how it works. He taught that light is pure spirit, and that
Newton was wrong: light cannot be divided into colors. Waldorf
graduates are unlikely to have a clear notion of the electromagnetic
spectrum, despite having taken physics in both grammar and high
schools."
I wonder what the source of that statement is, since I haven't come
across it yet in my readings of Steiner's books. It seems unlikely that
Steiner wrote it, for the reason you imply. Also, I suspect that the
statement about color is a misreporting of Goethe's theory of light,
which Steiner followed, but I have not checked and I wait to be
corrected by Dan Dugan.
Looking forward to your reply,
Best regards,
AL
(/bigger)
--============_-1275168075==_ma============--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Waldorf without Steiner
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 06:36:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Dan Dugan]
) This makes it
) impossible for anyone else to come along and make the same
) claims of no
) Anthroposophy and be believed.
Correction. You left out a few words. The following words should
be appended at the end of the sentence: "by Dan Dugan."
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.6 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 06:39:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Patti Morey]
)
) I freaked out a little yesterday when my son's former Waldorf
) teacher called
) at 7:30 a.m. to wish Chris well for his first day of high
) school. Another
) parent told me the teacher had called her daughter, too, and
) that she felt it
) was sweet. But I was concerned it invoked the dark times
) just as he made
) this important step.
Remind me not to send you a holiday greeting card for fear it may be
misconstrued.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 18:01:08 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
thanks Al!
wonder what he thought the heart does, or how he figured the blood coursed
through the body...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.8 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Where's Waldorf? (Was: Re: RE: Waldorf without Steiner)
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 18:08:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) - 9/10/99 6:36 AM )))
notes that:
)[Dan Dugan]
holds that:
)) This makes it
)) impossible for anyone else to come along and make the same
)) claims of no
)) Anthroposophy and be believed.
and Bob Tolz appends his:
) Correction. You left out a few words. The following words should
)be appended at the end of the sentence: "by Dan Dugan."
...to which William Blake presciently suggests that:
"Truth cannot be told so as to be understood and not be believed." /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1439.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 15:20:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909102203.PAA18097 lists1.best.com)
On 10 Sep 99, at 18:01, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) wonder what he thought the heart does, or how he figured the
) blood coursed through the body...
As I understand it, Steiner believed that blood is a "spirit
substance" that only takes material form on leaving the body, and
moves through the body by itself. The heart has a role in regulating
it, as well as a role in thinking and feeling.
But I have not read Steiner, so perhaps someone with more knowledge
of Anthroposophy could better answer your question.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1439 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1440 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
003 - "Brian Maxwell" (bmax uli - Re: Artikle from last week
004 - "Brian Maxwell" (bmax uli - Re: Artikle from last week
005 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Artikle from last week
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Premo flamed? Amazing.
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - the heart is not a pump
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - [Rosie] RE: Thank God something is being done
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: the heart is not a pump
010 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1439
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Steiner's "heart doesn't pump blood" thing
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 23:08:37 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
thank you for a very interesting reply, Steve. It is interesting to consider
bodily functions from perspective other than "science." however strongly I
feel against anthroposophy. thank you very much. Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 23:30:39 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
gosh Bob, as long as you don't call me at 7:30 in the morning to convey your
holiday greeting, that's fine!!!!
a holiday greeting card is one thing, but a telephone call from a former
teacher at 7:30 in the morning on child's first day of high school is
something else.
I do think a card - or even a phone call the afternoon/evening before,
would have been much more appropriate.
it felt intrusive to me when she called that early am, intruding upon our
busy hurried morning, upon our consciousness of new beginning, and it made me
wonder why she had chosen that particular time to call. Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.3 ---------------
From: "Brian Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 21:23:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909070215.TAA05847 lists1.best.com)
I think this thread of creation vs. evolution doesn't really belong on this
list, so out of respect I won't go on and on. I'm still so ticked from
reading Mr. Premo's comment that below that I just had to write and say that
there are LOTS of scientists and even university instructors who have strong
evidence opposing the theory of evolution, and strong evidence in favor of a
recent creation. For him to imply that Mr. Czachary needs to learn more
about biology, was ignorant and uncalled for.
I have sat under the teaching of some of these university professors, and I
have also read many books which prove the arguments against evolution and in
favor of creation overwhelming. These scientists I am referring to are not
similar to Steiner with his method of deleting whatever part of science
disagrees with his own beliefs. They have sought to look at the evidence
honestly and deal with it.
Anyone who would like to continue this discussion privately, my e-mail is
Bmax ulink.net. I can recommend books to read or free articles over the
internet written by my dad (who is a creationist scientist, and holds a
degree in Physics from UCLA).
I
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Monday, September 06, 1999 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
) On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
)
) ) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
) ) by chance?
)
) Uh, no. I'd explain the difference, but I don't have time to teach you
) right now. There are lots of web sites that can help you get a
) better grounding in basic biology, though.
)
) Steve Premo
) Santa Cruz, California
) http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.4 ---------------
From: "Brian Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 21:40:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909070215.TAA05847 lists1.best.com) (199909110421.VAA16611 lists1.best.com)
Oops, I forgot to sign my name on the e-mail I just sent.
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Maxwell (bmax ulink.net)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Friday, September 10, 1999 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
) I think this thread of creation vs. evolution doesn't really belong on
this
) list, so out of respect I won't go on and on. I'm still so ticked from
) reading Mr. Premo's comment that below that I just had to write and say
that
) there are LOTS of scientists and even university instructors who have
strong
) evidence opposing the theory of evolution, and strong evidence in favor of
a
) recent creation. For him to imply that Mr. Czachary needs to learn more
) about biology, was ignorant and uncalled for.
)
) I have sat under the teaching of some of these university professors, and
I
) have also read many books which prove the arguments against evolution and
in
) favor of creation overwhelming. These scientists I am referring to are
not
) similar to Steiner with his method of deleting whatever part of science
) disagrees with his own beliefs. They have sought to look at the evidence
) honestly and deal with it.
)
) Anyone who would like to continue this discussion privately, my e-mail is
) Bmax ulink.net. I can recommend books to read or free articles over the
) internet written by my dad (who is a creationist scientist, and holds a
) degree in Physics from UCLA).
Sincerely,
Christine Maxwell
)
) I
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
) To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
) Sent: Monday, September 06, 1999 7:05 PM
) Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
)
)
) ) On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
) )
) ) ) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
) ) ) by chance?
) )
) ) Uh, no. I'd explain the difference, but I don't have time to teach you
) ) right now. There are lots of web sites that can help you get a
) ) better grounding in basic biology, though.
) )
) ) Steve Premo
) ) Santa Cruz, California
) ) http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.5 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Artikle from last week
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 01:32:20 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Brian, you are a dear.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Premo flamed? Amazing.
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 23:48:34 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909070215.TAA05847 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909110421.VAA16611 lists1.best.com)
Whoa! This may be the first time in the history of the WC list that Steve
Premo has been flamed. Welcome to the club, Steve. Apparently, you've
crossed over the line. Still, I assume your good will.
Deby
)I think this thread of creation vs. evolution doesn't really belong on this
)list, so out of respect I won't go on and on. I'm still so ticked from
)reading Mr. Premo's comment that below that I just had to write and say that
)there are LOTS of scientists and even university instructors who have strong
)evidence opposing the theory of evolution, and strong evidence in favor of a
)recent creation. For him to imply that Mr. Czachary needs to learn more
)about biology, was ignorant and uncalled for.
)
)I have sat under the teaching of some of these university professors, and I
)have also read many books which prove the arguments against evolution and in
)favor of creation overwhelming. These scientists I am referring to are not
)similar to Steiner with his method of deleting whatever part of science
)disagrees with his own beliefs. They have sought to look at the evidence
)honestly and deal with it.
)
)Anyone who would like to continue this discussion privately, my e-mail is
)Bmax ulink.net. I can recommend books to read or free articles over the
)internet written by my dad (who is a creationist scientist, and holds a
)degree in Physics from UCLA).
)
)I
)----- Original Message -----
)From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
)To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
)Sent: Monday, September 06, 1999 7:05 PM
)Subject: Re: Artikle from last week
)
)
)) On 6 Sep 99,, Christian Czachary wrote:
))
)) ) But isn't the evolution theory just another kind of belief in creation
)) ) by chance?
))
)) Uh, no. I'd explain the difference, but I don't have time to teach you
)) right now. There are lots of web sites that can help you get a
)) better grounding in basic biology, though.
))
)) Steve Premo
)) Santa Cruz, California
)) http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: the heart is not a pump
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 01:37:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909100735.AAA10954 lists1.best.com)
(199909100735.AAA10954 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909100807.BAA23281 lists1.best.com)
))Hi, well, what do anthroposophists think the heart does if not to pump blood?
))I've never heard about this one..
)) Patti
"Naturally, people began to think that the heart is really a pump that
mechanically pumps the blood through the body, because they no longer knew
that our inner fluids have their own life and therefore move on their own.
They never dreamed that the heart is only a sense organ that checks on the
circulation of the fluids in its own way."
[Steiner, Rudolf. The Origins of Natural Science. (1922) Trans. Maria St.
Goar, Ed. Norman Macbeth. Spring Valley: Anthroposophic Press, 1985 p.
112.]
"Blood is really a "very special fluid." For it is the fluid which would
whirl away as spirit if we were able to remove it from the human body so
that it still remained blood and was not destroyed by other physical
agencies--an impossibility while it is bound to earthly conditions."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Study of Man: General Education Course: Fourteen Lectures
given by Rudolf Steiner in Stuttgart 21st August-5th September 1919.
(1919) Trans. Daphne Harwood and Helen Fox. London: Rudolf Steiner Press,
1960 p. 34. This is one of the basic books in teacher training, and the
above quote was given in a handout to public school teachers in training at
Rudolf Steiner College.]
"The heart is not a pump, however, but only indicates what goes on in the
body: the heart beats faster when the blood circulates faster."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Health and Illness: Volume 2 : Nine Lectures to the
Workmen at the Goetheanum, Dornach, Switzerland, 1922-23. Trans. Maria St.
Goar, Ed. Gilbert Church and Alice Wulsin. Spring Valley: Anthroposophic
Press, 1983 pp. 75-76.]
Lest someone say that these statements are old stuff that nobody pays
attention to any more:
"What is the greater significance of the heart? Pfeiffer sees it and
explains it as an etheric organ, an inner sun. Its motion reflects the
expansion and contraction of the cosmos itself. It doesn't "pump" blood as
we normally think, but etherizes it."
[Mercury Press Catalog 1995, p. 20]
And then there's the "current scientific research that proves Steiner was
right":
"The impact of spending billions of dollars on cardiovascular research
using an erroneous premise is enormous. In relation to this, the efforts to
construct a satisfactory artificial heart have yet to bear fruit. Within
the confines of contemporaray biological and medical thinking, the
propulsive force of the blood remains a mystery. If the heart really does
not furnish the blood with the total motive force, where is the source of
the auxiliary force and what is its nature? The answer to those questions
will foster a new level of understanding of the phenomena of life in the
biological sciences and enable physicians to rediscover the human being
which, all too often, many feel they have lost."
[Marinelli, Ralph, Branko F¸rst, Hoyte van der Zee, Andrew McGinn, William
Marinelli. "The Heart is not a Pump: A Refutation of the Pressure
Propulsion Premise of Heart Function." Center for Frontier Sciences:
Frontier Perspectives Vol. 5 No. 1 (Fall/Winter, 1995), p. 1.]
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [Rosie] RE: Thank God something is being done
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 01:14:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[The Waldorf schools will tell you about their famous and successful
graduates. We hear about the disasters. See the following anonymous posting
from "Rosie" -Dan Dugan]
[...] Can only have access to this on weekends so maybe a bit of a delay on
replies. Would rather use your notice board at present as there is a lot
happening this end and I would prefer not to have to worry about any
Anthros (as we call them here) getting into direct debate. Anything they
have to say to me can be said in open. Please, also any other victims,
either parents, ex teachers or especially children, speak out.
I have had so much telephone air time in the last week from survivors of
this absurd and nasty education. One letter from a man whose daughter was
sexually abused by a teacher named Stan Price (now dead) in 1982 when she
was seven. He is so angry and feels so helpless as his daughter is self
mutilating, in and out of hospital and generally broken. Stan was known by
me to be sexually abusing little girls for sure in 1975. We suspected he
was doing the same to little boys as well. This had been going on since he
joined in the late 1960's. Any queries were dismissed, put down, isolated
with the implication that the victim had somehow deserved it.
Five days before this letter a phone call from Canada. She was two years
older than me and had had full sexual relations with a teacher (he is still
alive and I know his name) at 15, attempted rape by another (he is still
alive and I know him also). She thought she was the only one, spent years
curled up on her fathers floor unable to do anything. Years later she is
finally getting her life together but still cannot stand up and speak out.
I personally had a main lesson teacher for eight years. I used to try and
count the days I DID NOT get beaten. One term there were no days. I was
humiliated verbally, described as a mess, slow and stupid. I was
dyslexic. He died a few years ago much respected, I wanted to incinerate
his grave.
I learnt to read at 7 because I begged the local state school children on
the bus to teach me. I was sneered at for being too smart, told I was a
classic 'melancholic' who needed to see life through rose tinted glasses.
I had 12 years of German and French and do not speak either. My math's has
been saved my some private tuition as an adult and my modern history ends
in 1600. My understanding of basic biology is from medical instruction
pamphlets. I cannot draw, either artistically or technically. My writing
is illegible and when I type the grammar and sentence structure is
'creative'.
I am sick to death of hearing about what personalities we Steiner children
are, how creative and full of self confidence. There are borstals where
the same claim could be made. The 'personalities' have a gallows humour,
the creativity is that of the criminal, that of a surveyor, and the self
confidence is 'bravado'. There are so may of those, whom I went to school
with who are totally broken people. Wandering the streets or country side
babbling at the sky, one is in a permanent mental institution, another two
committed suicide. Another pregnant at 16 to escape another teacher who
had been having sex with her since she was 14 is now working in the local
foodmarket, barely surviving after her "Caring and expensive education.
Giving her such a rounded education."
Another did get a professorship, after many minor breakdowns. He now lives
in self exile in another country a hopeless alcoholic virtually living on
the street. Another lives in a tent in another country, unable to deal
with 'ordinary' people.
I want to scream their names and the potential I know was there. I want to
tell everyone what great people they were. But I feel restrained, as how
can I out a victim who is trying to hard to forget?
Whether it is the Steiner philosophy, or the people it attracts, the wrong
horoscopes, I don't know. But this must be aired to get sorted and made
healthy. My experience is that this never gets aired, but hidden and the
abuser just blames the victim.
I have been plugging away speaking to anyone who shows an interest, and
have finally got the ear of the BBC, not an infallible media I know. I
intend to give them all the help I can to research and debate what has been
going on for decades.
If a system believes that we inherit our Karma and that all bad things are
what we chose in a previous life, fair enough. But there is not place for
this in education of children. The belief might be there,as we know racism
is often there, but any sign that it is being acted out should be nipped in
the bud. There is no way this should be an alibi for raping a small child,
beating anyone for anything and actively preventing them from learning.
Steiner school have a reputation, created by themselves for nurturing and
caring. A third parent is another description I have heard. This is so
totally the opposite from my experience. So many children came from
'dysfunctional' homes. Parents either knew they needed help and hoped the
school was the answer or needed an alibi for their own behavior and the
school gave them that.
I am passionate in this area, and would like to hear from others but please
could we keep this anonymous and on the notice board. Maybe to give me a
name I will call myself 'Rosie'
Thanks again for giving me this opportunity to air my views
Rosie
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: the heart is not a pump
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 05:29:53 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"The heart is not a pump, however, but only indicates what goes on in the
body: the heart beats faster when the blood circulates faster."
this is kind of interesting, to think of blood circulating faster as a
condition of the spirit, the spirit's being "quickened." Yet, steiner's
thought seems to reflect facist-like Supremacy of Human Being-type thinking,
while even a little mouse has a heart - and blood.
Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1440.10 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1439
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 08:34:16 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Patti--
)From what I've heard and read, no matter how "dark" things were for your
child, the teacher takes his/her job seriously and truly cares for each
child. So, by him/her calling I would say it was a very positive
thing...he/she truly cares for your child and genuinely wanted to wish him
well.
--Wendi
) I freaked out a little yesterday when my son's former Waldorf teacher
called
) at 7:30 a.m. to wish Chris well for his first day of high school. Another
) parent told me the teacher had called her daughter, too, and that she felt
) it
) was sweet. But I was concerned it invoked the dark times just as he made
) this important step.
)
) Patti Morey
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1440 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1441 --------------
001 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1439
002 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Rosie's Post
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Rosie's Post
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
005 - David McKay (mckay oro.ne - Re: Rosie's Post
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Rosie's Post
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
008 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Rosie's Post
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.1 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1439
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 08:40:13 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Aren't there studies being conducted now that show the heart also acts as a
second "brain" in some ways? That memories are stored in the muscle, as well
as in other parts of the body?
Before you say it's just a bunch of quacks doing the study or something like
that remember that at one time the folks who were calling the earth round
were considered quacks as well. ;-)
--Wendi
) As I understand it, Steiner believed that blood is a "spirit
) substance" that only takes material form on leaving the body, and
) moves through the body by itself. The heart has a role in regulating
) it, as well as a role in thinking and feeling.
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.2 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Rosie's Post
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 11:42:20 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I read Rosie's post and kept thinking...what makes this strictly a Waldorf
problem? I went to public schools and even a Catholic school and there was
much abuse...physical, emotional, sexual. All the problems that have been
stated cannot be simply assigned as a product of the WE. I know many people
who have developed into individuals with problems...large and small. I know
some who committed suicide, some who fled the country, some who live as
hermits, some who are addicted to some sort of illegal substance, some who
just barely get by in life, and others who shine like beacons to say: "Hey! I
went through all that bullshit in life too and I am here to say I make my own
happiness."
I don't doubt that these things happened in a Waldorf school, I do doubt,
however, that it was because of Steiner's beliefs, and the WE in general,
that these things happened.
--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Rosie's Post
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 14:53:45 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree - anyone can have bad school experience anywhere, or turn out on
fringes of society. Yet, because Waldorf education does shun many cultural
things valued by majority - computers, television, etc., they already exist
on the fringes of modern society.
)From that fringes stance, they claim their graduates go on to become
"successful" in modern society. Automatically, a conflict is suggested.
Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 15:11:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Patti wrote]
) a holiday greeting card is one thing, but a telephone call
) from a former
) teacher at 7:30 in the morning on child's first day of high school is
) something else.
)
) I do think a card - or even a phone call the
) afternoon/evening before,
) would have been much more appropriate.
[Bob Tolz]
I agree that a card or a call the preceding afternoon would have
been nicer.
[Patti]
) beginning, and it made me
) wonder why she had chosen that particular time to call.
[Bob Tolz]
Maybe the former teacher is like me. When I think about someone to
call them, it's usually when I'm not near a phone. And when I'm near a
phone, I don't remember. So, I'm trying to establish the habit of making
myself get to a phone immediately when I think of the person. It could be
that your child's former teacher thought of you and your family at 7:30 that
morning and wanted to call then and there, lest the call never be made.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.5 ---------------
From: David McKay (mckay oro.net)
Subject: Re: Rosie's Post
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 17:06:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909111543.IAA02171 lists1.best.com)
The difference is how this kind of sick behaviour is condoned in W.E. by
the common practice of protecting the teacher and by saying it was meant to
be, etc. What you and Patti have left out is mentioned in Rosies post
several times: "This had been going on since he joined in the late 1960's.
Any queries were dismissed, put down, isolated with the implication that
the victim had somehow deserved it.", "He died a few years ago much
respected,", "My experience is that this never gets aired, but hidden and
the abuser just blames the victim.", "If a system believes that we inherit
our Karma and that all bad things are what we chose in a previous life,
fair enough. But there is not place for this in education of children.",
"There is no way this should be an alibi for raping a small child, beating
anyone for anything and actively preventing them from learning.".
This very same thing happened at two different WE schools, one in Oregon
and one in this area of No. Ca. The teacher was protected for years and
in fact the College of Teachers in Oregon helped this teacher leave the
area and got him the job in this areas WE school were years later the law
caught up to him!
I have not yet seen a public school system offer this kind of
protection/cover-up. It is taken care of in a very fast.
David McKay
)I read Rosie's post and kept thinking...what makes this strictly a Waldorf
)problem? I went to public schools and even a Catholic school and there was
)much abuse...physical, emotional, sexual. All the problems that have been
)stated cannot be simply assigned as a product of the WE. I know many people
)who have developed into individuals with problems...large and small. I know
)some who committed suicide, some who fled the country, some who live as
)hermits, some who are addicted to some sort of illegal substance, some who
)just barely get by in life, and others who shine like beacons to say: "Hey! I
)went through all that bullshit in life too and I am here to say I make my own
)happiness."
)
)I don't doubt that these things happened in a Waldorf school, I do doubt,
)however, that it was because of Steiner's beliefs, and the WE in general,
)that these things happened.
)
)--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Rosie's Post
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 18:27:35 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909111543.IAA02171 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909120002.RAA03731 lists1.best.com)
)This very same thing happened at two different WE schools, one in Oregon
)and one in this area of No. Ca. The teacher was protected for years.
)In fact the College of Teachers in Oregon helped this teacher leave the
)area and got him the job in this area's WE school, where years later the law
)caught up to him!
In my son's Waldorf Kindergarten class, a classmate's big sister had this
very teacher. Shortly after his arrest, her mother was talking to several
other Mothers (including myself) about this incident . She was stunned ("He
was so nice!"), but admitted that her daughter had complained about his
inappropriate [sexual] behaviors towards the girls in her class. The Mother
said that she brought her daughter's concerns up to another member of the
faculty, who basically said, "Girls of this age are attracted to their
teachers. This fantasy is normal." This Mother said she never gave her
daughter's concerns another thought because she totally respected the
faculty member she spoke with. "How *do* you know when to take kids
seriously?", she quipped.
)I have not yet seen a public school system offer this kind of
)protection/cover-up. It is taken care of very fast.
Yep. In public school, it would be _instant_ karma for that teacher.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 01:44:08 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Bob,
You have a nice way to look at it :-)
I would have felt happier about the teacher's call if she had been nicer to
him that last year he was in the class....
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1441.8 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Rosie's Post
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 02:34:30 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear David McKay,
hi, could you please tell me the name of the Oregon teacher who was
involved? thank you so much, Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1441 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1442 --------------
001 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
002 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
004 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
005 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: RE: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
007 - Kanefer aol.com - thank you for your support
008 - David McKay (mckay oro.ne - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Atlantic Monthly Article on Waldorf
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.1 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 11:34:11 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sometimes coming from the "fringe" (which isn't always lunatic) allows one to
have a better view of what one is looking at...rather than being lost in the
center of things. Coming from the "outside" may allow one certain advantages
to see a better path to success. Maybe what you see as a confict is actually
an advantage at times?
--Wendi
) I agree - anyone can have bad school experience anywhere, or turn out on
) fringes of society. Yet, because Waldorf education does shun many
cultural
) things valued by majority - computers, television, etc., they already
exist
) on the fringes of modern society.
)
) From that fringes stance, they claim their graduates go on to become
) "successful" in modern society. Automatically, a conflict is suggested.
) Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.2 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 11:49:55 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 09/12/1999 9:15:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com writes:
)
) I have not yet seen a public school system offer this kind of
) protection/cover-up. It is taken care of in a very fast.
Well, you must not have gone to a public school in a very small town. The
school I went to was filled with teachers who abused students in many ways.
And the teachers were NOT dismissed (actually one was because he was with
"boys" and that just COULDN'T be accepted since a man with a boy was "wrong"
but a man with a girl was just the girl seducing the teacher). In fact, when
children complained about the teachers the parents many times would say
"yeah...he's just like that." "Everyone knows he's like that. He's a pig." If
you happened to be the parents of the girl, you would beat her for being a
tramp and sleeping with the teacher. And the conduct would either end or
continue in secret because the girl felt that she was in love with the
teacher.
When (years after I moved away from the area) a younger cousin of mine
mentioned sexual misconduct by a teacher who would fondle her and her
friends...I couldn't believe it was still going on. She said "yeah, everyone
hates him. He's a pig." I talked with her mother and she said, "yeah. he's a
pig. He's always been like that."
In small towns things do go on...and people do get away with things. And this
was a public school. The people of the community weren't calling it "karma"
but that's in essence what they were thinking...the girls were asking for it.
It's NOT a Waldorf thing...
--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 12:54:42 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It is good to go outside the norm to gain fresh view of it, for sure. Jesus
went out to the wilderness as a young man, and came out a great teacher. But
to raise children outside society norm, and then claim they are successful
within it offers something to wonder about.
it is interesting that the Waldorf educators do not shun automobiles...
wonder how this is justified "anthroposophically"
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.4 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 15:59:00 -0500
Patti wrote:
it is interesting that the Waldorf educators do not shun automobiles...
wonder how this is justified "anthroposophically"
Christian assumes that
"... The spirit is strong, but the flesh is weak!"
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.5 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: Atlantic article discussion online
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 18:54:15 -0500
a holiday greeting card is one thing, but a telephone call from a former
teacher at 7:30 in the morning on child's first day of high school is
something else.
I do think a card - or even a phone call the afternoon/evening before,
would have been much more appropriate.
it felt intrusive to me when she called that early am, intruding upon our
busy hurried morning, upon our consciousness of new beginning, and it made
me
wonder why she had chosen that particular time to call. Sincerely,
Patti
I would have felt the same way as you, Patti. I believe, a teacher (whether
anthroposophist or not) must keep a healthy distance to his/her pupils. As
the story went, I can't get the feeling away that this very teacher planned
to make you feel bad rather than to sincerly cares for your child.
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 19:55:41 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
ha ha! :-)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: thank you for your support
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 20:16:28 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Christian,
You know, sometimes we sense things, but they are so delicate, we aren't
quite sure, and maybe they can be taken two ways. and then, when others
disagree with our delicate initial impression, we decide we might have
over-reacted or are seeing things that just aren't there. To have even just
one other person reaffirm what we so delicately first sensed is so very
reassuring. Thank you so much for letting me know that you felt the same
thing.
It had hit me so hard, but with the other responses, I was toward convincing
myself that it was just wrong interpretation even while licking my wounds.
Thank you so much.
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.8 ---------------
From: David McKay (mckay oro.net)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:43:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909121551.IAA23184 lists1.best.com)
)In a message dated 09/12/1999 9:15:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
)waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com writes:
)
))
)) I have not yet seen a public school system offer this kind of
)) protection/cover-up. It is taken care of in a very fast.
)
)
)Well, you must not have gone to a public school in a very small town.
By the time I had graduated from the 12th grade I had been to 16 schools in
four states and 13 different cities/towns. At *all* of them if anything
like that came up it was taken care of promptly. I currently live in a
small town of 2,500 that has seven schools where my children have and are
currently going to. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this kind of
situation would not be allowed to go on in this community.
)The school I went to was filled with teachers who abused students in many
)ways.
)And the teachers were NOT dismissed (actually one was because he was with
)"boys" and that just COULDN'T be accepted since a man with a boy was "wrong"
)but a man with a girl was just the girl seducing the teacher). In fact, when
)children complained about the teachers the parents many times would say
)"yeah...he's just like that." "Everyone knows he's like that. He's a pig." If
Shame on this small towns parents for *allowing* this kind of reprehensible
behaviour to go on. If everyone knew then why were they condoning it by
not taking aggresive action in such a situation?
)you happened to be the parents of the girl, you would beat her for being a
)tramp and sleeping with the teacher. And the conduct would either end or
)continue in secret because the girl felt that she was in love with the
)teacher.
)
)When (years after I moved away from the area) a younger cousin of mine
)mentioned sexual misconduct by a teacher who would fondle her and her
)friends...I couldn't believe it was still going on. She said "yeah, everyone
)hates him. He's a pig." I talked with her mother and she said, "yeah. he's a
)pig. He's always been like that."
Why do people in this town just accept such behaviour? Why aren't they
taking responsibility for protecting their own children?
)
)In small towns things do go on...and people do get away with things. And this
)was a public school. The people of the community weren't calling it "karma"
)but that's in essence what they were thinking...the girls were asking for it.
)It's NOT a Waldorf thing...
No, it's blatant ignorant irresponsibility!!!
David McKay
)
)--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1442.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Atlantic Monthly Article on Waldorf
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 03:26:35 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi, don't know if you've already discussed this article, I just found the
title while looking at the Atlantic Monthly website: "Do Waldorf Schools
Offer a Model For Education WorldWide?" It is in the September issue. Here
is the website address, and when you click on the Waldorf article, you'll
find you can also join a discussion group about it:
http://www.theatlantic.com/index-js.htm
Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1442 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1443 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: web counter 29,947
002 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1442
004 - paul c (ptc712 yahoo.com) - Waldorf and television
005 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Waldorf and television
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
008 - "Brian & Christine Maxwel - Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Typo in Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: web counter 29,947
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 00:56:05 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On September 12, 1999, the PLANS web site had registered 29,947 visitors (not
hits, repeats on the same day are not counted) since August 12, 1996.
We had 1093 visitors in the last month, averaging 36 per day, up 20% from
the previous month.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.2 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 01:01:11 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909121655.JAA15436 lists1.best.com)
) it is interesting that the Waldorf educators do not shun automobiles...
)wonder how this is justified "anthroposophically"
My understanding is that Ahriman is not a threat when you're fully aware of
his presence. If an Anthroposophist is thinking, "Ahriman, you're working
for me" when he or she starts the car, there's no problem.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.3 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1442
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 13:15:43 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 09/13/1999 12:28:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com writes:
((
Why do people in this town just accept such behaviour? Why aren't they
taking responsibility for protecting their own children?
No, it's blatant ignorant irresponsibility!!!
David McKay
))
David--
I completely agree that the town had something wrong with it (the parents who
allowed things to continue--in addition to the teachers who were doing these
things) and that things should not have been allowed. It is obvious that it
was ignorant of the town to overlook such things and to not take
responsibility and correct the horrible acts that were happening. But it did
happen and that's why I mentioned it on this list...I don't feel that other
things that have been mentioned on the list can be attributed as a product of
Waldorf schools simply because they happened in a Waldorf school.
--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.4 ---------------
From: paul c (ptc712 yahoo.com)
Subject: Waldorf and television
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 11:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In the eight years that I have been a Waldorf parent,
involved with three or four different schools, I have
heard, from a few different teachers (all kindergarten
or primary grade age teachers) a general message
against television and, to a lesser extent, computers,
for kindergarten and primary grade children.
I've never heard any Waldorf teacher or administrator
say you should eliminate TVs or computers from the
home. Lots of Waldorf schools have Web sites; many
Waldorf parents communicate via e-mail using
computers. Many school-related materials are produced
on Pcs and Macs.
The suggested ban or limit against TVs and computers
for young children is not some fantatical quirk of the
Waldorf curriculum--many parents who have never heard
of Waldorf ban or limit TV viewing in their homes.
TV can be an effective source of entertainment and
education for kids (and parents) but let's face--one
of the primary purposes of TV and videos is marketing,
through kids to parents. (I'm setting aside for now
the physiological changes that many parents notice in
their kids when and after their kids watch TV, even
for short periods of time.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.5 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 17:47:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/10/99 6:48 PM ))),
having read:
[snip]))I'm still so ticked from
))reading Mr. Premo's comment that below that I just had to write and say that
))there are LOTS of scientists and even university instructors who have strong
))evidence opposing the theory of evolution, and strong evidence in favor of a
))recent creation. For him to imply that Mr. Czachary needs to learn more
))about biology, was ignorant and uncalled for. [snap](
wrote:
)Whoa! This may be the first time in the history of the WC list that Steve
)Premo has been flamed. Welcome to the club, Steve. Apparently, you've
)crossed over the line. Still, I assume your good will.
...perhaps having overlooked among the dim mists of prehistory that once a upon a time:
)
)))) "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com) - 6/4/99 6:32 PM )))
)
)writes:
)
)On 4 Jun 99, at 15:20, Catherine Alexander wrote:
)
)) Ah, isn't it so refreshing to meet a spiritually enlightened male
)) chauvanist-sexist named Steve.
)) And I supposed you came into the world in a most unusual way.
)) Too bad the aliens dropped you on your head.
)) Seems like you have a bit of brain damage there.
and Steve's response:
))I don't appreciate your dropping into our list to flame me. If you
))think I'm wrong, why not show me how I'm wrong instead of insulting
))me?
))
))What did I ever do to you?
))
))
))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
...and my then:
*********
)I'd say you were lucky, Steve. A friend of mine has a scar on his cheek to remind him that his dog can't process irony. Hoping to keep hearing )from you, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Waldorf and television
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 17:35:45 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi, I have heard only a little bit about why Waldorf educators discourage
television viewing, but what physiological changes have parents themselves
noted in their children after watching television? Please tell about this.
Probably no one thinks that Waldorf's stance on this issue is "fanatical,"
especially because of the questionable content of television programs. But
in regard to Waldorf it seems like one of those issues at the fulcrum between
child's home and school that sort of goes beyond teacher and school
responsibility in educating child through seeking controls on home.
My son's teacher once became very angry at me for taking my son and several
other children from the class to see a movie ("The Little Mermaid."). She
called a meeting of all us parents whose kids had gone to the movie, was
livid, and said that I should have told her the children to see a movie.
This astonished me - I mean, I just never would have thought about telling a
teacher that I'd taken my son and his classmates to see a movie. But knowing
little about Waldorf, I assumed she was correct in her attitude. But now,
looking back on such things, and on the tremendous relief my son and I both
experienced as he transferred to public school, it seems that it was somewhat
a parental role usurping thing.
Often, she would askif my son had been watching any television; if I
replied, "well, we did watch such-and-such together," she would say that she
could tell by his behavior in class, and then she would adjust her attitude
toward him accordingly. It was a great relief when my son went to public
school, for him to be able to just be a regular kid, and teacher not getting
so heavily involved and entwined with our home life.
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 18:55:19 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Yes, seem to recall that the concern about t.v. related to growing mind of
child, that mind would form around images or something like that - but adult
mind is solid . I don't really know too much about it. Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.8 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 17:46:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909132153.OAA13575 lists1.best.com)
Dear Mr. Premo,
My intent was never to "flame" you, only your comment. I've enjoyed reading
many of your posts, and I certaintly didn't attack you personally the way
Catherine Alexander did.
Sincerely,
Christine Maxwell
----- Original Message -----
From: MICHAEL RONALL (mronall rabecker.com)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 2:47 PM
Subject: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
) ))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/10/99 6:48 PM ))),
)
) having read:
)
) [snip]))I'm still so ticked from
) ))reading Mr. Premo's comment that below that I just had to write and say
that
) ))there are LOTS of scientists and even university instructors who have
strong
) ))evidence opposing the theory of evolution, and strong evidence in favor
of a
) ))recent creation. For him to imply that Mr. Czachary needs to learn more
) ))about biology, was ignorant and uncalled for. [snap](
)
) wrote:
)
) )Whoa! This may be the first time in the history of the WC list that Steve
) )Premo has been flamed. Welcome to the club, Steve. Apparently, you've
) )crossed over the line. Still, I assume your good will.
)
) ...perhaps having overlooked among the dim mists of prehistory that once a
upon a time:
)
) )
) )))) "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com) - 6/4/99 6:32 PM )))
) )
) )writes:
) )
) )On 4 Jun 99, at 15:20, Catherine Alexander wrote:
) )
) )) Ah, isn't it so refreshing to meet a spiritually enlightened male
) )) chauvanist-sexist named Steve.
) )) And I supposed you came into the world in a most unusual way.
) )) Too bad the aliens dropped you on your head.
) )) Seems like you have a bit of brain damage there.
)
) and Steve's response:
)
) ))I don't appreciate your dropping into our list to flame me. If you
) ))think I'm wrong, why not show me how I'm wrong instead of insulting
) ))me?
) ))
) ))What did I ever do to you?
) ))
) ))
) ))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
)
) ...and my then:
)
) *********
) )I'd say you were lucky, Steve. A friend of mine has a scar on his cheek
to remind him that his dog can't process irony. Hoping to keep hearing )from
you, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 23:28:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) - 9/13/99 4:01 AM )))
takes up:
) it is interesting that the Waldorf educators do not shun automobiles...
)wonder how this is justified "anthroposophically"
by offering that:
)My [ie, Dan's] understanding is that Ahriman is not a threat when you're fully aware of
)his presence. If an Anthroposophist is thinking, "Ahriman, you're working
)for me" when he or she starts the car, there's no problem.
'Fraid it's worse than that, Dan! Steiner suggested that farmers say (you might charitably hope silently) "Down, Ahriman, Down!" when they plowed. And since we're so far into it, being "fully" aware of Ahriman's presence is not the same as labeling it, nor probably not a good idea to attempt while you're behind the wheel of a car. Always wishing you safe passage, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1443.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Typo in Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 00:03:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com) - 9/13/99 11:28 PM )))
meant to say either:
)And since we're so far into it, being "fully" aware of Ahriman's presence is not the same as labeling it, nor probably a good idea to attempt while you're behind the wheel of a car.(
or
)...not the same as labeling it, and probably not a good idea to attempt...(
instead of the typo I printed. Whoops. Gremlins. /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1443 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1444 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
002 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
005 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
007 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
008 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 22:29:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909140340.UAA22068 lists1.best.com)
[Dan Dugan]
))My [ie, Dan's] understanding is that Ahriman is not a threat when you're
))fully aware of
))his presence. If an Anthroposophist is thinking, "Ahriman, you're working
))for me" when he or she starts the car, there's no problem.
)'Fraid it's worse than that, Dan. Steiner suggested that farmers say (you
)might charitably hope silently) "Down, Ahriman, Down!" when they plowed.
)And since we're so far into it, being "fully" aware of Ahriman's presence
)is not the same as labeling it, nor probably not a good idea to attempt
)while you're behind the wheel of a car. Always wishing you safe passage,
)/MRx
Michael,
Keep the stories alive and the brandy coming. Wishing I were as naive as
you again,
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.2 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 01:41:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/13/99 5:29 PM )))
writes:
)[Dan Dugan]
)))My [ie, Dan's] understanding is that Ahriman is not a threat when you're
)))fully aware of
)))his presence. If an Anthroposophist is thinking, "Ahriman, you're working
)))for me" when he or she starts the car, there's no problem.
)
)
))'Fraid it's worse than that, Dan. Steiner suggested that farmers say (you
))might charitably hope silently) "Down, Ahriman, Down!" when they plowed.
))And since we're so far into it, being "fully" aware of Ahriman's presence
))is not the same as labeling it, nor probably not a good idea to attempt
))while you're behind the wheel of a car. Always wishing you safe passage,
))/MRx
)
)Michael,
)Keep the stories alive and the brandy coming. Wishing I were as naive as
)you again,
)Deby
...and I wish for you everything you wish for yourself. Best, /M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:37:13 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Catherine Alexander's comments are a delight! :-)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:40:26 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
wow, who's "Ahriman" ?
Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.5 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:45:10 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mr.x , wow,
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:48:17 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
this is so funny!!! Steiner reminds me so much of Joseph Smith.
sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.7 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: How quickly they forget (Was Re: Premo flamed? Amazing.)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 08:38:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909140117.SAA04314 lists1.best.com)
On 13 Sep 99, at 17:46, Brian & Christine Maxwell wrote:
) Dear Mr. Premo,
)
) My intent was never to "flame" you, only your comment. I've enjoyed
) reading many of your posts, and I certaintly didn't attack you
) personally the way Catherine Alexander did.
No problem. I didn't take it personally, and I agree that my tone
was uncalled for.
Although I strongly disagree with you about the scientific viability
of creation theory, that was not my point. My point was that
evolution is not just another creation theory, because as I
understand it, creation theory necessarily implies the existence of a
creator, while evolution does not require a creator (although it is
not inconsistent with the idea of a creator).
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.n1444.8 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 08:45:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909140642.XAA25784 lists1.best.com)
On 14 Sep 99, at 2:40, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) wow, who's "Ahriman" ?
As I understand it, Ahriman and Lucifer are the main deities - er -
spiritual beings whose role is to try to keep us from realizing our
spiritual nature. Ahriman works by dazzling us with technological
works; Lucifer works by dazzling us with experiences which we
perceive as spiritual enlightenment, but which serve to distract us
from our true spiritual nature.
That's my understanding anyway. As I said, I've never read Steiner,
and perhaps an Anthroposophist on the list can give a better answer,
or correct me where I may be mistaken.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"God grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked, the
good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to be able
to tell the difference." - Dallas Dobro
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 12:43:04 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Gosh, I was at a Waldorf PR meeting once, and all these gals there were
saying how ridiculous it was that one parent had become offended when the
faculty and staff did a "dance to Lucifer." The parent, like me, was
Christian. I said, "Well, I would be upset by such a dance, too." And, they
all stared at me, then said Lucifer is actually not Satan but the
"light-bearer," see, and basically that the parent was unenlightened...
Sincerely, Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1444.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 12:34:49 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909140642.XAA25784 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909141546.IAA09123 lists1.best.com)
)On 14 Sep 99, at 2:40, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
)
)) wow, who's "Ahriman" ?
)
)As I understand it, Ahriman and Lucifer are the main deities - er -
)spiritual beings whose role is to try to keep us from realizing our
)spiritual nature. Ahriman works by dazzling us with technological
)works; Lucifer works by dazzling us with experiences which we
)perceive as spiritual enlightenment, but which serve to distract us
)from our true spiritual nature.
)
)That's my understanding anyway. As I said, I've never read Steiner,
)and perhaps an Anthroposophist on the list can give a better answer,
)or correct me where I may be mistaken.
The "Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide" says:
"Most of that which contributes to our work as teachers, preparation
work, artistic work, even meditative work, is under the guardianship
of Lucifer. We can become great teachers under his supervision,
for he is responsible for much that has blossomed in the unfolding of
civilization and culture in the past."
Schwartz, Eugene. The Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide. Fair Oaks, CA:
Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1992, p. 54.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1444 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1445 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Admin: web counter 29,947
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
004 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - web counter 30,000
005 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
006 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
007 - "Brian & Christine Maxwel - Waldorf in public schools?
008 - dingman mindspring.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Ahriman et alia (Was Re: Re: Re: Digest
waldorf-critics.v0
010 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Admin: web counter 29,947
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 09:54:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909131634.JAA06390 lists1.best.com)
)On September 12, 1999, the PLANS web site had registered 29,947 visitors (not
)hits, repeats on the same day are not counted) since August 12, 1996.
)
)We had 1093 visitors in the last month, averaging 36 per day, up 20% from
)the previous month.
The counter just ticked over 30,000 this morning.
-Dan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 18:06:52 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
holy shit! all one needs to do is publicize that one to keep waldorf out of
public schools. make billboards and a big flyer with that quote and its
source, post it all over - All hell would break loose.
I do know that Lucifer refers to star of morning, and feel there was
hyperinterpretation of Isaiah's passage so as to equate star of
morning/Lucifer with Satan. But fact is, people now regard "Lucifer" as
Satan, even in the dictionary.
This quote you found is enough to close schools. The author of it must
have learned about this from anthroposophical readings. It would be nice to
include another such quote from Steiner on the billboard & flyers, or several
quotes of similar nature which send hairs up on back of necks of readers.
Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 18:08:29 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm thinking of making a flyer with this quote on it, and posting it in our
town. Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.4 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: web counter 30,000
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 15:14:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909131634.JAA06390 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909142046.NAA06409 lists1.best.com)
)
)The counter just ticked over 30,000 this morning.
)
)-Dan
I recently received a phone call from a grateful Waldorf parent. Seems his
ex-wife placed their young child in a private Waldorf school against his
wishes. He downloaded some material from PLANS web site and is leafleting
the school (standing in the school easement). He said the teachers phoned
the sheriff, but since he wasn't on school property, the sheriff couldn't
do anything about it. He says he will not stop his [various] activities
until his child is out of Waldorf. He wants to "plaster the town with
information about this school".
His son's teacher asked him not to allow him to watch TV "because it will
make him act out later in life." He refused to agree. He told the teacher
that his son has learned more from TV than he ever has at school.
PLANS has received thank you notes with donations from parents who have
visited our web site, lurked on the critics list, then pulled their
children from Waldorf. If Waldorf proponents were honest about the belief
system that permeates Waldorf, there would be little need for PLANS.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.5 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 15:32:23 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909142210.PAA25553 lists1.best.com)
On 14 Sep 99, at 18:08, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) I'm thinking of making a flyer with this quote on it, and posting it
) in our town.
What quote is that?
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.n1445.6 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 18:37:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) (Kanefer aol.com) - 9/14/99 6:08 PM )))
writes:
)I'm thinking of making a flyer with this quote on it, and posting it in our
)town.
I had the same idea when I read it! I sure got a big kick out of Steve's
)"God grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked, the
)good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to be able
)to tell the difference." - Dallas Dobro
/MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.7 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Waldorf in public schools?
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 16:11:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909140642.XAA25784 lists1.best.com) (199909141935.MAA19897 lists1.best.com)
Would someone please explain the relationship Waldorf has with public
schools. Are Waldorf schools public or private, but receive some financial
aid from the government?
This statement about Lucifer clearly shows that Waldorf doesn't belong in
public schools.
Thanks,
Christine
----- Original Message -----
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 4:34 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
) )On 14 Sep 99, at 2:40, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) )
) )) wow, who's "Ahriman" ?
) )
) )As I understand it, Ahriman and Lucifer are the main deities - er -
) )spiritual beings whose role is to try to keep us from realizing our
) )spiritual nature. Ahriman works by dazzling us with technological
) )works; Lucifer works by dazzling us with experiences which we
) )perceive as spiritual enlightenment, but which serve to distract us
) )from our true spiritual nature.
) )
) )That's my understanding anyway. As I said, I've never read Steiner,
) )and perhaps an Anthroposophist on the list can give a better answer,
) )or correct me where I may be mistaken.
)
)
)
) The "Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide" says:
)
) "Most of that which contributes to our work as teachers, preparation
) work, artistic work, even meditative work, is under the guardianship
) of Lucifer. We can become great teachers under his supervision,
) for he is responsible for much that has blossomed in the unfolding of
) civilization and culture in the past."
)
)
) Schwartz, Eugene. The Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide. Fair Oaks, CA:
) Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1992, p. 54.
)
) Deby
)
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.8 ---------------
From: dingman mindspring.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 20:53:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Let me just preface what I am going to say with a discussion of who
Satan is from the Bible .
For some reason, King James' scribes translated the original Hebrew
description of Satan as "serpent," when actually, the original Hebrew
uses the word "nachash" which in English can be rendered a description
of a rather attractive, enticing, loving
and caring "being of light." Sounds a little familiar, doesn't it? Eve
was not approached by a mean, ugly, fearful snake, but by a shining ,
persuasive, light being. From Genesis 3:4 "You will not surely die,"
the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it
your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good from
evil."
The Bible tells us that Jesus claims to be the Light. It also tells us
Satan claims to be the light. In fact, the name Lucifer means "light
bearer." A spiritually undiscerning mind cannot tell the difference,
but a fairly careful student of scripture and Truth can.
I told you that to lead into this: Satan's specialty is appearing as
close, "like God" as possible. That's what got him in trouble in the
first place! And God had loved him very much, created him to be the most
beautiful of all angels, and he was favored above all, but in the 28th
chapter of Ezekiel verses 15-17 that wasn't enough for Lucifer." "You
were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till
wickedness was found in you. Through your widespread trade you were
filled with violence and you sinned. So I drove you in disgrace from
the mount of God, and I expelled you, O guardian cherub, from among the
fiery stones. Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and
you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor. So I threw you to
the earth; I made a spectacle of you before kings."
So it is not surprising that Lucifer would blind Mr. Steiner's view of
creation and His view of Christ as the Son of God and "the way, the
truth, and the light." So Steiner leads us in a new age direction,
corrupts the precise instructions God gave us in the Bible, and Satan
gets to mislead yet another batch of poor lost souls who happen to be
children, straight into hell. And it starts early on. Last year, my
son's class did a Eurythmy preformance on the story of creation. Only
Rudolph Steiner's God needed a whole host of spiritual beings to create
the creation. The God of the bible spoke the earth and the heavens into
existence. Steiner wants to convince us that we can be just like God if
we follow his teaching and gain the secret "knowledge." Just like Satan
its another counterfeit. Don't be fooled.
Those who do accept the reality of a Satanic realm need to get rid of
the mental image of Satan as being "a mean little man in a red suit
with horns and a pitchfork." The Evil One looks alot more like your
kid's Waldorf teacher. Parents in the name of the risen Lord Jesus who
defeated Satan once and for all on the cross, take back your kids from
this evil deception.
Rev.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Ahriman et alia (Was Re: Re: Re: Digest
waldorf-critics.v001.n1441)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 22:27:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com) - 9/14/99 11:45 AM )))
wrote:
)As I understand it, Ahriman and Lucifer are the main deities - er -
)spiritual beings whose role is to try to keep us from realizing our
)spiritual nature. Ahriman works by dazzling us with technological
)works; Lucifer works by dazzling us with experiences which we
)perceive as spiritual enlightenment, but which serve to distract us
)from our true spiritual nature.
)
)That's my understanding anyway. As I said, I've never read Steiner,
)and perhaps an Anthroposophist on the list can give a better answer,
)or correct me where I may be mistaken.
Hi, Steve -- I can try. Very, very sketchily, due to my own limitations.
Rudolf Steiner suggests paying attention to two complementary tendencies in human psychology: one tendency toward hardening and cooling and darkening, and another towards loosening, warming, luminescence.
It signified an advance in ethical discernment when Aristotle defined a virtue as the mean between two vices, eg the virtue of courage as the mean between the polar vices of cowardice and rashness, thus replacing the primitive binary understanding a virtue as simply the opposite of a vice by the perception of a a virtue as the mean between two extremes. If, following Aristotle, we experimentally suspend our (hardening) tendency to freeze a label of absolute "good" or "bad" onto either of these modes, and instead exert the psychological effort simply to identify where each is operating in our environment or expressed in our own dispositions, we might find the exercise lends us insight.
Eg, at the beginning of life an individual's constitution is "looser" than it will gradually become (if the development is healthy); children are constituted more "loosely," more "softly" than adults. This doesn't make them "better" or "worse"! It makes then capable of some accomplishments that adults are incapable of, and vice-versa. This is hardly arcane knowledge; just yesterday, for example, I read a message written by an adult that wistfully professed to covet her lost intellectual innocence.
Children's bodies are more flexible (but less strong) than adults'; so too their inner life. An adult who preserves, unmodified, the imagination of a child is deemed dysfunctionally superstitious (you can read about that here, y'know); on the other hand, nobody likes an incessantly "smart-alecky" kid. A cynical child is a sadder case than a cynical adult; a credulous child is less of a problem than a credulous adult.
As we mature, memory replaces imagination as a growing resource for making decisions. As children profit from being strengthened by incorporating structure, adults profit from stretching, "excorporating" energy. For as we age, we naturally grow stiffer, both physically as well as becoming more prone to "set" ways of thinking.
When my attempt to predict another's behavior fails, I might afterwards infer that I had been extrapolating too rigidly, too mechanistically, from his or her past behavior. Put in an extreme way, one could say that I have been thinking about my neighbor as a machine; I was sure that I had him "all figured out" -- as if a human being could be "all figured out." Alternately, I might err in the direction of thinking not rigidly enough, that is, when hindsight tells me that "I could have seen something coming" but failed to notice; that I was "asleep." (Lists like this are good proving grounds for such predictions.) In the latter case I have overlooked the structures that bind human beings to the earth; I am fallaciously expecting totally unconditioned, "divine" behavior from a mortal. An example of this would be to make no allowance for the role of habit in a person's inclinations.
We ourselves are not the source of the tendencies to hardening and loosening that we experience; we respond to them. They are challenges to encounter; tey hold opportunities for growth. When I find the world around me "hard" (in any number of senses), my own effort to "warm" it can enhance my own experience and that of the other -- as anyone who has successfully faced an uncooperative companion will know. When I find the world around me too "loose," my fidelity to structure can redeem a sloppy situation, as _any_one who has guided a child's consciousness will know. (Rhythm, by the way, is the great mediator between form and function.)
Often we receive the greatest gifts from our opponents, whose criticisms inform us (if we pay attention) of our limitations, who strengthen our capacities by inviting that we exercise them: "No pain, no gain," as the weightlifters and other athletes tell us. Each of these two tendencies -- the loosening, warming, expansive, lucent one; and the contracting, precipitating, concretizing one -- are in this way "gifts" to human life.
It is beyond the scope of an email to convey Rudolf Steiner's method of showing "that open-minded consideration of the two questions I have indicated and which are fundamental for every kind of knowledge, leads to the view that man lives in the midst of a genuine spiritual world." (Paragraph 5 of the 1918 Preface to the Second Edition of The Philosophy of Freedom/Spiritual Activity). That book offers a method through which the reader can test for him/herself whether there is any foundation to Steiner's claim that "dormant in every human being live faculties by which he can attain knowledge of higher worlds" (from another book by the same author) that include subjects with whom acquaintance can be gained through trained exact intuition.
When Rudolf Steiner was asked about the claims by his contemporaries Freud and Jung concerning an individual or collective "unconscious," he gave a very simple response: If I am standing behind you, and you do not know that I am there, you are "unconscious" of my existence. But that does not make me "your unconscious." If I then speak, and you turn around to face me, and see me, you will become conscious of what was previously -- to you -- unconscious. It is not I who have changed; you have changed: You have become aware of something/someone that was there before you became aware of its existence.
If I am wrestling with a problem, believing I am alone in my room and, and then I hear a voice proposing a solution, it's a pretty sure bet that I will look in the direction from which the voice has come, in order to identify its source. Rudolf Steiner asks, Why not do the same when we are prompted to solutions to our problems through non-physical articulations, namely, ideas, inspirations, imaginations?
If I view the reception of a material commodity, say, a meal, as a gift that I have received, I will (all other things being equal) turn gratefully toward the donor, my benefactor; I will be moved to establish or deepen a relationship with that agent who has graced my life with a benefit; I will want to know him better. If the challenge is an arduous one -- say, a stable that I am given to clean -- I may have to strive mightily to appreciate its gift-nature ( -- as the bumper sticker huffs: "Another goddam learning experience!"). And if I regard "my" ideas as gifts that I have received, I will cultivate an analogous attitude of gratitude toward the world that lent me that inspiration.
Rudolf Steiner's meditative thinking identified these two tendencies -- of hardening and of loosening -- that condition our lives on earth as challenging gifts. A gift implies a giver; each of these two gifts is understood in Anthroposophy as a continual sacrifice undertaken by agents who themselves stand in need of redemption by human beings' effort:
When we bring the warmth of love to the impressions that course through our souls, we "redeem" our self-consciousness -- the gift that naturally traps us in egotism, but also makes us capable of freedom, and hence becoming donors ourselves. We release the bearer of light who would, buy his own devices, keep us from incarnating our ideals as method, as practice.
And when we bring the light of clear thinking to the world around us; contextualize our experience; practice science, we produce a corollary to the gift that we receive as the material world. The "donor," whose tendency is to reduce all of earthly life, and the human being with it, to a machine, then becomes the servant rather than the misguided ruler of man's progress.
Both dog and master are better off when it is the master who holds the leash.
The spiritual ideal of ancient India was to remain aloof from Mahata-Mya/Maya/ the Great Illusion of materiality. At a subsequent historical epoch, the spiritual ideal of ancient Persia, as if in recognition that it was "too late" to return to Paradise, sought to redeem the darkness of matter by sowing it with light -- an agricultural model through which ancient Persian philosophy produced the notion of the hygienic opposition that the darkness brought to man through his entanglement with matter. The battleground for the strife between light and dark -- the earthly "field" -- is the human being himself. The name the ancient Persians gave to their god of light was Ahura-Mazdao (whence the brand of lightbulbs named Mazda); the god of darkness they named Ahriman (Satan in Hebraic tradition). Now _if_ you are interested in knowing what Rudolf Steiner meant, puh-leeze remember Aristotle's contextualization principle, and the weightlifter's credo; reconsider the (universal) reflex t!
o black-and-white, automatic-pilot binarization/anathemization/self-righteousness by means of demonization. Rather than being )spiritual beings whose role is to try to keep us from realizing our spiritual nature( [don't worry -- a common fallacy!], Ahriman and Lucifer are )spiritual beings whose role is to( _facilitate_ )us [in] realizing our spiritual nature( -- they are instruments of the pain that facilitates that gain of realizing our capacity to love freely. They are the two vices flanking the virtue that -- or more precisely, Who -- will have to be the subject of another post. Best to you! /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1445.10 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 00:02:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) (Kanefer aol.com) - 9/14/99 12:43 PM )))
writes:
)Gosh, I was at a Waldorf PR meeting once, and all these gals there were
)saying how ridiculous it was that one parent had become offended when the
)faculty and staff did a "dance to Lucifer." The parent, like me, was
)Christian. I said, "Well, I would be upset by such a dance, too." And, they
)all stared at me, then said Lucifer is actually not Satan but the
)"light-bearer," see, and basically that the parent was unenlightened...
I wasn't there and so can account for neither what provoked them to stare at you nor apologize for anyone's bad behavior, but I can assure you that any "dance to Lucifer" executed in a Waldorf setting was likely to be a satiric skit -- possibly clumsy, conceivably in poor taste, obviously selected for the wrong audience, but not performed with devotion. Like anyone else, Waldorf enthusiasts can screw up. What does the evangelical bumper sticker say? "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven." /MRx
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1445 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1446 --------------
001 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
005 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Ahriman et alia (Was Re: Re: Re:
Digestwaldorf-critic
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
007 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Patti
008 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.1 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 22:51:29 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909150408.VAA11322 lists1.best.com)
)))) (Kanefer aol.com) - 9/14/99 12:43 PM )))
)
[snip]
)I wasn't there and so can account for neither what provoked them to stare
)at you nor apologize for anyone's bad behavior, but I can assure you that
)any "dance to Lucifer" executed in a Waldorf setting was likely to be a
)satiric skit -- possibly clumsy, conceivably in poor taste, obviously
)selected for the wrong audience, but not performed with devotion. Like
)anyone else, Waldorf enthusiasts can screw up. What does the evangelical
)bumper sticker say? "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven." /MRx
)
So how do you account for the quote?
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 03:07:05 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
this quote that Deby sent:
"Most of that which contributes to our work as teachers, preparation
work, artistic work, even meditative work, is under the guardianship
of Lucifer. We can become great teachers under his supervision,
for he is responsible for much that has blossomed in the unfolding of
civilization and culture in the past."
Schwartz, Eugene. The Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide. Fair Oaks, CA:
Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1992, p. 54.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 03:08:37 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
ha ha!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 03:19:59 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Rev,
that was an awesome letter. what you have to say is so true. it
reminds me of how they made Treblinka look like a pretty little train station
to keep the Jews who were disembarking more peaceful. They planted flowers
and painted windows on the building, and painted a clock at the top, to make
it look appealing and fine. You can picture them convincing themselves,
despite a feeling of uneasiness, "Now see? Everything's fine..." It's hard
for people to believe a truth when it is ugly, easier to believe a beautiful
lie.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.5 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Ahriman et alia (Was Re: Re: Re:
Digestwaldorf-critics.v001.n1441)
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 03:32:30 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
well, i think a virtue is much more than a mean. regarding a virtue as a
mean would ennervate the beauty and power of the virtue, while alarmingly
fixing it between two evils, which rings discordant mathematically,
somehow... like the yin yang, the mean is the tao between two extremes.
nothing wrong with simple "binary" thought - God pretty simple and binary
when He created world: light and dark, night and day, heaven and earth...
besides, didn't you or someone mention that steiner believed he himself was
reincarnation of aristotle? aristotle be damned! sincerely, patti m.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 03:36:28 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
hi mr. x,
no, two of these gals who had been there were saying how beautiful the
dance was... it was not satiric, it was some kind of devotional thing as
part of a meeting. they sympathetically thought me an ignorant mere mortal
for not being enlightened to the "true nature" of Lucifer... i didn't push
the issue, just sort of freaked out inside.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.7 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Patti
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 09:17:40 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Patti--
I think that is so unfair of you...to suggest taking something that you KNOW
had no "evil" meaning and suggest that it be used to turn/freighten people
away from WE. It's one thing to bring up your legitimate concerns, but to use
something as a guise just isn't right.
It's like a politician finding out that an opposing married politician is
helping out a young woman who is dying of a disease and then sending
photographers out to capture pictures of him going to the woman's house and
her hugging him at the door...and then putting a caption underneath, "married
politician in arms of young woman"--knowing that readers will interpret it
the wrong way from what is actually going on. It's just not ethical what you
are saying (even if in jest).
Just my opinion.
--Wendi
p.s. Not that I think all of Steiner's beliefs are okay...I still have a
serious problem with his view on races and what seems to be anti-Semitism.
((
holy shit! all one needs to do is publicize that one to keep waldorf out of
public schools. make billboards and a big flyer with that quote and its
source, post it all over - All hell would break loose.
I do know that Lucifer refers to star of morning, and feel there was
hyperinterpretation of Isaiah's passage so as to equate star of
morning/Lucifer with Satan. But fact is, people now regard "Lucifer" as
Satan, even in the dictionary.
This quote you found is enough to close schools. The author of it must
have learned about this from anthroposophical readings. It would be nice to
include another such quote from Steiner on the billboard & flyers, or
several
quotes of similar nature which send hairs up on back of necks of readers.
Sincerely, Patti Morey
))
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.8 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:07:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) I do know that Lucifer refers to star of morning, and feel there was
)hyperinterpretation of Isaiah's passage so as to equate star of
)morning/Lucifer with Satan. But fact is, people now regard "Lucifer" as
)Satan, even in the dictionary.
(Patti Morey)
There is a big misconception about the personality of the "Star of the
morning": In Isaiah, Lucifer is referred to "Son of the morning":
("How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!")
There is no "star" anywhere in the text, although the "new" bibles changed
the text, omitting Lucifer completely,
as for example the RSV: "How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of
Dawn!" (I wonder why.)
Now, who is the Star of the morning in the Bible?
Rev. 22:16 reads:
"I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the
churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and
morning star."
An interesting note is, that the idea of setting Lucifer into the position
of Jesus Christ is followed by Mde Blavatsky enthusiastically (Adolf Hitler
was inspired by her "Secret Doctrine", known as "satanic bible"), coming
from her idol Elivaz Levi's literature about Baphomet being the hidden (and
true) god and all this stuff. Blavatsky had MANY followers, however, nobody
wants to have ever heard from her before.
(Colin Wilson wrote a bibliography about Rudolf Steiner, where he was
allowed to write a little bit more about his affiliations with the
Theosophical Order than normal Steiner literature does).
Also interesting is, how this "doctrine" is followed by the "new" bible
translaters, since Westcott and Hort did manage to replace the accepted
bible manuscripts with the so called "new Greek Text" from Alexandria.
Rudolf Steiner gave a few lectures ("The Balance between Ahriman And
Lucifer") in 1914 (I'm not sure about the date) in Dornach, where he
emphasized how important (sic!) this issue is for the education of the
child. There he describes in detail his belief about the conceptional
trinity of Lucifer, Ahriman and Christ, whereby "Christ" itself is not a
"being" like Luci or Ahri (you know, the two nice guys from around the
corner), but merely the expression of the right balance between them both
(give me a brandy...). In fact, he describes it as a swinging pendulum,
which is moving between Ahriman and Lucifer. In the perfect center stage of
the pendulum you will find the absolute balance of the being (in this case,
the child), that is, the "1Christ Impulse".
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1446.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 08:49:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909150708.AAA04168 lists1.best.com)
On 15 Sep 99, at 3:07, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) this quote that Deby sent:
Thanks.
Does your email program allow you to quote the post to which you're
responding? That would help, especially when the subject just refers
to the digest.
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.n1446.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 08:56:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909150056.RAA09873 lists1.best.com)
On 14 Sep 99, at 20:53, dingman mindspring.com wrote:
) Let me just preface what I am going to say with a discussion of who
) Satan is from the Bible .
(Good discussion follows)
) The Bible tells us that Jesus claims to be the Light. It also tells
) us Satan claims to be the light. In fact, the name Lucifer means
) "light bearer." A spiritually undiscerning mind cannot tell the
) difference, but a fairly careful student of scripture and Truth can.
) . . .
) So it is not surprising that Lucifer would blind Mr. Steiner's view of
) creation and His view of Christ as the Son of God and "the way, the
) truth, and the light." So Steiner leads us in a new age direction,
) corrupts the precise instructions God gave us in the Bible, and Satan
) gets to mislead yet another batch of poor lost souls who happen to be
) children, straight into hell.
Rev, assuming that your interpretation of scripture is correct, how
is one to know that the writers and editors of the Bible are more
likely to have a correct view of spiritual reality than Steiner? If
it's just blind faith, I can accept that, since Anthroposophy is
obviously inconsistent with fundamentalist Christianity. But is
there some basis other than blind faith to trust the Bible over
Steiner?
[Personally, I find all sorts of thoughts on the spiritual realm
interesting, and consider it all to by mythology, which is not to say
that it's false, but rather that the truth that is there for me is in
the form of symbolism and allegory.]
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1446 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1447 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Admin: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Wendi
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
004 - dingman mindspring.com - Re:Is the Bible True?
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Is the Bible True?
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Kanefer aol.com
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Speaking of fair...
008 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
010 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Kanefer aol.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 01:24:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909141646.JAA13083 lists1.best.com)
This is a good time to remind digest subscribers that when you reply to a
message, you need to:
1) edit the Subject field to exactly the subject of the message you're
replying to, and
2) delete all the text of other messages and unnecessary parts of the
message you're replying to.
Really, digest subscribing is convenient for lurkers. If you're going to
participate, change your subscription to singles.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Wendi
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:58:42 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
This thing about Lucifer is a legitimate concern. It confirms for me
what I had always sensed all along. I don't understand how you can think to
say what I "KNOW," and I am also very concerned that you would suddenly wish
to defend Waldorf Education in these terms of Lucifer.
I feel that Waldorf, like Mormonism, like Treblinka, is inherently
diabolical. Its outward looks are very nice, but the hidden heart of it is
evil, and would lead souls to the pit. That nice-looking exterior may extend
for quite a depth, and with but occasional glimpses that unsettle one. It
might be easy to cling to all that nice-looking exterior for comfort and
reassurance - till one gets closer and closer to the windows, and discovers
that they are only paint. Meanwhile, as one maintains a state of denial,
looking for ways to deny one's own bodily instincts, the soul is being
devoured.
I do not know anything about the anthroposophical concept of Lucifer,
except what I have read here at the list. I'd thought "Lucifer" was simply
the name for Venus, which Isaiah had compared to an evil king to show that he
would inevitably fall like the morning star does. (After all, in the King
James translation of the Bible, the word, "Lucifer" occurs only once, in
that one passage of Isaiah's). I'd thought that people were vainly
attempting to know of Heavenly things by forming a connection and making an
assumption that might not be there.
However, last night, someone quoted a passage from Ezekial which showed
again this analogy - that shows specifically that Satan was once an angel who
rose to great heights, then fell because of his vanity. I don't really care
to know about Satan, and as I'm here on the earth, I'll wait till Heaven to
find out all about the angels. Meanwhile, to me, Satan/Lucifer is simply the
embodiment of evil.
If someone says the word, "Lucifer" to me, I naturally assume they are
speaking about Satan. Perhaps I am "unenlightened." But if you look up
"Lucifer" in the dictionary, you'll find it defined: 1. the morning star,
2. Satan, 3. a type of match. There's no complex mumbo jumbo. But if
these definitions are wrong, surely anthroposophists and Waldorfians will
have no problem with a quote demonstrating their dependence upon Lucifer
being made available to the general public. It's already been published,
after all....!
I think the quote Deby found is Highly Significant. It sure as hell
unsettled me, and I'm sure it would unsettle anyone other than those who
willfully cater to Lucifer.
Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 14:03:43 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
thank you for this informative note. It's awesome. I have saved it for
future reference. Sincerely, Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.4 ---------------
From: dingman mindspring.com
Subject: Re:Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 14:06:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve, I knew you were the one who would query my post. Thanks for the
opportunity to explain why I believe the Bible is 100% true and every
one of the 66 books proclaims Jesus as the Messiah and the son of God.
I will also explain why Steiner was a spiritual moron who never got it.
The Bible testifies to itself as God's word.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness [or 'rightness']:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
furnished unto all good works."
II Timothy 3:16-17
All means all, with no exception. The whole thing.
Also:
"Knowing this first, that no prophesy [or
profession] of scripture is of any private
interpretation. For the prophesy came not in old time
by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they
were moved by the Holy Spirit."
II Peter 1:20-21
The entire Word of God is literally, "God
breathed." So the Word wasn't "just written by men"
after all. That's why, after 66 books and 44 authors
over a period of 1600 years, it all fits like a hand
in a glove, because it was essentially written by the
same author, the Holy Spirit. Also, there goes the
argument for "It all depends on how you interpret it."
There is no private interpretation. It says what it
means and means what it says. If something doesn't
seem to make sense, it's due to a problem with the
English translation or our understanding of it. The
Bible contains an astronomic amount of data, some of
which can be tested for validity, some cannot. That
which can be tested for validity turns out to be true
and correct every single time. So, from a research
prospective only, it would stands to reason that in an
entire document or record, if it is true every time
otherwise, it will probably (but not definitely) be true
throughout. I stand upon the premise that the Word is true,
from cover to cover. There is no way that the Bible could
fit together so well if the Holy Spirit had not been the author
through the prophets and apostles.
The world has taught us to worship our stock portfolios
and our information technology and ourselves. God's word
tells us to worship the Lord our God with all of our heart, mind,
soul, and might. To believe in the Lord by faith. And only
in our faith is the place that God moves. You will never find God by
your intellect or by sacred esoteric knowledge. You will find him
if you seek him by faith in the truth of the bible. I know numerous
people who
have been healed by their faith. I can give you a phone number for a
man who was raised from the dead after 5 days. Call him, talk to him.
Read
his story. The power of prayer and of faith can accomplish anything in
God's will. This is where steiner never knew God. He thought he could
find
God by channeling and learning ancient akastic pagan dark wisdom. He
could never get his
intellect out of the way to find God by faith. His search led him to
demons who
captured his soul and blinded his vision, but since he did not have the
Holy Spirit or the truth of God's word, he could never decern the
difference.
New belief, old lie. Making it look very close to the
truth (sound familiar?..."Surely you will not die!"---
yes you will...spiritually!) They relied on some
OLD, AGE-OLD basic tenets--- the God within you,
playing blasphemously on the precious work Jesus
completed on the cross to atone for our sins and
preserve us from everlasting death, by even suggesting
that we seek "at-one-ment" with the Holy One by
achieving "christ consciousness" within. There is
only one way to have that: it comes when you are
actually indwelled by the Holy Spirit after asking
Jesus Christ to come into your life and make you holy.
And praise the Lord we cannot do this on our own
power. See, we CANNOT ACHIEVE this in our strength--- it
is all done by God, by the Holy Spirit, and it is a free gift for the
asking, by just acknowledging we cannot do it without
accepting Him, we create room for God to move in our lives.
Then, He comes in and does all the work. We don't have to
be good, we don't have to be anything, except willing to let
Him come in, and follow Him, through prayer, through staying in God's
Word daily and finding out what He has to say.
Finally, to know God and the truth of the bible, we must
first have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. John 16:13 "The
Holy Spirit will guide you into all truth." Jesus in John 14:6
"I am the way the truth and the life, no one gets to the father except
through me."
And again in John 8:32 Jesus says,"then you will know the truth,
and the truth will set you free." By the word of my testimony and
the testimony of God's word and the testimonies of Billions of
Christians worldwide. This is the only truth in all of our worldly
existence and it is the only one we can take with us. I urge you to
pick up a bible and begin reading in the book of John in the new testi--
ment and see if God does not reveal his truth to you. I knew before
I got out of the 6th chapter that the bible is true and Jesus is Lord.
Jesus in Matthew 7:7 promises, "Ask and it will be given to you, seek
and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. But it all
comes back to the same old thing you have always heard," Jesus loves me
this I know because the bible tells me so." Do you see the power in it.
It is faith and faith is the place where we can touch the throne.
Well you probably didn't expect a sermon, and I hope I did not overstep
the decorum of the forum I am so excited to be able to share with you a
little of what the Lord has given me. Steve if you or any others would
like
to discuss this off the forum, contact me personally.
"NewPaul" aka REV
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 08:56:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909150056.RAA09873 lists1.best.com)
On 14 Sep 99, at 20:53, dingman mindspring.com wrote:
) Let me just preface what I am going to say with a discussion of who
) Satan is from the Bible .
(Good discussion follows)
) The Bible tells us that Jesus claims to be the Light. It also tells
) us Satan claims to be the light. In fact, the name Lucifer means
) "light bearer." A spiritually undiscerning mind cannot tell the
) difference, but a fairly careful student of scripture and Truth can.
) . . .
) So it is not surprising that Lucifer would blind Mr. Steiner's view of
) creation and His view of Christ as the Son of God and "the way, the
) truth, and the light." So Steiner leads us in a new age direction,
) corrupts the precise instructions God gave us in the Bible, and Satan
) gets to mislead yet another batch of poor lost souls who happen to be
) children, straight into hell.
Rev, assuming that your interpretation of scripture is correct, how
is one to know that the writers and editors of the Bible are more
likely to have a correct view of spiritual reality than Steiner? If
it's just blind faith, I can accept that, since Anthroposophy is
obviously inconsistent with fundamentalist Christianity. But is
there some basis other than blind faith to trust the Bible over
Steiner?
[Personally, I find all sorts of thoughts on the spiritual realm
interesting, and consider it all to by mythology, which is not to say
that it's false, but rather that the truth that is there for me is in
the form of symbolism and allegory.]
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1446 ---------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 15:06:43 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Steve Premo]
) Rev, assuming that your interpretation of scripture is correct, how
) is one to know that the writers and editors of the Bible are more
) likely to have a correct view of spiritual reality than Steiner?
[Rev responds to Steve Premo's query]
) The Bible testifies to itself as God's word.
)
) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
) profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
) for instruction in righteousness [or 'rightness']:
) That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
) furnished unto all good works."
) II Timothy 3:16-17
)
) All means all, with no exception. The whole thing.
[Bob Tolz]
One should never take someone's (or, in this case, something's)
proclamation that they're telling the truth as evidence that they're telling
the truth.
[Rev]
) Also:
) same author, the Holy Spirit. Also, there goes the
) argument for "It all depends on how you interpret it."
) There is no private interpretation. It says what it
) means and means what it says.
[Bob Tolz]
Then why are there so many varying interpretations?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Kanefer aol.com
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:11:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909150710.AAA05353 lists1.best.com)
)ha ha!
I'm having the hardest time following your posts. I never know what thread
or post you are responding to.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.7 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Speaking of fair...
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:39:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909151318.GAA16423 lists1.best.com)
gypsey wrote--
)
)I think that is so unfair of you...to suggest taking something that you KNOW
)had no "evil" meaning and suggest that it be used to turn/freighten people
)away from WE. It's one thing to bring up your legitimate concerns, but to use
)something as a guise just isn't right.
WE proponents hide Anthroposophy's relationship with Lucifer while seducing
Christian children into their missionary school by claiming non-sectarian
status, knowing full well what the Christian definition of Lucifer is.
You may moan about unfair, but this is down right immoral. Parents have an
unequivocal right to be fully informed. Let WE teachers try to convince
their Christian families who Lucifer really is _before_ enrolling their
children.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.8 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 17:30:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve Premo wrote:
)Rev, assuming that your interpretation of scripture is correct, how
)is one to know that the writers and editors of the Bible are more
)likely to have a correct view of spiritual reality than Steiner? If
)it's just blind faith, I can accept that, since Anthroposophy is
)obviously inconsistent with fundamentalist Christianity. But is
)there some basis other than blind faith to trust the Bible over
)Steiner?
There are a lot of arguments to believe the Bible rather than any man.
In my opinion, the strongest argument for the Bible is prophecy which comes
to pass.
The fact is, that the Bible itself claims infallibility _because_ of true
prophecy, somehow like the final test for truth.
Also, there are many scientific details described in the bible, which are
known hundreds or thousands of years later to be true.
(One of the more common examples if that the earth is not flat, after all.)
I think, this are the more objective reasons.
Steiner himself claimed clairvoyance for his inspirations, but he is proven
often simply wrong in his statements, or in some cases simply fantastic.
Also his lack of integrity is obvious. What Steiner says about the bible
for example:
"Does the Bible tell us anything about this [that we may speak of man as
the descendant of the Gods in the same sense as we speak of the child being
the descendant of his parents. From the standpoint of Spiritual Science we
must look upon the human being standing before us as an Earth-man, the
descendant of divine-spiritual beings.]? Indeed it does, but we first must
learn how to read it. The fourth sentence of the Second Chapter of Genesis
runs: 'These are the generations of the heavens' . . . and so on. This
sentence is misleading, for it does not give what is really to be found at
this place in the Bible. The text ought really to stand as follows: 'What
follow here and will now be described are the descendants of the Heavens
and the Earth as they were brought forth by the divine power.' And by the
words 'the Heavens and the Earth,' divine spiritual beings are meant,
divine spiritual beings whose descendant is man. "
from: "The Bible and Wisdom", a lecture by Rudolf Steiner, Hamburg, 1908.
(what a lecture, what a lecture!)
I mean, this is not even worth reading. What I also don't like of R.
Steiner is, that he tried always to make the impression that his insights
come from his deep consciousness (rather than from his big mouth), but a
lot of it is simply copied, although changed in his expressions. He read a
lot of books supplied by the theosophical order, so you see often paralell
texts from Eliphaz Levi ('round 1800).
(A Side note: Nobody living has ever seen an animal which is called "The
Original Manuscripts" of the Bible. so if somebody wants to hint against
any translation error in the Bible, pointing to "the Original" he is
knowingly misleading you.)
sincerely
Christian Czachary
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 17:45:43 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well, "spiritual reality" is just a term, don't you agree?
Bible has thousands of years of accumulated spiritual wisdom, from many,
offered in terms of the earth. ("Consider the lilies of the field..." etc.)
Steiner, on the other hand, offered "knowledge" about earthly things - in
terms of his own singular notions of "spirit."
I prefer the Bible's wisdom to Steiner's "knowledge."
Sincerely, Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1447.10 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Kanefer aol.com
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 17:49:47 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
oh gosh, honey. sorry! I thought the previous posts automatically appeared
with my responses!!
I'll copy part next time to send with my response. Sincerely, Patti M.
p.s. wait - here you go:
I'm having the hardest time following your posts. I never know what thread
or post you are responding to.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1447 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1448 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Speaking of fair...
002 - "Brian & Christine Maxwel - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry (Was: Re: Re: Re etc.)
004 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: Is the Bible True?
005 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Ahriman et Aristotle
006 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
007 - dingman mindspring.com - RE: Is the Bible True?
008 - "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf pe - Re: Is the Bible True?
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Is the Bible True?
010 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Is the Bible True?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Speaking of fair...
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 17:53:19 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 9/15/99 2:25:19 PM, you wrote:
(( Let WE teachers try to convince
their Christian families who Lucifer really is _before_ enrolling their
children.
-ds))
Deby, I agree with you 110% They won't hang around to be convinced though.
They will just run!! I would have!! Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.2 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 15:11:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909151556.IAA21804 lists1.best.com)
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
But is
) there some basis other than blind faith to trust the Bible over
) Steiner?
Yes.
THERE IS INTERNAL EVIDENCE within the Bible itself to substantiate it's
claims to inspiration from God Himself and complete accuracy.
1. There is entire unification of the Bible's message: from cover to cover
proclaiming over and over again that God himself would provide a way for
reconciliation with Him through a Substitute taking the punishment for our
sins. Take into consideration the number of different authors and the time
span over which the Bible was written and this alone is pretty impressive.
2. There are the prophesies of the coming Messiah which were fulfilled in
Jesus. My dad, Tim Stout, devotes a chapter to this in his book,
"Scientific Proofs of God and Creation Science Material".on is online at
http://www.innercite.com/~tstout/cs/welcome.shtml . In chapter 10,
"Christianity Verified by Messianic Prophesy" he says "There are well over
two hundred prophecies of the Messiah.... There are five topics that we
will look at:
1. The initial promise of a Messiah.
2. His ancestral liniage.
3. The city of His birth.
4. Things he was to accomplish.
5. The approximate year of His death."
Isaiah 53:6 is a good example illustrating both of my points "All we like
sheep have gone astray; we have turned, everyone, to his own way; and the
LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all." It clearly is part of the
unified message of a Substitute punishment for sins as well as a specific
Messianic prophesy fulfilled by Jesus' death, burial and ressurection.
THERE IS ALSO EXTERNAL EVIDENCE.
There is the witness if the nation of Israel, it's history and it's
existence today. The theologial issues of why God chose them, how He used
them, and their current situation today is discussed in the Bible and I
won't get into here.
There is the witness of life and the physical universe, pointing to a God of
order and a Person from Whom we all received our being, consistent with and
best explained by the Bible.
"Dr. Bradley then quotes astrophysicist Paul Davies from his 1984 book
Superforce: "The equations of physics have in them incredible simplicity,
elegance, and beauty. That in itself if sufficient to prove to me that
there must be a God who is responsible for these laws and responsible for
the universe." This quote is in my dad's book in chapter 9 "Proof of God:
Miscellaneous Evidences".
Steve Premo wrote earler: .. My point was that
) evolution is not just another creation theory, because as I
) understand it, creation theory necessarily implies the existence of a
) creator, while evolution does not require a creator (although it is
) not inconsistent with the idea of a creator).
To which I respond again with a quote from my dad's book, because it puts
the matter so nicely. My dad quotes from Robert Jastrow, an agnostic,
arguing that many scientists refused to accept the big bang theory because
they didn't like the philosophical implications "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story (of the big bang) ends
like a bad dream. For the past three hundred years, scientists have scaled
the mountain of ingorance and as they pull themselves over the final rock,
they are greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (Taken from chapter 9)
Yes, creation does imply the existence of a creator. This is not
inconsistent with science. A Creator creating the universe is actually more
in line with correct interpretation of scientific evidence that the theory
of evolution, which contradicts both the first and second laws of
thermodynamics. The first law states that energy can neither be created nor
destroyed. So, obviously the universe could not come from "nothing".
Creation is very consistent with this law, because the creation is merely
created from an already existing Source.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry (Was: Re: Re: Re etc.)
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 20:36:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/14/99 5:51 PM )))
asks me:
)So how do you account for the quote?
-- namely (I suppose) the quote in Eugene Schwartz's "Waldorf Teacher's Survival Guide," which reads:
) "Most of that which contributes to our work as teachers, preparation
) work, artistic work, even meditative work, is under the guardianship
) of Lucifer. We can become great teachers under his supervision,
) for he is responsible for much that has blossomed in the unfolding of
) civilization and culture in the past."
*******
Hi, Deb! By restoring the rest of the passage, which continues:
"However, if our goal is only to be a great teacher, if we look on
everything else in the life of the school merely as a distraction from
our pedagogical work, we are in danger of falling prey to Lucifer.
"This is one of the reasons that Steiner wanted Waldorf teachers to assume
responsibilities for the administrative life of the school. Answering
phone calls, writing memos and letters, etc.--all those activities that
compel us to meet the outside world on its own terms--bring us into
connection with Ahriman, who holds the secret of the future.
"If, every day, we can do some administrative/office work as well as carry
out our classroom responsibilities, we can go a long way towards
balancing the activities of Lucifer and Ahriman."
...and while we're at it, another passage from the same book, reminiscent of newsgroups like, uh, some I've participated in:
["Questioner" has just remarked, "...what I always find so difficult is
what comes over people in meetings..."
"'Answerer' (fictive Waldorf mentor) replies:] The phrase you used says it all--
_'what comes over people.'_ We can sense
that colleagues change profoundly in a meeting. Instead of human beings,
we meet so many standpoints; instead of social movement, we experience
entrenchment; instead of the metamorphosis and change that makes human
life so fascinating, we encounter dull, deadly predictability. Indeed,
what--or _who_--overcomes people in a meeting?
"Just as Lucifer thrives on eccentricity, on whims, on
rebelliousness, and all else that arises from the individuality asserting
itself too strongly, so Ahriman encourages conventionality, rigidity, and
above all, uniformity of opinion. Lucifer would like to rule our
classrooms, but Ahriman is most interested in controlling the Board room.
What we encounter in our meetings is all too often a group overcome by
what Nietzsche called the 'will to power.'"
...that's how. Best, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.4 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 19:22:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909151928.MAA24122 lists1.best.com)
Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate forum.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.5 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Ahriman et Aristotle
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 22:32:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) (Kanefer aol.com) - 9/15/99 3:32 AM )))
that is, Patty, writes:
)well, i think a virtue is much more than a mean. regarding a virtue as a
)mean would ennervate the beauty and power of the virtue, while alarmingly
)fixing it between two evils, which rings discordant mathematically,
)somehow...
[MRx:]
The extremist Aristotle (Nichomachean Ethics, II, 6, at (http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/academic/digitexts/aristotle/nicomachean_ethics/book02.html)) agrees with you:
"Virtue [snip] is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect; and again it is a mean because the vices respectively fall short of or exceed what is right in both passions and actions, while virtue both finds and chooses that which is intermediate. Hence in respect of its substance and the definition which states its essence virtue is a mean, with regard to what is best and right an extreme."
[Patty:]
)like the yin yang, the mean is the tao between two extremes.
[MRx:]
For anyone interested in the viewpoint of the best traditional Christian apologeticist of this century (so far), C.S. Lewis...
"...concluded his first essay in The Abolition of Man by launching his argument for the existence of an objective moral code that transcended time and culture. Lewis claimed that an honest study of different cultures, far from showing ethical confusion, indicated the existence of a universal moral code, which Lewis (drawing on ancient Chinese philosophy) called the "Tao." Lewis backed up his case for the Tao by supplying appendices that catalogued common moral maxims from civilizations around the world.
"Lewis defended the existence of the Tao more fully in essay two of The Abolition of Man ('The Way')."
[snip]
"The main ideas in The Abolition of Man can be found throughout Lewis's other writings and lectures, especially those that date from the 1940s. In
fact, Lewis's first talk on the BBC ("The Law of Human Nature," broadcast August, 1941) dealt with natural law. The talk was published in 1942 in
the collection titled Broadcast Talks, and it ultimately became the first chapter of Mere Christianity. [snip] Lewis presented a talk at the Oxford
Socratic Club titled, "If We Have Christ's Ethics, Does the Rest of the Christian Faith Matter?," which previewed part of the Riddell lectures by
showing how Christianity's ethical teachings shared considerable common ground with the moral teachings of other religious and philosophical traditions." (http://www.discovery.org/lewis/abolition.html)
[Patty:]
)nothing wrong with simple "binary" thought - God pretty simple and binary
)when He created world: light and dark, night and day, heaven and earth...
[Aristotle, agreeing with Patty again:]
"But not every action nor every passion admits of a mean; for some have names that already imply badness, e.g. spite, shamelessness, envy, and in the case of actions adultery, theft, murder; for all of these and suchlike things imply by their names that they are themselves bad, and not the excesses or deficiencies of them. It is not possible, then, ever to be right with regard to them; one must always be wrong. Nor does goodness or badness with regard to such things depend on committing adultery with the right woman, at the right time, and in the right way, but simply to do any of
them is to go wrong. It would be equally absurd, then, to expect that in unjust, cowardly, and voluptuous action there should be a mean, an excess, and a deficiency; for at that rate there would be a mean of excess and of deficiency, an excess of excess, and a deficiency of deficiency. But as there is no excess and deficiency of temperance and courage because what is intermediate is in a sense an extreme, so too of the actions we have mentioned there is no mean nor any excess and deficiency, but however they are done they are wrong; for in general there is neither a mean of excess and deficiency, nor excess and deficiency of a mean."
)
)besides, didn't you
[MRx:]
No.
[Patty:]
)or someone mention that steiner believed he himself was
)reincarnation of aristotle?
[MRx:]
This was extrapolated by some of Steiner's students.
kmm
Finally, and again, only for those who want it, "In chapter 7 of The Discarded Image (1964), Lewis discussed the conception of reason in the medieval world, which included the capacity of humans to rationally apprehend the first principles of morality."
[Patty:]
)aristotle be damned!
)sincerely, patti m.
[MRx:]
He says the nicest things about you...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.6 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 22:35:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) - 9/15/99 10:22 PM )))
writes:
)Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
)waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate forum.
...Aw, just when I was hoping Yael would come back... ( ; ) )
/MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.7 ---------------
From: dingman mindspring.com
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 23:45:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------8592D4FF504C153EBC08E984"
References: (199909152156.OAA00899 lists1.best.com)
--------------8592D4FF504C153EBC08E984
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) [Bob Tolz]
) One should never take someone's (or, in this case, something's)
) proclamation that they're telling the truth as evidence that they're telling
) the truth.
)
With regards to Mr Tolz comments. I like my truth to be true whether I or anyone else wants to
believe it or not. This is the nature of the truth of God's word. Throughout the middle prophets
after the time of King Solomon and before, the Birth of Christ, the people turned from God and let
relativism take over. They worshipped at pagan alters and they pathetically forgot God's word (sound
familiar?) God allowed the hordes to tear down the walls of Jerusalem, he sent the people into
slavery in Babylon. The people lost the promised land and they went through great hardship.
Relativism is a terminal disease that allows the people to forget truth and God. I don't know about
you, but I am getting a little nervous. God's truth says that he will not tolerate relativism.
) [Bob Tolz]
) Then why are there so many varying interpretations?
)
)
God knows how think skilled and stubborn we are. He really keeps it all fairly simple . The words
may be slightly different between NIV or king james or new am standard, but the meanings are the
same. There are no new interpretations. There are those who have more insight than others into the
significance of various passages. Bob, I will bet my last dollar you have never read it through cover
to cover. Can you show me a difference in meaning between translations? Are you questioning from the
knowledge of what you know and believe or what you do not know and choose to believe?
[From: Christian Czachary]
) A Side note: Nobody living has ever seen an animal which is called "The
) Original Manuscripts" of the Bible. so if somebody wants to hint against
) any translation error in the Bible, pointing to "the Original" he is
) knowingly misleading you.)
)
I guess you are right, but I know that when they found the dead sea scrolls in was it (1947) they
translated Isaiah and it translated word for word exactly like what was translated 2500 years
before. It surprised everyone because many thought it would show some glaring error.
Would anyone like to step up and show us the errors of God's word? Can you prove that it is flawed
and not the truth? I am no great bible scholar, but I have almost finished reading the Bible through
and I have come to trust that we can rely on it truth and authenticity whether we want to believe it
or not. Remember this, it takes a lot more faith to be an atheist than it does to believe the bible.
feel free to email me direct if you want to further discuss.
New Paul
)
)
)
--------------8592D4FF504C153EBC08E984
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en")
(html)
(blockquote TYPE=CITE)
(pre) [Bob Tolz]
One should never take someone's (or, in this case, something's)
proclamation that they're telling the truth as evidence that they're telling
the truth.(/pre)
(/blockquote)
With regards to Mr Tolz comments. I like my truth to be true whether
I or anyone else wants to believe it or not. This is the nature of
the truth of God's word. Throughout the middle prophets after the
time of King Solomon and before, the Birth of Christ, the people turned
from God and let relativism take over. They worshipped at pagan alters
and they pathetically forgot God's word (sound familiar?) God allowed
the hordes to tear down the walls of Jerusalem, he sent the people into
slavery in Babylon. The people lost the promised land and they went through
great hardship. Relativism is a terminal disease that allows the
people to forget truth and God. I don't know about you, but
I am getting a little nervous. God's truth says that he will not
tolerate relativism.
(br)
(blockquote TYPE=CITE)
(pre) [Bob Tolz]
Then why are there so many varying interpretations?
(/pre)
(/blockquote)
(p)(br)God knows how think skilled and stubborn we are. He really
keeps it all fairly simple . The words may be slightly different
between NIV or king james or new am standard, but the meanings are the
same. There are no new interpretations. There are those who
have more insight than others into the significance of various passages.
Bob, I will bet my last dollar you have never read it through cover to
cover. Can you show me a difference in meaning between translations?
Are you questioning from the knowledge of what you know and believe or
what you do not know and choose to believe?
(br)
(p)[From: Christian Czachary]
(blockquote TYPE=CITE)
(pre)A Side note: Nobody living has ever seen an animal which is called "The
Original Manuscripts" of the Bible. so if somebody wants to hint against
any translation error in the Bible, pointing to "the Original" he is
knowingly misleading you.)(/pre)
(/blockquote)
(p)(br)I guess you are right, but I know that when they found the dead
sea scrolls in was it (1947) they translated Isaiah and it
translated word for word exactly like what was translated 2500 years before.
It surprised everyone because many thought it would show some glaring error.
(p)Would anyone like to step up and show us the errors of God's word?
Can you prove that it is flawed and not the truth? I am no great
bible scholar, but I have almost finished reading the Bible through and
I have come to trust that we can rely on it truth and authenticity whether
we want to believe it or not. Remember this, it takes a lot more
faith to be an atheist than it does to believe the bible. feel free to
email me direct if you want to further discuss.
(p) New Paul
(blockquote TYPE=CITE)
(pre)
(/pre)
(/blockquote)
(br)
(br)
(br)
(blockquote TYPE=CITE) (/blockquote)
(/html)
--------------8592D4FF504C153EBC08E984--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.8 ---------------
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Is the Bible True?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 22:19:41 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909160222.TAA18401 lists1.best.com)
I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are indicative of the
sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
Alan Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 8:22 PM
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
) Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
) waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate
forum.
)
) -Dan Dugan
) Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 00:49:48 -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) - 9/16/99 12:19 AM )))
responds to Dan Dugan's:
)Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
)
)) Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
)) waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate
)forum.
by posting:
)I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
)objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are indicative of the
)sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
...And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of faiths of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of Anthroposophy and of Waldorf education. Best, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1448.10 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 01:03:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
[Alan Fine]
)
) I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
) objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are
) indicative of the
) sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
I almost agree with you Alan, though I would modify your statement
to say that the objections are indicative of the **perception** that some
have that anthroposophy is sectarian.
Bob Tolz
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1448 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1449 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry (Was: Re: Re: Re etc.)
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Ahriman et Aristotle
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Is the Bible True?
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
005 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
006 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: RE: Is the Bible True?
007 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Patti
008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Anon. comment
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - please post anon
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry (Was: Re: Re: Re etc.)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 02:36:13 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Funny, how I'd never heard of "Ahriman" before. Sounds spooky to me...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Ahriman et Aristotle
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 02:55:52 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I still say, a virtue is not a mean. It's all just terminology, though, so
who cares I guess. Just develop the virtue is probably best use of time.
Also "right and wrong," and "good and bad:" are matter of individual
perception, cultural values, etc... Feel they are mortal concepts, arising
from flesh and blood confined to finite earth.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 03:09:44 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 9/15/99 10:05:58 PM, you wrote:
(())) "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com) - 9/16/99 12:19 AM )))
responds to Dan Dugan's:
)Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
)
)) Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
)) waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate
)forum.
by posting:
)I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
)objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are indicative of the
)sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
...And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of faiths
of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of Anthroposophy and
of Waldorf education. Best, /MRx
))
We should probably refrain from discussing "sects" on-line... Patti Morey
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 03:14:07 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 9/15/99 10:09:37 PM, you wrote:
((Alan Fine]
)
) I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
) objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are
) indicative of the
) sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
))
That Lucifer Dance the teachers and staff did at one of their meetings tells
me it is definitely sectarian.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.5 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 09:20:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)Funny, how I'd never heard of "Ahriman" before. Sounds spooky to me...
Ahriman is defined in Zoroastrism:
Ahriman is the evil spirit who contends against Spenta Mainyu, also called
"Angri Mainyu".
The whole educational idea developed by Steiner is highly influenced by his
beliefs concerning the spiritual influences from Ahriman and Lucifers. this
is one of the main reasons, why I cannot distinguish between WE and
Anthroposophy.
In his texts, this is repeated very often: (Q's from The Balance in the
World and Man, Lucifer and Ahriman, (The World as Product of the Working of
Balance)" 1914)
"I have said repeatedly that the cultivation of Spiritual Science today is
not the outcome of any arbitrary desire, but is a necessity of evolution at
the present time. This feeling of separation from the physical body is an
experience that will arise in human beings more and more frequently in the
future, without being understood. A time will come when a great many people
will find themselves asking: "Why is it that I feel as if my being were
divided, as if a second being were standing by my side?" This feeling will
arise as naturally as hunger or thirst or other such experiences and it
must be understood by men of the present and future. It win become
intelligible when, through Spiritual Science, people begin to understand
what this experience of division within them really signifies.
In the domain of Education, particularly, attention will have to be paid to
it; (...) "
and about the Luciferic and Ahrimanic powers:
"It is particularly important in the present age for man to recognize this
co-operation between Luciferic and Ahrimanic powers; for only by such
recognition can he gradually learn to understand the forces that are at
work behind the external phantasmagoria of existence. We know very well
that we have no occasion either to hate Ahriman or to fear Lucifer, since
their powers are inimical only when they are working outside the realm
where they belong. We spoke on this subject at some length in Munich last
year** ); and we have also given indications in this direction in lectures
here in Dornach." (** The Secrets of the Threshold, by Rudolf
Steiner)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.6 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 09:22:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)That Lucifer Dance the teachers and staff did at one of their meetings tells
)me it is definitely sectarian.
Christian adds:
... and Luciferian as well.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.7 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Patti
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:35:32 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
((
This thing about Lucifer is a legitimate concern. It confirms for me
what I had always sensed all along. I don't understand how you can think to
say what I "KNOW," and I am also very concerned that you would suddenly wish
to defend Waldorf Education in these terms of Lucifer. ))
Patti--
You used the word "know" yourself...that's why I put it in quotes:
"I do know that Lucifer refers to star of morning, and feel there was
hyperinterpretation of Isaiah's passage so as to equate star of
morning/Lucifer with Satan. But fact is, people now regard "Lucifer" as
Satan, even in the dictionary."
When I read what you originally wrote it sounded as though you were saying
that you "know" that what the Waldorf folks were referring to as Lucifer was
really "star of morning," but that most people will immediately feel their
skin crawl when reading the quote and immediately interpret it (when posted
all over) to be a Satanic worship of some sort--thus scaring them away from
Waldorf.
If you were meaning something different from the way I read your message then
I am sorry. It just seemed that you were picking up something that could be
misinterpreted and suggesting to spread the word to further negative opinions
on the school.
I am not suddenly defending the "Waldorf Education in these terms of Lucifer"
as you were concerned. I do not even believe in Satan/Lucifer/Evil. All I was
saying was that I felt what you were proposing was unethical...to spread a
quote that you know will be misinterpreted to bring about negative
thoughts/actions.
I have my own concerns with the WE as I've stated before. I do not, however,
feel the mission of the school is to trick/deceive people.
--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.8 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 08:23:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909160042.RAA00615 lists1.best.com)
Hi Michael,
Like I said before. Let the Anthroposophist teachers convince their
Christian families who Lucifer really is _before_ enrolling their children
in Waldorf.
Deby
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/14/99 5:51 PM )))
)
)asks me:
)
))So how do you account for the quote?
)
)-- namely (I suppose) the quote in Eugene Schwartz's "Waldorf Teacher's
)Survival Guide," which reads:
)
)) "Most of that which contributes to our work as teachers, preparation
)) work, artistic work, even meditative work, is under the guardianship
)) of Lucifer. We can become great teachers under his supervision,
)) for he is responsible for much that has blossomed in the unfolding of
)) civilization and culture in the past."
)
)*******
)
)Hi, Deb! By restoring the rest of the passage, which continues:
)
)"However, if our goal is only to be a great teacher, if we look on
)everything else in the life of the school merely as a distraction from
)our pedagogical work, we are in danger of falling prey to Lucifer.
)
)"This is one of the reasons that Steiner wanted Waldorf teachers to assume
)responsibilities for the administrative life of the school. Answering
)phone calls, writing memos and letters, etc.--all those activities that
)compel us to meet the outside world on its own terms--bring us into
)connection with Ahriman, who holds the secret of the future.
)
)"If, every day, we can do some administrative/office work as well as carry
)out our classroom responsibilities, we can go a long way towards
)balancing the activities of Lucifer and Ahriman."
)
)...and while we're at it, another passage from the same book, reminiscent
)of newsgroups like, uh, some I've participated in:
)
)["Questioner" has just remarked, "...what I always find so difficult is
)what comes over people in meetings..."
)
)"'Answerer' (fictive Waldorf mentor) replies:] The phrase you used says it
)all--
)_'what comes over people.'_ We can sense
)that colleagues change profoundly in a meeting. Instead of human beings,
)we meet so many standpoints; instead of social movement, we experience
)entrenchment; instead of the metamorphosis and change that makes human
)life so fascinating, we encounter dull, deadly predictability. Indeed,
)what--or _who_--overcomes people in a meeting?
)
)"Just as Lucifer thrives on eccentricity, on whims, on
)rebelliousness, and all else that arises from the individuality asserting
)itself too strongly, so Ahriman encourages conventionality, rigidity, and
)above all, uniformity of opinion. Lucifer would like to rule our
)classrooms, but Ahriman is most interested in controlling the Board room.
)What we encounter in our meetings is all too often a group overcome by
)what Nietzsche called the 'will to power.'"
)
)...that's how. Best, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Anon. comment
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 08:27:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
))..And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of
faiths of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of
Anthroposophy and of Waldorf education. Best, /MRx((
Or it is indicative of the total disregard Anthroposophists have of
anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone else. After all, who
knows which faith/race/geographical location anyone will incarnate into in
their next lifetime?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1449.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 08:26:49 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[Alan Fine]
)
) I agree it is basically off topic, except in one way. The vociferous
) objections to Steiner from people of other faiths are
) indicative of the
) sectarian nature of Anthroposophy, and of Waldorf education.
[Tolz]
))I almost agree with you Alan, though I would modify your statement
to say that the objections are indicative of the **perception** that some
have that anthroposophy is sectarian.((
))We should probably refrain from discussing "sects" on-line... Patti
Morey((
"Sect" is commonly used in Europe instead of 'cult', which is used in the
US, Australia and New Zealand. It is a perfectly on-topic discussion on
this list.
Steiner himself was frustrated by this. In the quote below, he is using a
word that was translated as 'sect'. In discussion of Steiner's quote,
Geoffery Ahern [The Sun At MIdnight: The Rudolf Steiner Movement and the
Western Esoteric Tradition; Aquarian Press 1984; written with cooperation
from practicing Anthroposophists]
says: "Even Rudolf Steiner himself had once questioned 'the use of telling
people over and over again that we are not a cult when we behave as though
we were a cult.'[p96]
footnote [ibid;p 220]:
"I have substituted the word 'cult' for what was translated as 'sect'(with
its deviant Protestant connotations). Rudolf Steiner, 'The Anthroposophic
Movement' Lecture VI, Dornach 10-17 June 1923 (typescript available at
Rudolf Steiner House, London),p 173
It is amusing, in this context, that Anthroposophy has apologetics. They
mimic Christianity in the use of words of the prophet or the Messiah to
prove the truth of the revelation. Yet another counterfeit deception.
It is *not* simply *perception* that Anthroposophy is sectarian. Since the
aim is to provide an occultist school for future incarnations of the
children, the openess to any and all other beliefs is utilitarian. If, in
the bargain, the parents fall away from the practice of their original
faith, all the better. But Anthroposophy, as a group, does not care about
anyone's specific faith or spiritual practice in the here and now. After
all, they can fix that.
By their fruits shall you know them.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1449 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1450 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: please post anon
002 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - reply to MRx
003 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: please post anon
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: RE: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
005 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: please post anon
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: please post anon
008 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Patti
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: reply to MRx
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: please post anon
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 11:56:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
)
) ))We should probably refrain from discussing "sects"
) on-line... Patti
) Morey((
)
[Debra Snell]
) "Sect" is commonly used in Europe instead of 'cult', which is
) used in the
) US, Australia and New Zealand. It is a perfectly on-topic
) discussion on
) this list.
[Bob Tolz]
Debra, you missed the humor. Hint: We also shouldn't discuss
violins on-line.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.2 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: reply to MRx
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:31:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
posted by MRx:
)["Questioner" has just remarked, "...what I always find so difficult is
)what comes over people in meetings..."
posted anonymously:
What comes over people within the context of Anthroposophical gatherings,
in Anthroposophical terms of belief, is considered to be a false image,
generated by those present. It is considered to be a spiritual being,
brought into existence and fed by the combined worship & adoration of a
collectively self-created deception. It is, in Anthroposophical
terminology, called an *egregore*. It is, in esoteric belief, a parasite, a
*soul-eater*.
Patti Morey's intimations at her Waldorf school gatherings would seem to
have spiritual reality within Anthroposophy, by Anthroposophists.
No doubt, balance is sorely needed.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.3 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:17:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Debra wrote:
)Since the aim is to provide an occultist school for future
)incarnations of the children, the openess to any and all
)other beliefs is utilitarian.
This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that the aim
of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for future
incarnations of the children), then this would prove, that WE cannot be
distinct from Anthroposophy. Also this statement would explain, why
anthroposophics try to cover their intention to provide the spiritual food
for the Waldorf schools.
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:23:31 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It seems Steiner's writings have a suggestive nature.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.5 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Aunt Lucy & Uncle Harry
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:29:33 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree, Deby. And let them also inform parents of their Luciferian view on
individuality... Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:34:19 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thanks, Bob! :-) Your response was precious! Patti
Bob Tolz]
Debra, you missed the humor. Hint: We also shouldn't discuss
violins on-line.
Bob
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:32:22 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
When I said we should probably refrain from discussing "sects" on-line, I was
merely being witty (get it? - "sects" ? ;-) )
oops, ok, well - sorry! Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.8 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Patti
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:27:16 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Yes, dear Rikki, about all I DID "know" about Lucifer was that the name
referred to the morning star. I knew nothing, and still know very little,
about Lucifer as a personage other than Satan as regarded by Waldorf...
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: reply to MRx
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:36:31 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Mr. X, not sure I understand, but it sounds very intriguing.
Can you elaborate a bit? thanks! Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1450.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:16:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909161820.LAA23653 lists1.best.com)
)Debra wrote:
))Since the aim is to provide an occultist school for future
))incarnations of the children, the openess to any and all
))other beliefs is utilitarian.
)
)This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that the aim
)of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for future
)incarnations of the children), then this would prove, that WE cannot be
)distinct from Anthroposophy. Also this statement would explain, why
)anthroposophics try to cover their intention to provide the spiritual food
)for the Waldorf schools.
)
)Christian
This is a remarkable statement _because_ it is true. Anthroposophists
believe that you don't need to understand what you are doing (occult wet on
wet painting excersizes, Eurythmy, crossing hands over heart while reciting
blessings, etc. ad nauseam) for it to be effective.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1450 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1451 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: please post anon
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: RE: RE: Is the Bible True?
003 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: please post anon
004 - Neil Faiman (faiman zko.d - RE: please post anon
005 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - RE: please post anon
006 - NewPaul (dingman mindspri - reply to MRx
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - anon replies to Premo
008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - anon replies to Fairman
009 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: please post anon
010 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: please post anon
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:41:32 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
wow, this stuff is starting to blow my mind.
Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:48:08 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)That Lucifer Dance the teachers and staff did at one of their meetings tells
)me it is definitely sectarian.
Christian adds:
... and Luciferian as well.
Awesome observation. That Waldorf Luciferianism freaks me out royal.
Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.3 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 13:51:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
))This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that the aim
of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for future
incarnations of the children),((
)From our anonymous contributer:
To clarify:
the purpose of the WE is to provide the occult basis for initiatory
evolution/context in *future* reincarnations of the students AND to provide
a true occult education/context for the *presently re-incarnated initiates*
who may appear at any moment, who will then bring their pre-embodiement
choice of parents to a Waldorf school, and who 'need' True Waldorf. Because
the financial means of such chosen parents may, for many karmic reasons,
not be up to the tuition requirements of Waldorf, public, tax-financed
Waldorf is necessary.
WE is NOT about any sort of real education in the here and now, except
whatever it takes to evade the regulation of the state and assuage parental
doubt.
And, do not forget:
The late Dieter Br¸ll, in his chapter on starting a
new Waldorf school,
advises:
"We must impose two restrictions on ourselves as we
embark on this work.
The first one is to strictly exclude any thoughts,
even secondary ones,
about the legality of what we wish to do. Once we
know specifically what we
want, it will be easy to find a lawyer who can
translate this into
something that bears the 'stamp of approval.'
Anybody who wants to get
anywhere proceeds in this manner anyway. The second
restriction prohibits
any question regarding economic feasibility."
[Br¸ll, Dieter. The Waldorf School and Threefold
Structure: The
Embarrassing Mandate: The Risk of Being an
Anthroposophical Institution.
Trans. Thomas Forman & Trauger Groh. Fair Oaks, CA:
The Association of
Waldorf Schools of North America, 1997. pp. 11-12.]
Esoteric Rosicrucian proverb (15th century):
"He who hides well, lives well."
Puts all the lame explainations in a new light, does it not?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.4 ---------------
From: Neil Faiman (faiman zko.dec.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:54:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Deby Snell wrote
)Since the aim is to provide an occultist school for future
)incarnations of the children, the openess to any and all
)other beliefs is utilitarian.
and Christian Czachary replied
) This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that
) the aim
) of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for
) future
) incarnations of the children), then this would prove, that WE cannot
) be
) distinct from Anthroposophy. Also this statement would explain, why
) anthroposophics try to cover their intention to provide the spiritual
) food
) for the Waldorf schools.
It is all the more remarkable a statement because there are no grounds
for it.
I have read or perused hundreds, possibly thousands, of pages of
writings and lectures by Steiner about Waldorf Education, including
most of the mainstream works. So far, I haven't found *ANYTHING* to
suggest that "preparation for future incarnations" is a consideration
*at all* in Waldorf education.
Doubtless, buried somewhere in those thousands of pages, there are a
few sentences about the relation of current education to future
incarnation. Even if there are, the attempt to elevate them to the
*primary* concern of Waldorf Education must be a truly spectacular
illustration of the art of out-of-context quotation.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.5 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:43:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909162053.NAA25200 lists1.best.com)
On 16 Sep 99, at 13:51, Debra Snell wrote:
) )From our anonymous contributer:
)
) To clarify:
)
) the purpose of the WE is to provide the occult basis for initiatory
) evolution/context in *future* reincarnations of the students AND to
) provide a true occult education/context for the *presently
) re-incarnated initiates* who may appear at any moment, who will then
) bring their pre-embodiement choice of parents to a Waldorf school, and
) who 'need' True Waldorf. Because the financial means of such chosen
) parents may, for many karmic reasons, not be up to the tuition
) requirements of Waldorf, public, tax-financed Waldorf is necessary.
)
) WE is NOT about any sort of real education in the here and now, except
) whatever it takes to evade the regulation of the state and assuage
) parental doubt.
Unless I have some information as to this individual's source of
knowledge, and some hard facts to back up this remarkable statement,
I must disregard it completely. It is in complete opposition to the
attitudes I've encountered among Waldorf teachers, who are very much
concerned with "real education in the here and now."
The comment reads like propaganda, and for all I know, is motivated
by religious prejudice.
I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
reason to believe that it is true.
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.n1451.6 ---------------
From: NewPaul (dingman mindspring.com)
Subject: reply to MRx
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:55:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------99EE97B424CF638BBE127EAF"
References: (199909161916.MAA29475 lists1.best.com)
--------------99EE97B424CF638BBE127EAF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) From: Debra Snell
) Subject: reply to MRx
) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:31:10 +0100
) MIME-Version: 1.0
) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)
)
) posted by MRx:
) )["Questioner" has just remarked, "...what I always find so difficult is
) )what comes over people in meetings..."
)
) posted anonymously:
)
) What comes over people within the context of Anthroposophical gatherings,
) in Anthroposophical terms of belief, is considered to be a false image,
) generated by those present. It is considered to be a spiritual being,
) brought into existence and fed by the combined worship & adoration of a
) collectively self-created deception. It is, in Anthroposophical
) terminology, called an *egregore*. It is, in esoteric belief, a parasite, a
) *soul-eater*.
)
) Patti Morey's intimations at her Waldorf school gatherings would seem to
) have spiritual reality within Anthroposophy, by Anthroposophists.
)
)
Could someone please enlighten me about "what comes over people" at gatherings,
and what is "egregore" I am lost here. Could someone post some anthropososphy
lessons on the subject. I tried to read Rudolf Steiner once and I have never
seen an auther use so many words to say so little. The guy never came right to
the point. That is the nature of a decieved mind. It will not acknowledge
absolute truth. Carry on brothers and sisters, I await your spiritual
enlightenment with pregnant anticipation. Are the children as confused as I am?
"NewPaul"
)
--------------99EE97B424CF638BBE127EAF
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en")
(html)
(blockquote TYPE=CITE)
(pre)From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: reply to MRx
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:31:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
posted by MRx:
)["Questioner" has just remarked, "...what I always find so difficult is
)what comes over people in meetings..."
posted anonymously:
What comes over people within the context of Anthroposophical gatherings,
in Anthroposophical terms of belief, is considered to be a false image,
generated by those present. It is considered to be a spiritual being,
brought into existence and fed by the combined worship & adoration of a
collectively self-created deception. It is, in Anthroposophical
terminology, called an *egregore*. It is, in esoteric belief, a parasite, a
*soul-eater*.
Patti Morey's intimations at her Waldorf school gatherings would seem to
have spiritual reality within Anthroposophy, by Anthroposophists.
(/pre)
(/blockquote)
Could someone please enlighten me about "what comes over people"
at gatherings, and what is "egregore" I am lost here. Could someone
post some anthropososphy lessons on the subject. I tried to read
Rudolf Steiner once and I have never seen an auther use so many words to
say so little. The guy never came right to the point. That
is the nature of a decieved mind. It will not acknowledge absolute
truth. Carry on brothers and sisters, I await your spiritual enlightenment
with pregnant anticipation. Are the children as confused as I am?
(p)"NewPaul"
(br)
(blockquote TYPE=CITE) (/blockquote)
(/html)
--------------99EE97B424CF638BBE127EAF--
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.7 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 15:41:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
))I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
reason to believe that it is true.((
Since 1972, many academic, historical texts examing esotericism and
occultism have been written. Many researchers have approached other
occultists, such as Jung, Hahnemann, Swedenborg. Steiner did not invent
very much nor did he exist in a vacuum. It is not even essential that
Waldorf teachers are aware that they are deceived.
Bigotry is a convenient conclusion.
You may go back to sleep.
It is not important to convince any one specific person. Go to the library;
go to the bookstore. Surf. Read all you can on the dry, academic studies of
emanationism, of Rosicrucianism and put it together with all you can find
on Steiner and his various paths of Anthroposophy. Speak with the real
esoterics.
Join a study group for several years. Subscribe to Anthroposophical
publications. Join the Rosicrucians.
It is not essential for these conclusions to be proved in any court. But,
they are conclusions that are indicated from the weight of historical
research.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.8 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 15:39:38 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
))Doubtless, buried somewhere in those thousands of pages, there are a
few sentences about the relation of current education to future
incarnation. Even if there are, the attempt to elevate them to the
*primary* concern of Waldorf Education must be a truly spectacular
illustration of the art of out-of-context quotation.((
Occult means hidden. Some of these objectives must be concluded from those
thousands and thousands of pages, as well as the occaisional clear
statement. Just as clever denials are sprinkled through all occultic texts
to support charges of 'out of context' quoting, so some things are only
known from study groups, Branch meetings and other religious gatherings.
Steiner himself was accused of revealing occult secrets during his lifetime.
Academic researchers are not limited to just what is available in public
publications. Many archives of letters, diaries and other papers exist,
most in German. Not all members of all groups keep all secrets. Not all
researchers are blind materialists.
While much information may come from anecdotes, after centuries, enough
anecdote carries enough weight to form probable conclusions.
Don't you get tired of the obligation to defend Steiner, Waldorf and
Anthroposophy?
From: Neil Faiman (faiman zko.dec.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:54:36 -0400
BestServHost: lists.best.com
Sender: waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com
Reply-To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
Deby Snell wrote
)Since the aim is to provide an occultist school for future
)incarnations of the children, the openess to any and all
)other beliefs is utilitarian.
and Christian Czachary replied
) This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that
) the aim
) of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for
) future
) incarnations of the children), then this would prove, that WE cannot
) be
) distinct from Anthroposophy. Also this statement would explain, why
) anthroposophics try to cover their intention to provide the spiritual
) food
) for the Waldorf schools.
It is all the more remarkable a statement because there are no grounds
for it.
I have read or perused hundreds, possibly thousands, of pages of
writings and lectures by Steiner about Waldorf Education, including
most of the mainstream works. So far, I haven't found *ANYTHING* to
suggest that "preparation for future incarnations" is a consideration
*at all* in Waldorf education.
Doubtless, buried somewhere in those thousands of pages, there are a
few sentences about the relation of current education to future
incarnation. Even if there are, the attempt to elevate them to the
*primary* concern of Waldorf Education must be a truly spectacular
illustration of the art of out-of-context quotation.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.9 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:58:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) the purpose of the WE is to provide the occult basis for initiatory
)evolution/context in *future* reincarnations of the students AND to
provide
)a true occult education/context for the *presently re-incarnated
initiates*
)who may appear at any moment, who will then bring their pre-embodiement
)choice of parents to a Waldorf school, and who 'need' True Waldorf.
Because
)the financial means of such chosen parents may, for many karmic reasons,
)not be up to the tuition requirements of Waldorf, public, tax-financed
)Waldorf is necessary.
So, as I interpret it, WE is the foundation of Anthroposophy, not vice
versa! This makes things even worse. Every tax-dollar which goes into the
WE trashcan will then end up in unforeseen future somewhere on the desks of
Ahri and Luci.
Now, if you don't call that good fund-raising!
To me, this sounds very much like Nazi, they had very similar thoughts: for
example the cleansing of the race was for some reason necessary for the
evolution of the arian race, and if successfully done, they could then be
able to contact exterrestrials which would have helped Hitler and his gang
to win the war.
Guess where Hitler got this idea from: From Blavatsky, our well-known
Luciferian messenger!
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1451.10 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:39:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve Premo wrote:
)Unless I have some information as to this individual's source of
)knowledge, and some hard facts to back up this remarkable statement,
)I must disregard it completely. It is in complete opposition to the
)attitudes I've encountered among Waldorf teachers, who are very much
)concerned with "real education in the here and now."
)
)The comment reads like propaganda, and for all I know, is motivated
)by religious prejudice.
)
)I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
)anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
)of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
)of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
)basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
)which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
)
)I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
)in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
)reason to believe that it is true.
Christian Czachary writes:
I don't know which writings of Steiner made him making this statements, and
I would reject any of these interpretations as they are without source and
reason. However, from what I see in the writings of Steiner is, that this
statement is not untrue. Whether it is hundred-percent true I cannot say
from this perspective, because the style Steiner writes, and the way it is
interpreted by his followers, makes it difficult to say "Yes" or "No".
But the type of following statements point to the same direction as it
would match (at least partly) the abovementioned statement. I can imagine
that Steiner is not very clear in his expressions to someone who is not
used to read Steiner, but I want to emphasize statements like "In the
domain of Education (...) attention will have to be paid to it'' (which is
much more demanding in his mother-language than it sounds in english) and
"Our age will be followed by an age when duties will be more regarded than
rights, and this will be directly attributable to the influence of the
anthroposophical spiritual world-conception", which, in its entire context,
says a lot about his aims.
(following statements are taken from "THE BALANCE IN THE WORLD AND MAN,
LUCIFER AND AHRIMAN", Rudolf Steiner, 1914, Dornach.)
"You will see from this that there can be a relationship to the physical
body quite different from that to which we are accustomed in ordinary life.
This is a fact to which attention must be called by Spiritual Science and
it is an experience which will become more and more common in human beings
as evolution leads on into the future.
"I have said repeatedly that the cultivation of Spiritual Science today is
not the outcome of any arbitrary desire, but is a necessity of evolution at
the present time. This feeling of separation from the physical body is an
experience that will arise in human beings more and more frequently in the
future, without being understood. A time will come when a great many people
will find themselves asking: "Why is it that I feel as if my being were
divided, as if a second being were standing by my side?" This feeling will
arise as naturally as hunger or thirst or other such experiences and it
must be understood by men of the present and future. It win become
intelligible when, through Spiritual Science, people begin to understand
what this experience of division within them really signifies.
"In the domain of Education, particularly, attention will have to be paid
to it; indeed we shall all have to learn to pay more heed than hitherto to
certain experiences which will become increasingly common in children as
time goes on. It is true that in later life, when the whole impression made
by the physical world is very strong, these feelings and experiences will
not be particularly noticeable in the near future, but as time goes on they
will become more and more intense. They will occur, to begin with, in
children, and grown-up people will hear from children many things which in
the ordinary way are pooh-poohed but which will have to be understood
because they ate connected with deep secrets of evolution.
"We shall hear children saying: "I have seen a being who said this or that
to me, who told me what to do." -- The materialist, of course, will tell
such a child that this is all nonsense, that no such being exists. But
students of Spiritual Science will have to understand the significance of
the phenomenon. If a child says: "I saw someone who came to me, he went
away again but he keeps on coming and I cannot get rid of him'' -- then
anyone who understands Spiritual Science will realize that a phenomenon
which will appear in greater and greater definition as time goes on, is
here revealing itself in the life of the child. What does this really
signify?
"We shall understand it if we think of two fundamental and typical
experiences, the first of which was particularly significant in the Grec
o-Latin age, while the other is significant in our own time, when it is
beginning, gradually, to take shape. Whereas the first experience reached a
kind of culmination in the Greco-Latin epoch, we are slowly moving towards
the second.
"Experiences deriving from the influences of Lucifer and Ahriman are all
the time playing into human life. In this basic experience of man during
the Fourth Post-Atlantean or Greco-Roman epoch, Lucifer's influence was the
greater; in our own epoch, Ahriman is the predominant influence. Lucifer is
connected with all those experiences which, lacking the definition imparted
by the senses, remain undifferentiated and obscure."
(...)
("The basic tendency of our Fifth Post-Atlantean epoch is different. The
trend of evolution has been such that the ether-body has contracted and is
far less prone to diffusion or expansion. The ether-body, instead of being
too large, is too small, and this will become more marked as evolution
proceeds. If it can be said that in the man of ancient Greece, the
ether-body was too large, it can be said that in the man of modern times
the ether-body is compressed and contracted, has become too small. The more
human beings are led by materialism to disdain the Spiritual, the more will
the ether-body contract and wither.")
(...)
"Now we must not imagine that we are present in this interplay with our
full Ego. Our earthly Ego, the Ego that we have acquired in the course of
earth evolution, can only come to its full consciousness in the physical
body. Not until the time of Jupiter will the Ego be able to unfold itself
completely within the etheric body. In all that takes place within the
etheric body the real Ego of the human being has no immediate part. Had the
progress of world evolution gone on without the intervention of Luciferic
and Ahrimanic forces, then man would have been an altogether different
being. He would, for example, have been able to have perceptions in his
physical body, but he would not have been able to have thoughts. The
capacity to have thoughts he owes to the fact that Ahriman can acquire
influence over his etheric body. And he has impulses of will because
Luciferic forces can acquire influence over his etheric body. These forces
are therefore necessary for man, they must needs be present."
(...)
"Duty is the opposite idea of right. Our age will be followed by an age
when duties will be more regarded than rights, and this will be directly
attributable to the influence of the anthroposophical spiritual
world-conception. In the future -- certainly, in a rather distant future --
we shall have movements where less and less emphasis will be laid on the
demand for rights and people will inquire more and more as to their duty.
The question will rather be: What is our duty as man, as woman, e.g., in
this or that situation of life? The present epoch that demands rights will
be succeeded by an epoch that asks after duties."
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1451 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1452 --------------
001 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - From each according to his capacities...
002 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - Reply to Christian
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - What in Carnation is the problem (Was: Re: RE: please post
an
004 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: RE: please post anon
005 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Service with a smile (Was: Re: Reply to Christian)
006 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - waldorf
007 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Reply to Christian
008 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - egre-culture
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
010 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: anon replies to Premo
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.1 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: From each according to his capacities...
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:53:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:23 AM )))
writes:
)Hi Michael,
)Like I said before. Let the Anthroposophist teachers convince their
)Christian families who Lucifer really is _before_ enrolling their children
)in Waldorf.
Hi, Deby!
Anyone -- Christian parent or heathen celibate -- who wants to know what Anthroposophy has to say about the spiritual world will find a great deal of un-hidden information in its literature and its calendars of public events such as lectures, workshops and study courses at the various Branches of Anthroposophical Society, which has been a public society since 1923. The volume of material offered is ample enough to fill anyone's schedule for more than a few lifetimes.
The "daughter movements" of the Society -- such as anthroposophically extended therapeutics, the renewed arts, biodynamic agriculture, education -- appeal to many people who hold no interest in these movements' philosophical foundations. Parents of Waldorf pupils are often invited to explore Anthroposophy, whether in study groups held at school or in parents' or teachers' homes, or at the Anthroposophical Society. Like everyone else, they should at any time feel free to do so or not, as they choose.
The answers Anthroposophy offers about the riddles of existence may fail to satisfy a particular audience, but, unlike a Waldorf school, the Society's purpose IS to teach Anthroposophy to those who freely approach it for that purpose. When it remains true to its purpose, the Society does not missionarize, for the reason that the purpose of Anthroposophy is to recognize and promote the possibilities for human freedom, although its proponents are not always successful in that endeavor, as some of them may, if you listen carefully, be heard to admit. As the Statutes of the Society state, its purpose is not to convince anyone of anything. An interest in Anthroposophy cannot be grafted on from outside; it addresses only those individuals who experience "an elemental need, like hunger or thirst" for it.
Unlike a Waldorf school (though perfectly compatible with it), the Society exists precisely in order to tell anyone who asks, what Anthroposophy's account of )who Lucifer really is( is. If it fails to do so, please let me know.
Best, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.2 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: Reply to Christian
Date: 16 Sep 1999 20:56:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Christian
I think I understood the passage you quoted from Steiner (not that I agree with or believe it all). I have no idea what point you were trying to make. You are harder to understand than Steiner.
Didn't President Kennedy say "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Sounds like a statement of duties over rights to me. If there is something bad or malicious in this you are going to have to make a much more clear and concise argument against it.
From a religious/historical perspective, I think Jesus was someone who practiced placing duties before rights.
comment refers to post that begins:
)Christian Czachary writes:
)I don't know which writings of Steiner made him making this statements.....
FWIW. It's nice to now have some new kinds of fundis here to flesh out the extremes by which the means can be shown to be a virtuous place.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: What in Carnation is the problem (Was: Re: RE: please post
anon)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:02:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com) - 9/16/99 3:17 PM )))
writes that:
)Debra wrote:
))Since the aim is to provide an occultist
[MRx interjects:
Ever notice how Critics append Latin suffixes that add no meaning whatsoever to terms they dislike? "Occult" becomes "occultic"; "eurythmic" becomes "eurythmical"; "etheric" becomes "etherical"; "esoteric" becomes "esoterical." (Look at Dan's website if you think I'm making this up.) The abstractionistical suffixes add exactly _what_ to our thinking, Dear Friends?
Steiner: "The problem with modern man is that he believes his task in to criticize, whereas his task in fact is rather to characterize."
There, now I feel better.]
[Debra patiently resumes (Thank you, Debra!)]
)school for future
))incarnations of the children, the openness to any and all
))other beliefs is utilitarian.
and Christian adds that:
)This is a very remarkable statement. If this is true (meaning, that the aim
)of anthroposophy ["spiritual science"] is to provide a school for future
)incarnations of the children),
[MRx here:]
That is its taim in exactly in the same sense that "Waldorf Critics have been concerned over the past two decades to ingest sufficient quantities of Vitamin C for the _aim_ that they be well enough to celebrate New Year's Eve 2000."
If a person in New York today expects to arrive in Boston tonight, he will put food in his mouth today, but not with the _exclusive_ "aim" of brushing some of it out of his teeth _specifically_ in Boston tonight. Rather, he eats in order to be nourished; if he is in Boston tonight he will necessarily have to be a nourished person there; a byproduct of his eating will be that he have food between his teeth when he arrives in Boston; and a consequence of that, added to other conditions in his life, will prompt him to brush after he has arrived.
So if you think that how you live now will have an influence over how you and others live tomorrow, and if you think that tomorrow extends past your earthly death (Steiner's book Theosophy explains how he thinks this), you will do _everything_ you do bearing in mind its long-range consequence for everyone concerned.
As the old joke has it:
Q.: Why does a fireman wear red suspenders?
A. To keep his pants up.
Hence:
Q.: Why do anthroposophists do, well, anything?
A.: To better facilitate _everyone's_ next incarnations(s) on earth.
[Christian:]
)then this would prove, that WE cannot be
)distinct from Anthroposophy.
[MRx:]
Now that depends on what you mean by "distinct." (Am I a student of Tolz, or what?) A plant either can/cannot be said to be "distinct" from the soil, depending on what sense of "distinct" you mean. Anthroposophy is the foundation of Waldorf schooling. But just as, when you eat a tomato, or even a radish, it shouldn't taste like the earth, so a classroom lesson shouldn't "taste" like Anthroposophy, but should have, metamorphosed within it, the "wisdom concerning the human being" that the teacher has artistically/scientifically presented it in -- _as method_ (not as content). The purer the soil, the purer -- more distinct, if you will -- its bounty. On the other hand, in a larger sense, all food _should_ "taste" of the earth; when our friend CS. Lewis tried to imagine conveying the essence of our planet to an extraterrestrial, he called it "salty." So Waldorf schooling [imo] cannot be distinct from Anthroposophy -- but precisely in order that it be _entirely_ distinct, like a !
soil-nutrient taken up into the growing plant, like child "distinguished" from its mother, through the agency of the mother's Philosophy of Metamorphical Emancipation. *Whew!* Blame it on Floyd.)
[Christian:]
)Also this statement would explain, why
)anthroposophics try to cover their intention to provide the spiritual food
)for the Waldorf schools.
[MRx:]
I am an "anthroposophic" and I don't try to cover it. Someone just has to ask. And sometimes they don't even have to ask.
Occulticalistically, /M
PS: Do you know that my spell-checker turns "imo" into "imp"?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.4 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: RE: please post anon
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:25:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909162302.QAA17118 lists1.best.com)
)So, as I interpret it, WE is the foundation of Anthroposophy, not vice
)versa! This makes things even worse. Every tax-dollar which goes into the
)WE trashcan will then end up in unforeseen future somewhere on the desks of
)Ahri and Luci.
)Now, if you don't call that good fund-raising!
In Steiner's 'Conferences with Teachers of the Waldorf School in
Stuttgart, vol. 2 (published 1978), he says:
"You people who work at the Waldorf School must help to
support the whole movement ... the Waldorf School can put itself
on a broad basis and thus be a pillar for the whole Anthroposophical Movement."
A friend of mine was hired to work at the public Waldorf Charter school.
She was state certified, but not Waldorf trained. The opening words from
her Waldorf training were, "Your job is to spread Anthroposophy to the
world." Heavy words for a non-Anthroposophical teacher. She didn't last
long in that job. She left and took most of her class with her.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.5 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Service with a smile (Was: Re: Reply to Christian)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:44:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com) - 9/16/99 8:56 PM )))
writes to:
)Christian
)
)I think I understood the passage you quoted from Steiner (not that I agree with or believe it all). I have no
) idea what point you were trying to make. You are harder to understand than Steiner.
) Didn't President Kennedy say "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your
) country." Sounds like a statement of duties over rights to me. If there is something bad or malicious in this
) you are going to have to make a much more clear and concise argument against it.
) From a religious/historical perspective, I think Jesus was someone who practiced placing duties before ))) rights.
)
) comment refers to post that begins:
)
))Christian Czachary writes:
))I don't know which writings of Steiner made him making this statements.....
Sheer, sheer speculation (which my anthroposophical teacher would almost always have had me eschew), but if "Dienst" was the term translated as "duties," then "service" or "responsibility" might, in this context, be a more apt rendering for the contemporary ear. ("Service" is my Cassell's German & English Dictionary's first definition.) But maybe Steiner didn't say "Dienst." /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.6 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: waldorf
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:37:05 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hi,I'm new to this list. I recently took my son out of a Waldorf school with
many mixed feelings.I share the sentiments of others on this list, and
others I know who have also recently left our Waldorf school, in wishing we
could give our children the best parts of Waldorf and just get rid of a few
of the kookier things and a LOT of the rigidity and dogma.
Referring to the recent thread on ``can you have Waldorf without
anthroposophy,'' I think this goes beyond whether the teachers are
explicitly teaching Anthroposophy, or even trying to work in
anthroposophical concepts in disguised form (though some certainly are). I
worked as an aide in the kindergarten for two years in my son's school. Even
if you could take the explicit content of anthroposophy out of the teachers'
training, you'd be hard pressed to overcome their ONE TRUE WAY mentality.
Like the other parents in our school who became disillusioned, I had no
objections to any of their teaching methods, or really to any of the
curriculum or anything that went on in the classroom. The Waldorf
kindergartens are beautiful and nurturing and I really believe what they're
doing with the children is developmentally appropriate and wholesome. How
can you argue with the idea that it's good for small children to bake bread,
garden, listen to stories, play with wooden toys?
However, rigid mindsets can hamstring a teacher in many ways, not least of
all discipline. The problem with expecting things to go BY THE BOOK is that
they inevitably do not. A teacher can miss many opportunities for
interacting creatively with the children (for REACHING the children) if
she's hung up on the color of the cloth on the table (which of course has
some anthroposophical significance. . .), or just by insisting everyone have
their hands folded a certain way at a certain moment and the kids just can't
handle it. Even more serious is refusing to get to know the children as
individuals. They think the children should act a certain way, and the
children's world should BE a certain (Waldorf) way, and they end up not
being able to talk to the children about their lives, supposedly because you
shouldn't make small children self-conscious, or talk to small children
"scientifically" (which I came to see meant, you shouldn't answer childrens'
questions at all, if you can get away with it).
This leads into the discipline problems . . . children who are treated
condescendingly, who feel disregarded as people, and who can't live up to
the teacher's expectations, become angry, and many act out. In my
observation, a teacher who is not so rigid, who is able to toss out an idea
if it isn't working in a particular situation and substitute something
not-perfectly-Waldorf (while still doing mostly-Waldorf most-of-the-time),
has a happy classroom with the children productively engaged. The Waldorf
hard-liners just pretend everything is fine even if the class is totally out
of control.
As my son completed kindergarten year (and as I observed one dysfunctional
classroom after another), I came to feel that the hard line on late reading
ignores the individual differences between the children too, in favor of
absolutism about WHEN SHOULD CHILDREN READ (never mind the teeth thing . .
.)
Many of us who signed up our 3-year-olds for the preschool liked very much
that they wouldn't be drilled in numbers and letters or forced to fill in
worksheets . . . but when you're talking about 5- and 6-year-olds, I'm not
necessarily on board anymore. SOME children aren't ready and shouldn't be
forced (and my own falls in that group), but some are. Some of the older
children in the kindergartens I observed wanted desperately to be starting
to read, and I think were suffering from the lack of challenge. They had
just heard ``The Little Red Hen'' too many times already. Once in one of the
classes I worked in, a boy drawing a picture asked me how to spell a word
which he wanted to write on his picture, so I spelled it for him. The
teacher reprimanded me (in front of the child, ironically) for spelling the
word for him, because it was such a seriously damaging thing for him,
supposedly. He was supposed to somehow NOT EVEN KNOW that letters spell
words, and if I had just refused to spell the word, he could somehow have
his innocence restored to him. They make no distinction between forcing
small children to sit doing drills or copying letters when they would rather
be running around (and developmentally NEED to be running around), versus
simply responding honestly and simply to a child's interests. The children
were discouraged from even writing their names on their pictures. (The
teachers were supposed to put their names on their pictures for them, but
very DISCREETLY, hopefully when the child wasn't watching, as if we could
hide from them the very fact that adults read and write, or avoid making
them conscious that they even existed as individuals with names.)
I could go on and probably will! Thanks, everyone, for letting me "get this
off my chest."
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.7 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Reply to Christian
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:54:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)I think I understood the passage you quoted from Steiner (not that I agree
with or
)believe it all). I have no idea what point you were trying to make. You
are harder
)to understand than Steiner.
) Didn't President Kennedy say "Ask not what your country can do for you,
but
)what you can do for your country." Sounds like a statement of duties over
rights
)to me. If there is something bad or malicious in this you are going to
have to
)make a much more clear and concise argument against it.
) From a religious/historical perspective, I think Jesus was someone who
practiced
)placing duties before rights.
Luke,
(Thanks, your flattering. I always wanted to be like Him :-)
I will try to make it more clear by quoting the text-parts to which I
replied:
Debra posted this message ("From our anonymous contributer:)
) the purpose of the WE is to provide the occult basis for initiatory
) evolution/context in *future* reincarnations of the students AND to
) provide a true occult education/context for the *presently
) re-incarnated initiates* who may appear at any moment, who will then
) bring their pre-embodiement choice of parents to a Waldorf school, and
) who 'need' True Waldorf. Because the financial means of such chosen
) parents may, for many karmic reasons, not be up to the tuition
) requirements of Waldorf, public, tax-financed Waldorf is necessary.
Onto which Steve Premo replied:
)Unless I have some information as to this individual's source of
)knowledge, and some hard facts to back up this remarkable statement,
)I must disregard it completely. It is in complete opposition to the
)attitudes I've encountered among Waldorf teachers, who are very much
)concerned with "real education in the here and now."
In general, I agreed with Steve insofar, that the text above is not
verified, so we cannot take it as true.
("I would reject any of these interpretations as they are without source
and
reason.")
However, I cannot reject these interpretations fully (as Steve does),
because some of Steiner's texts could be interpreted in such way, that the
abovementioned statement would be -at least partly- true.
To clarify the aim of my comment, I emphasized on two sentences which were
part of the quotations of Steiner.
The first one ("In the domain of Education (...) attention will have to be
paid to it'' should clarify, that Steiner had Education in mind, thus he
had not only philosophical reasons for his lecture.
The second part ("Our age will be followed by an age when duties will be
more regarded than
rights, and this will be directly attributable to the influence of the
anthroposophical spiritual world-conception") was quoted separately to
emphasize Steiner's belief, that the anthroposophical spiritual
world-conception would play a main role in the 'future age'. Putting it all
together would bring up to the point, that some anthropops may have very
well the future (age) in mind, while believing to work on the very
foundations of the souls which then will incarnate in this age.
If a teacher really would believe this, it is possible that he would abuse
his profession in order to please his belief. Howeve, he would not admit
this.
Note, that Steve 'disregarded "it" completely', to which I resond "not
completely, partly, partly!"
Sincerely
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.8 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: egre-culture
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:56:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) NewPaul (dingman mindspring.com) - 9/16/99 5:55 PM )))
writes:
[snip]
) )posted anonymously:
))
))What comes over people within the context of Anthroposophical gatherings,
))in Anthroposophical terms of belief, is considered to be a false image,
))generated by those present. It is considered to be a spiritual being,
)) brought into existence and fed by the combined worship & adoration of a
)) collectively self-created deception. It is, in Anthroposophical
)) terminology, called an *egregore*. It is, in esoteric belief, a parasite, a
))*soul-eater*.
))[snip]
and NewPaul asks:
)Could someone please enlighten me about [snip] what is "egregore" I am lost here. Could someone
)post some anthropososphy
)lessons on the subject.
[snip]
)Are the children as confused as I am?
This one is. Debra, please do NewPaul and me a favor, and find out from anon what "egregore" is. Thanks so much. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 22:13:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:27 AM )))
responds to my:
)))..And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of
)faiths of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of
)Anthroposophy and of Waldorf education.((
by suggesting:
)Or it is indicative of the total disregard Anthroposophists have of
)anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone else.
Hi, Debra.
Would you be kind enough to help me envision what anyone's )total disregard( )of anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone else.( looks like? I'm at a loss here. Thanks.
) After all, who
)knows which faith/race/geographical location anyone will incarnate into in
)their next lifetime?
(I didn't get that part either.) Regards, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1452.10 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 22:23:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) [Steve Premo]
) ))I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
) in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
) reason to believe that it is true.((
I concur with brother Premo.
[Debra Snell]
)
) Since 1972, many academic, historical texts examing esotericism and
) occultism have been written. Many researchers have approached other
) occultists, such as Jung, Hahnemann, Swedenborg. Steiner did
) not invent
) very much nor did he exist in a vacuum. It is not even essential that
) Waldorf teachers are aware that they are deceived.
....snip remainder...
Debra, there is nothing that you said in your post that offers any
support for the baseless conclusions proferred by your anonymous
contributor.
Bob Tolz
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1452 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1453 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: anon replies to Fairman
002 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: anon replies to Premo
003 - "Brian & Christine Maxwel - Re: waldorf
004 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: anon replies to Premo
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
006 - Christian Czachary (chris - =?us-ascii?Q?RE=3A_What_in_Carnation_is_the_problem_=28Was=3A_
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Unmanifest destiny (Was: Re: RE: please post anon)
008 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Service with a smile (Was: Re: Reply to Christian)
009 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: waldorf
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 22:25:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Debra Snell to Neil Faiman]
)
) Don't you get tired of the obligation to defend Steiner, Waldorf and
) Anthroposophy?
)
Debra, don't you ever get tired of your messianic mission to save
the world from anthroposophy?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.2 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:23:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909162242.PAA04084 lists1.best.com)
On 16 Sep 99,, Debra Snell wrote:
) ))I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
) in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
) reason to believe that it is true.((
)
) Since 1972, many academic, historical texts examing esotericism and
) occultism have been written. Many researchers have approached other
) occultists, such as Jung, Hahnemann, Swedenborg. Steiner did not
) invent very much nor did he exist in a vacuum. It is not even
) essential that Waldorf teachers are aware that they are deceived.
)
) Bigotry is a convenient conclusion.
) You may go back to sleep.
)
) It is not important to convince any one specific person. Go to the
) library; go to the bookstore. Surf. Read all you can on the dry,
) academic studies of emanationism, of Rosicrucianism and put it
) together with all you can find on Steiner and his various paths of
) Anthroposophy. Speak with the real esoterics. Join a study group for
) several years. Subscribe to Anthroposophical publications. Join the
) Rosicrucians.
)
) It is not essential for these conclusions to be proved in any court.
) But, they are conclusions that are indicated from the weight of
) historical research.
That's factual support?
Back to sleep, indeed.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.3 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine Maxwell" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:47:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com)
Thanks for sharing your experiences, Diana. It helped me understand a
little better what a Waldorf school is like.
Christine
----- Original Message -----
From: Diana Winters (winters_diana hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 6:37 PM
Subject: waldorf
)
) Hi,I'm new to this list. I recently took my son out of a Waldorf school
with
) many mixed feelings.I share the sentiments of others on this list, and
) others I know who have also recently left our Waldorf school, in wishing
we
) could give our children the best parts of Waldorf and just get rid of a
few
) of the kookier things and a LOT of the rigidity and dogma.
)
) Referring to the recent thread on ``can you have Waldorf without
) anthroposophy,'' I think this goes beyond whether the teachers are
) explicitly teaching Anthroposophy, or even trying to work in
) anthroposophical concepts in disguised form (though some certainly are). I
) worked as an aide in the kindergarten for two years in my son's school.
Even
) if you could take the explicit content of anthroposophy out of the
teachers'
) training, you'd be hard pressed to overcome their ONE TRUE WAY mentality.
)
) Like the other parents in our school who became disillusioned, I had no
) objections to any of their teaching methods, or really to any of the
) curriculum or anything that went on in the classroom. The Waldorf
) kindergartens are beautiful and nurturing and I really believe what
they're
) doing with the children is developmentally appropriate and wholesome. How
) can you argue with the idea that it's good for small children to bake
bread,
) garden, listen to stories, play with wooden toys?
)
) However, rigid mindsets can hamstring a teacher in many ways, not least of
) all discipline. The problem with expecting things to go BY THE BOOK is
that
) they inevitably do not. A teacher can miss many opportunities for
) interacting creatively with the children (for REACHING the children) if
) she's hung up on the color of the cloth on the table (which of course has
) some anthroposophical significance. . .), or just by insisting everyone
have
) their hands folded a certain way at a certain moment and the kids just
can't
) handle it. Even more serious is refusing to get to know the children as
) individuals. They think the children should act a certain way, and the
) children's world should BE a certain (Waldorf) way, and they end up not
) being able to talk to the children about their lives, supposedly because
you
) shouldn't make small children self-conscious, or talk to small children
) "scientifically" (which I came to see meant, you shouldn't answer
childrens'
) questions at all, if you can get away with it).
)
) This leads into the discipline problems . . . children who are treated
) condescendingly, who feel disregarded as people, and who can't live up to
) the teacher's expectations, become angry, and many act out. In my
) observation, a teacher who is not so rigid, who is able to toss out an
idea
) if it isn't working in a particular situation and substitute something
) not-perfectly-Waldorf (while still doing mostly-Waldorf most-of-the-time),
) has a happy classroom with the children productively engaged. The Waldorf
) hard-liners just pretend everything is fine even if the class is totally
out
) of control.
)
) As my son completed kindergarten year (and as I observed one dysfunctional
) classroom after another), I came to feel that the hard line on late
reading
) ignores the individual differences between the children too, in favor of
) absolutism about WHEN SHOULD CHILDREN READ (never mind the teeth thing . .
) .)
)
) Many of us who signed up our 3-year-olds for the preschool liked very much
) that they wouldn't be drilled in numbers and letters or forced to fill in
) worksheets . . . but when you're talking about 5- and 6-year-olds, I'm not
) necessarily on board anymore. SOME children aren't ready and shouldn't be
) forced (and my own falls in that group), but some are. Some of the older
) children in the kindergartens I observed wanted desperately to be starting
) to read, and I think were suffering from the lack of challenge. They had
) just heard ``The Little Red Hen'' too many times already. Once in one of
the
) classes I worked in, a boy drawing a picture asked me how to spell a word
) which he wanted to write on his picture, so I spelled it for him. The
) teacher reprimanded me (in front of the child, ironically) for spelling
the
) word for him, because it was such a seriously damaging thing for him,
) supposedly. He was supposed to somehow NOT EVEN KNOW that letters spell
) words, and if I had just refused to spell the word, he could somehow have
) his innocence restored to him. They make no distinction between forcing
) small children to sit doing drills or copying letters when they would
rather
) be running around (and developmentally NEED to be running around), versus
) simply responding honestly and simply to a child's interests. The children
) were discouraged from even writing their names on their pictures. (The
) teachers were supposed to put their names on their pictures for them, but
) very DISCREETLY, hopefully when the child wasn't watching, as if we could
) hide from them the very fact that adults read and write, or avoid making
) them conscious that they even existed as individuals with names.)
)
) I could go on and probably will! Thanks, everyone, for letting me "get
this
) off my chest."
)
) ______________________________________________________
) Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.4 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:49:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170218.TAA12106 lists1.best.com)
Again, I didn't write this post. Sorry I didn't make it clear enough.
-ds
)) [Steve Premo]
)) ))I don't know whether this person is motivated by bigotry or not, but
)) in the absence of some factual support for the statement, I have no
)) reason to believe that it is true.((
)
) I concur with brother Premo.
)
)[Debra Snell]
))
)) Since 1972, many academic, historical texts examing esotericism and
)) occultism have been written. Many researchers have approached other
)) occultists, such as Jung, Hahnemann, Swedenborg. Steiner did
)) not invent
)) very much nor did he exist in a vacuum. It is not even essential that
)) Waldorf teachers are aware that they are deceived.
)
)
)....snip remainder...
)
) Debra, there is nothing that you said in your post that offers any
)support for the baseless conclusions proferred by your anonymous
)contributor.
)
) Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:47:58 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170218.TAA12061 lists1.best.com)
Hi Michael,
I am not the author of this post. I was asked to post it anonymously by a
lurker on the list. Sorry that I didn't make it clearer...
-ds
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:27 AM )))
)
)responds to my:
)
))))..And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of
))faiths of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of
))Anthroposophy and of Waldorf education.((
)
)by suggesting:
)
))Or it is indicative of the total disregard Anthroposophists have of
))anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone else.
)
)
)Hi, Debra.
)
)Would you be kind enough to help me envision what anyone's )total
)disregard( )of anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone
)else.( looks like? I'm at a loss here. Thanks.
)
)) After all, who
))knows which faith/race/geographical location anyone will incarnate into in
))their next lifetime?
)
)(I didn't get that part either.) Regards, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.6 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: =?us-ascii?Q?RE=3A_What_in_Carnation_is_the_problem_=28Was=3A_?=
=?us-ascii?Q?Re=3A_RE=3A_please_post=09anon=29?=
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 22:54:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
))So if you think that how you live now will have an influence over how you
and others live tomorrow, and if you think that tomorrow )extends past your
earthly death (Steiner's book Theosophy explains how he thinks this), you
will do _everything_ you do bearing in )mind its long-range consequence for
everyone concerned.(Michael Ronall))
Yes, there was an article in Luci's Trust. It was very distinct.
In the "Rudolf Steiner Schule" in Nuremberg (Germany), you don't find the
word "Theosophy" mentioned. In the general Schoolinformation you don't find
even the word "Anthroposophy" mentioned.
I was there to find out whether this school might be a good choice for my
daughter, and in these days I liked it a lot. (That's past.)
They gave us a few hours to learn about "Waldorf Paedagogik", and all this
stuff. I didn't hear the word anthroposophy either.
Maybe I missed something, but I don't think so, because they emphasized a
lot, that it is important to repeat everything in certain rhythms. So they
would have repeated "Anthroposophie" in certain rhythms - at least. But
they did not.
I wonder why.
But one thing I remember: "It is like television" I thought, because of all
these repetitions, you know.
Sincerly
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Unmanifest destiny (Was: Re: RE: please post anon)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:01:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 8:51 AM )))
conveys an
)Esoteric Rosicrucian proverb (15th century):
)
)"He who hides well, lives well."
...from her anonymous contributor, who ought to know. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.8 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Service with a smile (Was: Re: Reply to Christian)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:05:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Michael Ronell speculated:
))Sheer, sheer speculation (which my anthroposophical teacher would almost
always have had me eschew), but if "Dienst" was the term translated as
"duties," then "service" or "responsibility" might, in this context, be a
more apt rendering for the contemporary ear.("Service" is my Cassell's
German & English Dictionary's first definition.) But maybe Steiner didn't
say "Dienst." /MRx))
Christian would say to "Dienst"
"Dienst" is used in Steiner days as what we nowadays use to entitle
"Verpflichtung", which could be well translated in nowadays english as
"Duty". "Dienst" is used more often in connection with "Dienstleistung",
for which "Service" is the proper translation. (Highly evoloved, I would
say.)
"Dienst" alone stresses more on the compelling of the task. If a person has
"Dienst", this means a doctor for example is "Im Dienst", then he is "in
duty" (or "on Duty"? at least not "off duty".
However, I don't know the German text of this lecture.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.9 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:11:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 2:47 PM )))
writes:
)Hi Michael,
)I am not the author of this post. I was asked to post it anonymously by a
)lurker on the list. Sorry that I didn't make it clearer...
Goodness. I'm getting the bends. Not only is _reading_ Steiner's work easier than this; _writing_ it must have been, too! Had I known that what appears below wasn't from you, I wouldn't have bothered to ask. Is automatic writing really worth confusing your good reputation here? Now I have to erase _everything_ I've attributed to your authorship this evening, because I don't know what's what anymore. Where's that brandy you were passing around? /M
-ds
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:27 AM )))
)
)responds to my:
)
))))..And the tolerant acceptance by (at least some) anthroposophists of
))faiths of other people is indicative of the nonsectraian nature of
))Anthroposophy and of Waldorf education.((
)
)by suggesting:
)
))Or it is indicative of the total disregard Anthroposophists have of
))anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone else.
)
)
)Hi, Debra.
)
)Would you be kind enough to help me envision what anyone's )total
)disregard( )of anything that occurs in the present lifetime of anyone
)else.( looks like? I'm at a loss here. Thanks.
)
)) After all, who
))knows which faith/race/geographical location anyone will incarnate into in
))their next lifetime?
)
)(I didn't get that part either.) Regards, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1453.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 20:15:12 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com)
)Hi,I'm new to this list. I recently took my son out of a Waldorf school with
)many mixed feelings.I share the sentiments of others on this list, and
)others I know who have also recently left our Waldorf school, in wishing we
)could give our children the best parts of Waldorf and just get rid of a few
)of the kookier things and a LOT of the rigidity and dogma.
)
Gosh, as I was reading your post, I swear our kids went to the very same
Waldorf school. You described the classroom environment well. I visualized
my son's kindergarten teacher, preoccupied and ignoring the out of control
class. My own son was intimidated by the "angry and mean boys and girls".
He would climb under the table for respite from the chaos. The teacher
thought it was _Max_ who had the problem. One day she wrapped him in silks
while singing and avoiding eye contact with him. This was "a healing". Max
said, "Get me out of this school." I did, but placed him in another
Waldorf kindergarten. Some of us Mom's are slow learners. At the time, I
thought it was just _that_ teacher.
Thanks for sharing.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1453 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1454 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: anon replies to Premo
002 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: waldorf
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Unmanifest destiny (Was: Re: RE: please post anon)
004 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - RE: anon replies to Fairman
005 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: waldorf
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Max's new blessing
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
008 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: anon replies to Premo
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: waldorf
010 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:28:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
)
) Again, I didn't write this post. Sorry I didn't make it clear enough.
) -ds
[Bob Tolz]
Ah, I see you tried to convey in your subject header that it was
"anon" speaking and not you. I didn't think it sounded like you. You
usually make a lot more sense than your anonymous contributor. I guess in
the future you ought to state the source in the body of the message, rather
than mentioning it solely in your subject line.
Given the foregoing, I modify the following statement I made in my
recent post:
) )
) ) Debra, there is nothing that you said in your post that
) offers any
) )support for the baseless conclusions proferred by your anonymous
) )contributor.
) )
) ) Bob Tolz
Change it to: There is nothing which Debra's anonymous contributor
offered in his reply to Steve Premo which offers any support for his/her
prior baseless conclusions.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.2 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: waldorf
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:22:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Diana,
Thank you for posting your experiences. I understand now better how WE
works in practice.
My child also goes to Waldorf school, (some years ago I even wanted her in
Waldorf Kindergarten), but I don't have first hand knowledge of her school,
because she lives a few thousand miles away from here (in Germany).
I changed my mind about Waldorf in the meanwhile, but her mother didn't.
What I would like to know is, how did all the other parents in your
Kindergarten react? Were they anthroposophics, mainly, or did they just
take the authority of the school as a burden? What did they do at home,
when children asked to read or write?
I can't believe, that Waldorf parents find everything good what is going on
in the schools.
Sincerely,
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.3 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Unmanifest destiny (Was: Re: RE: please post anon)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:29:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
)
) ))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 8:51 AM )))
)
) conveys an
)
) )Esoteric Rosicrucian proverb (15th century):
) )
) )"He who hides well, lives well."
)
) ...from her anonymous contributor, who ought to know. /MRx
)
(snicker)
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.4 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:51:13 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170222.TAA15638 lists1.best.com)
) Debra, don't you ever get tired of your messianic mission to save
)the world from anthroposophy?
) Bob Tolz
Nor did I write the above statement. Trying to figure out a better method
for posting anon's comments.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.5 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:49:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:15 PM )))
writes, in response to:
))Hi,I'm new to this list. I recently took my son out of a Waldorf school with
))many mixed feelings.I share the sentiments of others on this list, and
))others I know who have also recently left our Waldorf school, in wishing we
))could give our children the best parts of Waldorf and just get rid of a few
))of the kookier things and a LOT of the rigidity and dogma.
))
)Gosh, as I was reading your post, I swear our kids went to the very same
)Waldorf school. You described the classroom environment well. I visualized
)my son's kindergarten teacher, preoccupied and ignoring the out of control
)class. My own son was intimidated by the "angry and mean boys and girls".
)He would climb under the table for respite from the chaos. The teacher
)thought it was _Max_ who had the problem. One day she wrapped him in silks
)while singing and avoiding eye contact with him. This was "a healing". Max
)said, "Get me out of this school." I did, but placed him in another
)Waldorf kindergarten. Some of us Mom's are slow learners. At the time, I
)thought it was just _that_ teacher.
Now THAT'S the voice we know and love. /M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Max's new blessing
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:09:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
When Max transferred to public school [from Waldorf] in mid-second grade,
he thought I had placed him in a school for gifted children. He was sure
that he was not gifted, and worried about his performance. He was truly
behind, scoring 0.0 on a reading comprehension test. (With the help of
special reading program, a tutor, and his dogged determination, Max was
reading at 3rd grade, 4th month level by the end of the year.)
I picked Max up after his third day of school. We are chatting during the
ride home and he says, "We have a different blessing at my new school."
Surprised, I asked what his new blessing was. He said, "I haven't memorized
it all yet, but it starts out 'I pledge allegince to the flag...'"
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.7 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: I must have overlooked something (Was: Re: Anon. comment)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 22:05:53 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170316.UAA21278 lists1.best.com)
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 2:47 PM )))
)
)writes:
)
))Hi Michael,
))I am not the author of this post. I was asked to post it anonymously by a
))lurker on the list. Sorry that I didn't make it clearer...
)
)Goodness. I'm getting the bends. Not only is _reading_ Steiner's work
)easier than this; _writing_ it must have been, too! Had I known that what
)appears below wasn't from you, I wouldn't have bothered to ask. Is
)automatic writing really worth confusing your good reputation here? Now I
)have to erase _everything_ I've attributed to your authorship this
)evening, because I don't know what's what anymore. Where's that brandy you
)were passing around? /M
Yes, Dan is far better at clarifying these things. I can see how you
thought I was the author.
Sorry, the Brandy is gone.
-ds
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.8 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: anon replies to Premo
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:59:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM) - 9/16/99 11:28 PM )))
writes:
)
) Again, I didn't write this post. Sorry I didn't make it clear enough.
) -ds
[Bob Tolz]
Ah, I see you tried to convey in your subject header that it was
"anon" speaking and not you. I didn't think it sounded like you. You
usually make a lot more sense than your anonymous contributor. I guess in
the future you ought to state the source in the body of the message, rather
than mentioning it solely in your subject line.
Given the foregoing, I modify the following statement I made in my
recent post:
) )
) ) Debra, there is nothing that you said in your post that
) offers any
) )support for the baseless conclusions proferred by your anonymous
) )contributor.
) )
) ) Bob Tolz
Change it to: There is nothing which Debra's anonymous contributor
offered in his reply to Steve Premo which offers any support for his/her
prior baseless conclusions.
Bob Tolz
*****
How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I mean -- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too fast] cited? /M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 00:16:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170354.UAA14347 lists1.best.com)
)))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 3:15 PM )))
))Gosh, as I was reading your post, I swear our kids went to the very same
))Waldorf school. You described the classroom environment well. I visualized
))my son's kindergarten teacher, preoccupied and ignoring the out of control
))class. My own son was intimidated by the "angry and mean boys and girls".
))He would climb under the table for respite from the chaos. The teacher
))thought it was _Max_ who had the problem. One day she wrapped him in silks
))while singing and avoiding eye contact with him. This was "a healing". Max
))said, "Get me out of this school." I did, but placed him in another
))Waldorf kindergarten. Some of us Mom's are slow learners. At the time, I
))thought it was just _that_ teacher.
)
)
)Now THAT'S the voice we know and love. /M
Oh Michael, you _know_ how to touch those zones...
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1454.10 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 03:04:26 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Whoa, I have often wondered about Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis, Jews,
during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically about this matter?
Wonder if there had been any Jewish children at first Waldorf school. Patti
M.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1454 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1455 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: anon replies to Premo
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: anon replies to Fairman
003 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Is the Bible True?
004 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: anon replies to Fairman
005 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
006 - paul c (ptc712 yahoo.com) - Steiner and Nazis
007 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
008 - GypsyArdor aol.com - unmanifest destiny
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Hostility and bigotry
010 - GypsyArdor aol.com - humor
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: anon replies to Premo
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 03:08:56 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am fascinated by this statement - "It is not even essential that Waldorf
teachers are aware that they are deceived." Do you mean, like, at first and
maybe for a long while, teachers are not quite wholly aware that they are
devil-worshippers being trained to devour souls? Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 03:11:18 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re: "While much information may come from anecdotes, after centuries, enough
anecdote carries enough weight to form probable conclusions." Feel this is
brilliant and right on. Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.3 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Is the Bible True?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:55:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I know this is off-topic, but it shows how important it is to check
sources.
)) Paul wrote about the dead sea scrolls:
I guess you are right, but I know that when they found the dead sea scrolls
in was it (1947) they
translated Isaiah and it translated word for word exactly like what was
translated 2500 years
before. It surprised everyone because many thought it would show some
glaring error.))
When you say "... was translated 2500 year before", do you refer to the LXX
?? They don't exist brother, and never, ever, any man or woman, that is
living to-day, has ever seen anything which comes near to anything which
can be called "... translated 2500 year before," nor could prove that a
greek translation of Isaiah 2500 years before even existed.
After 40 years of studying the dead sea scrolls, we can see, what modern
bible scholarship has given us:
nothing.
P.S. After all, 'they' proved with the dead sea scrolls (and with a big
horse laugh), that _our_ bible is NOT correct, and that _they_ know the
truth alone, and that _you_ have to pay them a lot of money, because they
are so *smart*. And this was the only thing they wanted to prove.
Don't believe them _one_ word, brother.
kind regards
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.4 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:15:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909170712.AAA01822 lists1.best.com)
On 17 Sep 99, at 3:11, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) Re: "While much information may come from anecdotes, after centuries,
) enough anecdote carries enough weight to form probable conclusions."
) Feel this is brilliant and right on. Sincerely, Patti
For centuries Christians in Europe told anecdotes about Jews killing
and eating Christian babies. Christians felt that those anecdotes
had been repeated enough to form the probable conclusion that they
were true. As a result, synagogues were burned, and Jews were
persecuted.
Repeating the same lies for centuries didn't make them any more true.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.5 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:24:52 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909170706.AAA28738 lists1.best.com)
On 17 Sep 99, at 3:04, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) Whoa, I have often wondered about Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis,
) Jews, during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically about this
) matter? Wonder if there had been any Jewish children at first Waldorf
) school. Patti M.
Steiner died before WWII.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.6 ---------------
From: paul c (ptc712 yahoo.com)
Subject: Steiner and Nazis
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Patti M. wrote: "Whoa, I have often wondered about
Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis,Jews,
during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically
about this matter?"
Considering that Steiner died in 1925, probably not
much.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.7 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:34:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
))On 17 Sep 99, at 3:04, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) Whoa, I have often wondered about Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis,
) Jews, during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically about this
) matter? Wonder if there had been any Jewish children at first Waldorf
) school. Patti M.
Steiner died before WWII.(( Steve Premo))
To be evaluated in this context:
'One of Rudolf Steiner's lecture tours, May 6 through May 18, 1915, took
him to Vienna, Prague and Linz. In all three cities he stressed that the
Christ figure in the sculptured group would have to be portrayed as a being
in equipoise between the polar forces of Lucifer and Ahriman and that this
being was symbol of, and model for, man's own existence here on earth. The
Linz lecture, which is here translated, presents the group in a
world-historical context and relates the significance of the
Lucifer-Christ-Ahriman configuration to the events surrounding World War I.
Steiner sees a parallel between Christ's central, but equalizing position
and Central Europe's mission in World War I. He implies that Germany's and
Austria's militarism and political intransigence alone did not lead to war
against the world powers in the East (Russia) and the West (France, England
and, since 1917, the United States). According to Steiner, World War I was
the earthly expression of a struggle between luciferic forces in the East
and ahrimanic forces in the West, and it was Central Europe's destiny to
mediate between these forces. "'
So we learn, that it was Germany's (Central Europe's?) DESTINY to MEDIATE
BETWEEN THESE FORCES.
And, we learn furthermore, that it was UNAVOIDABLE:
'The fundamental polarization of East and West that Rudolf Steiner saw
emerging more than six decades ago is now a political reality. While most
historians today concede that World War II was in part caused by the
circumstances surrounding World War I, few would accept Rudolf Steiner's
statement from his Linz lecture that World War I was "destined by the
European karma" or, to state it more concretely, that it was unavoidable.
If the war could not have been avoided, then the question of who was to
blame or who caused it is, as Steiner says, irrelevant. Based on this
position, Steiner suggests that only one question has relevancy: "Who could
have prevented the war?" This question seems to contradict Steiner's
statement that World War I was destined by the European karma.'
So, we cannot answer Patti's question what Steiner's attitude toward Nazis
was during WWII, but we can tell what Steiner's attitude would have been
towards Nazis: "It is IRREVELANT, because it's Karma, Karma."
(Quotes from "Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman", Linz 1915,
Introduction by Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. It is included in Das Geheimnis
des Todes (The Secret of Death)
Sincerely
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.8 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: unmanifest destiny
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:30:40 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 09/16/1999 11:52:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com writes:
((
...from her anonymous contributor, who ought to know. /MRx ))
I can't stop laughing at this. lol Thanks for the chuckle! ;-)
--Wendi
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Hostility and bigotry
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:30:07 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909162053.NAA25200 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909162144.OAA25815 lists1.best.com)
At 10:43 PM +0100 9/16/99, Steve Premo wrote:
)I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
)anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
)of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
)of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
)basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
)which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
I agree in theory, Steve, but _why_ should Anthroposophy be immune from
criticism? Orthodox Christianity certainly isn't. We can legitimately
critique Waldorf's religious pedagogy, curriculum, and violation of the
Establishment Clause.
Anthroposophists are moving into taxpayer's pocket books with their
deceptive and illegal [religious] practices through their public Waldorf
schools and their religious public school teacher training programs. (PLANS
has all kinds of evidence to this end.) Anthroposophists are _begging_ to
be exposed AND critiqued BECAUSE they don't own their religious status.
They deny their own belief system to inculcate Anthroposophy into
unsuspecting children whose parents believe the lie of their non-sectarian
claim. They should admit their mistakes and fully disclose their doctrine
to all parents AND school boards if they want us to leave them alone.
I'm open to the possibility of crooked thinking on my part. Discussion welcome.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1455.10 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: humor
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:38:35 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
((
How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I
mean -- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too
fast] cited? /M ))
lol
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1455 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1456 --------------
001 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Steiner and Nazis
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
003 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: anon replies to Fairman
005 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: humor
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: please post anon
007 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: please post anon
008 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: please post anon
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
010 - Neil Faiman (faiman zko.d - Virtue in the mean
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.1 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner and Nazis
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:48:39 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well, see what I don't know!!! But as I understand it, antisemitism had been
building up for some time. I wonder if Steiner sort of went along with the
Aryan race grandeur thing, it seems so, his concepts seem to reflect that
sort of supremacy type thinking. But mainly I wonder if he may have ever
expressed anything about Jewish or other races.
Sincerely, Patti M.
----------------------------
(cut & paste from last time):
Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis,Jews,
during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically
about this matter?"
Considering that Steiner died in 1925, probably not
much.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:05:45 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re: (cut & pasted)
So we learn, that it was Germany's (Central Europe's?) DESTINY to MEDIATE
BETWEEN THESE FORCES.
And, we learn furthermore, that it was UNAVOIDABLE:
this is exactly sort of thing I wish to examine. That supremacy attitude,
Germany's Great Destiny type of concept, I wish to know if Steiner was
operating from within the midst of this attitude, if he was shaped by this
attitude, and thus his teachings flowing forth from that -
the same attitude which birthed Naziism.
the "karma" thing is unfortunate, I feel,
enabling one to stand by and merely nod one's head as things happen, as evil
wreaks its havoc. After all - "It is Germany's Destiny"/"It is Karma."
It suggests a helplessness, and absence of free will.
I did feel my son's will was being sapped when he was in Waldorf.
possibility: Creating people without will to enable karma to exist? to
justify karma? "I was just following orders..." (sorry, thinking in font,
will think on this privately, and let's discuss more, ok?) Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.3 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:17:41 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
Steve, that is so dang funny!!!!!!! I'm going to give that to my son's
former Latin teacher. She'll love it! :-) Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: anon replies to Fairman
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:15:51 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
well, think there was much much more to the persecution of Jews than
anecdotal basis, we ought not to make mountain out of molehill. But is true
that after a while, hearing such anecdotes again and again causes them to
achieve a solidity.
People have always persecuted those who are different from themselves. Think
main deal with Christian persecution of Jews is clear - Christians resented
their not believing in Christ.
(cut & pasted):
"Christians felt that those anecdotes had been repeated enough to form the
probable conclusion that they were true." As a result, synagogues were
burned, and Jews were persecuted.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.5 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: humor
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:04:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909171751.KAA17545 lists1.best.com)
At 6:38 PM +0100 9/17/99, GypsyArdor aol.com wrote:
) How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I
)mean -- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too
)fast] cited? /M ))
)
)
)lol
We already have an anon. poster named "Rosie". Remember the former Waldorf
student who posted here last week? I think we should name him/her/it
"Anon."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:40:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909162344.QAA15130 lists1.best.com)
Christian, thanks for the research! Can you give us the actual publication
that your citation was from? (publisher, date, page)
)(following statements are taken from "THE BALANCE IN THE WORLD AND MAN,
)LUCIFER AND AHRIMAN", Rudolf Steiner, 1914, Dornach.)
Thanks in advance, Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.7 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:32:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909162344.QAA15130 lists1.best.com)
Steve Premo wrote:
))I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
))anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
))of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
))of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
))basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
))which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
Thanks for setting a good example, Steve. Don't forget to add
Anthroposophical medicine to your list, though.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.8 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:54:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909162344.QAA15130 lists1.best.com)
Christian, you quoted Steiner,
)"Duty is the opposite idea of right. Our age will be followed by an age
)when duties will be more regarded than rights, and this will be directly
)attributable to the influence of the anthroposophical spiritual
)world-conception. In the future -- certainly, in a rather distant future --
)we shall have movements where less and less emphasis will be laid on the
)demand for rights and people will inquire more and more as to their duty.
)The question will rather be: What is our duty as man, as woman, e.g., in
)this or that situation of life? The present epoch that demands rights will
)be succeeded by an epoch that asks after duties."
He was a prophet. Only eight years after he died, a movement "where less
and less emphasis will be laid on the demand for rights and people will
inquire more and more as to their duty" took power, the Nazis. Was this
"attributable to the influence of the anthroposophical spiritual
world-conception," though? Not directly, but Anthroposophy did help.
-Dan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:19:23 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170706.AAA28738 lists1.best.com)
)Whoa, I have often wondered about Steiner's attitudes toward Nazis, Jews,
)during WWII. Did he ever say anything specifically about this matter?
)Wonder if there had been any Jewish children at first Waldorf school. Patti
)M.
Steiner died in 1925, so he had no opinions during the Nazi period
(1933-45) or WWII. The Nazi movement was active in his time. The Nazi party
was founded the same year Steiner founded the Waldorf school. Steiner
avoided criticizing them directly. Some racists quoted Steiner and
Blavatsky as authorities for their theories.
Steiner's movement wasn't only spiritual; it was (and is) also political,
the "threefold social order". In 1919 they had a weekly newspaper. Squads
of Anthroposophists were sent to influence an election in Silesia. This
political activity led the Nazis to consider them as rivals for power, and
Nazi thugs harassed and threatened Steiner till he fled to Switzerland.
Regarding the Jews, there was a lot of doubletalk. In Steiner's theory, the
Jews had accomplished their cosmic mission by providing a physical body for
"The Christ Spirit" to incarnate into. They should have died out after
that, if the "evolution of man" hadn't been interfered with by Lucifer and
Ahriman. Steiner had Jewish devotees, however, so he had to be very
circumspect in his language. He seemed to avoid mentioning contemporary
Jews at all.
Shortly after the Nazis took over in 1933, Anthroposophy was outlawed. The
Waldorf schools were allowed to continue provisionally, without any
national policy determination, but were harassed by local authorities. The
schools fired their Jewish teachers. Classes were opened with "Heil Hitler"
salutes.
There was disagreement in the party about Waldorf. Baeumler, a leading
educator, argued that Waldorf supported the objectives of Naziism, and
Hitler's 2nd in command Rudolf Hess intervened twice to keep Waldorf
schools open. After six years of Nazi rule all the schools were closed.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1456.10 ---------------
From: Neil Faiman (faiman zko.dec.com)
Subject: Virtue in the mean
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:15:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Greetings.
Patti M. dislikes Michael Ronall's discussion of virtue in the balance
between evils:
) well, i think a virtue is much more than a mean. regarding a virtue
) as a
) mean would ennervate the beauty and power of the virtue, while
) alarmingly
) fixing it between two evils, which rings discordant mathematically,
) somehow... like the yin yang, the mean is the tao between two
) extremes.
)
) nothing wrong with simple "binary" thought - God pretty simple and
) binary
) when He created world: light and dark, night and day, heaven and
) earth...
The idea of finding virtue in the mean is certainly not alien to
Christianity.
I would suggest contemplation of the familiar Christian exhortation,
"Be in the world, but not of it."
"Being in the world AND of the world" -- what a perfect summary of what
an anthroposophist would call the Ahrimanic temptation -- to throw
aside the spiritual, to say that "the world" is all that matters, all
that exists.
"Being NEITHER of the world, NOR in it" -- that's the Luciferic
temptation -- to condemn "the world" and seek virtue in pure
spirituality.
"Being in the world, but not of it" -- that's the Christian balance.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1456 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1457 --------------
001 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: waldorf
002 - GypsyArdor aol.com - humor
003 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Hostility and bigotry
004 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
005 - "Brian & Christine" (bmax - Re: Hostility and bigotry
006 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: please post anon
007 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: humor, intended and otherwise
008 - "Luke Schelly" (lschelly - what's in a name (hideswell)
009 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: please post anon
010 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: waldorf
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.1 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: waldorf
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:39:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com) - 9/17/99 12:22 AM )))
confesses:
)I can't believe, that Waldorf parents find everything good what is going on
)in the schools.
Please let us know where (this side of Paradise) you, or someone else, finds _everything_ good going on. Cordially, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.2 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: humor
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:43:33 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 09/17/1999 3:39:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
waldorf-critics-errors lists.best.com writes:
(( (A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.) ))
lol is this just an extra funny day for me or something? lol
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.3 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Hostility and bigotry
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:54:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199909162144.OAA25815 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909171733.KAA08944 lists1.best.com)
On 17 Sep 99, at 11:30, Debra Snell wrote:
) At 10:43 PM +0100 9/16/99, Steve Premo wrote:
)
) )I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
) )anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
) )of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
) )of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
) )basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
) )which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
)
) I agree in theory, Steve, but _why_ should Anthroposophy be immune
) from criticism? Orthodox Christianity certainly isn't. We can
) legitimately critique Waldorf's religious pedagogy, curriculum, and
) violation of the Establishment Clause.
Of course Anthroposophy should not be immune from criticism. I
criticise it myself, plenty. But the criticism must be based on
facts and reason. It should reflect an attitude of serious
questioning rather than hostility.
The post in question made some serious charges about the motivations
of Waldorf teachers:
) WE is NOT about any sort of real education in the here and now,
) except whatever it takes to evade the regulation of the state and
) assuage parental doubt.
Rather, "Rosie" stated that the teachers' only real concerns are to
provide an education for initiates. Further, s/he stated that the
motivation to establish Waldorf charter schools is because otherwise,
Waldorf education cannot be afforded by some of the select few at
which the education is aimed.
These are serious charges, offered without the slightest attempt at
justification, other than to make vague references to "authorities."
The whole post reads to me much like statements about the
"international Jewish conspiracy." It's different from posts which,
say, criticise Anthroposophy for making and adhering to statements
about the physical world which are not supported by modern science,
or criticise the Waldorf movement for pretending that it is based on
scientific research when the pedagogy is actually based on esoteric
"knowledge" revealed to Uncle Rudy through clairvoyance. (If they're
going to claim the mantle of science, they should at least make it
clear to parents that they are talking about "spiritual science," and
that it's based on clairvoyance.)
It's hard for me to express why Rosie's post was different, except
that it's much more outlandish than other critics' posts, and it's
contrary to my experience.
(Incidentally, I find it ironic that lately I've been more on the
side of the Anthroposophists in these debates than on the side of the
critics, since I'm really a materialist at heart, at least when it
comes to understanding the nature of material reality. In the past,
we've had anthroposophists and former Waldorf students making
outlandish statements, and I've been a critic. Now, we're seeing
outlandish statements made by critics, and my posts are more
supportive of the other side. Maybe if Bob Tolz is a "Waldorf critic
critic," I'm becoming a Waldorf critic critic critic.)
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carbonata descendum pantorum."
(A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.)
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.4 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:55:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)this is exactly sort of thing I wish to examine. That supremacy attitude,
)Germany's Great Destiny type of concept, I wish to know if Steiner was
)operating from within the midst of this attitude, if he was shaped by this
)attitude, and thus his teachings flowing forth from that -
)the same attitude which birthed Naziism.
)
)the "karma" thing is unfortunate, I feel,
) enabling one to stand by and merely nod one's head as things happen, as
evil
)wreaks its havoc. After all - "It is Germany's Destiny"/"It is Karma."
)It suggests a helplessness, and absence of free will.
)
)I did feel my son's will was being sapped when he was in Waldorf.
)
) possibility: Creating people without will to enable karma to exist? to
)justify karma? "I was just following orders..." (sorry, thinking in
font,
)will think on this privately, and let's discuss more, ok?) Sincerely,
Patti
"To be sure, Europeans have been led into considering the wisdom of India
as something especially profound."
Wrote Steiner. His ideas about the wisdom of India were highly influenced
by Md. Blavatsky, that is the idea of Karma, or the root race theory (the
seven root races) for example, which gave the Nazis the foundation for
their understanding of the evolution of mankind. This evolution is
explained in such a way, that there are lesser (older) races, which have to
pass away. UNFORTUNATLY they did NOT pass away. So they have to be passed
away by power.
Further, Steiner states: "We must in pan cleanse Western culture of the
luciferic remnants and in part we must elevate them in such a way that the
Christ impulse can enter."
We MUST cleanse!
Moreover he states: "Moving from Asia to the East of Europe, we notice how
Russian orthodox Christianity has remained stationary at an earlier stage
of Christian development, refusing to advance and thereby keeping something
of the luciferic element. In short, we can detect a luciferic remnant in
the East, which, I would say, a wise guiding force left behind for the
evolution of mankind in general."
EVOLUTION OF MANKIND!
And "We in Central Europe must be most intimately engaged in the continued
development of the Christ impulse. To do this we must, among other things,
try to understand the minds that have already sown the seeds."
WE UNDERSTAND!
"One's glance at the spiritual world will be infinitely enriched if one
considers that those who have lost loved ones -- fathers and mothers,
sisters and brothers, sons and daughters -- may tell themselves that those
who were sacrificed continue to live for humanity, as a reminder of what is
yet to come!"
A Question: Why do you think, used Adolf Hitler an INDIAN Hindu symbol for
his warfare, the SWASTIKA ("Hakenkreuz", the Hindu symbol for 'power')?
It is all there, it cannot be explained away.
(All quotations from Rudolf Steiner, "Christ in Relation to Lucifer and
Ahriman", Linz 1915, including the following one:)
"From the warrior's valor,
)From the blood of battles,
)From the pain of the bereaved.
)From a people's sacrifice
Will tile spirit fruit arise --
Will the souls embrace the spirit
Consciously, with inner eyes.
With such feelings in our hearts we forever want to imbue ourselves with
the meaning of the rose cross so that we can perceive it in the proper way
as the motto for our doing, weaving and feeling. Not the black cross alone.
He who tears the roses from the black cross and has nothing left but the
black cross, would fall into the clutches of Ahriman." R Steiner.
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.5 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: Hostility and bigotry
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:09:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909162053.NAA25200 lists1.best.com) (199909171733.KAA08944 lists1.best.com)
) At 10:43 PM +0100 9/16/99, Steve Premo wrote:
)
)
) )I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
) )anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
) )of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
) )of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
) )basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
) )which I consider to be legitimate concerns.
)
) I agree in theory, Steve, but _why_ should Anthroposophy be immune from
) criticism) I'm open to the possibility of crooked thinking on my part.
Discussion welcome.
) Deby
I think you are both trying to say the same thing. Isn't Steve saying that
a certain amount of criticism is legitimate?
) I'm open to the possibility of crooked thinking on my part. Discussion
welcome.
) Deby
)
I think you both are right on.
Christine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.6 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:28:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)Christian, thanks for the research! Can you give us the actual publication
)that your citation was from? (publisher, date, page)
))(following statements are taken from "THE BALANCE IN THE WORLD AND MAN,
))LUCIFER AND AHRIMAN", Rudolf Steiner, 1914, Dornach.)
)Thanks in advance, Dan Dugan
There is a lot of material at www.elib.com,
The lectures are in www.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures
This is a Anthoposophic page, so most translations are authorized, although
some translation are not very good (typo-errors).
Abovementioned Lecture is in three parts, "Authorized translation from
shorthand reports unrevised by the lecturer, by permission of the Rudolf
Steiner Nachlassverwaltung, Dornach, Switzerland. Lecture I, translated by
D. Osmond, II-III, by M. Adams."
Some of these lectures are not published, as far as I know.
You might look in the Webpage for further information.
This is a trashcan full of material!
Kind regards
Christian
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.7 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: humor, intended and otherwise
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:31:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/17/99 8:04 AM )))
writes:
)At 6:38 PM +0100 9/17/99, GypsyArdor aol.com wrote:
[MRx interrupts (a fine art)]:
No, Deb, that was me. GypsyArdor was quoting me. I use my own customized initials, and it _still_ gets confusing, as we see. It was I whom Gypsy quoted as suggesting:
[Debra, quoting MRx as quoted by GypsyArdor]:
)) How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I
))mean -- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too
))fast] cited? /M ))
... to which GypsyArdor responded:
))lol
[MRx]:
I will sorely rue the day I am heard laughing at my own jokes...
[Debra (I think)]
)We already have an anon. poster named "Rosie". Remember the former Waldorf
)student who posted here last week?
[MRx]:
...or explaining them.
[Debra (I'm almost sure)]:
)I think we should name him/her/it
)"Anon."
[MRx]:
Is "e-gregio" incapable of naming itself? I worry about confusing your pen-pal with the stream of other eponymous anonyms soon to be scratching at the gates -- and what about when anon I starts disputing anon II? But maybe I worry to much. /M (Will this be on the quiz?)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.8 ---------------
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com)
Subject: what's in a name (hideswell)
Date: 17 Sep 1999 17:06:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
MICHAEL RONALL queried
)How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I mean )-- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too fast] ))))))cited? /M
I prefer *hideswell* (because of the other statement). it is more descriptive too.
luke
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.9 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:05:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)Christian, you quoted Steiner,
))"Duty is the opposite idea of right. Our age will be followed by an age
))when duties will be more regarded than rights, and this will be directly
))attributable to the influence of the anthroposophical spiritual
))world-conception. In the future -- certainly, in a rather distant future
--
))we shall have movements where less and less emphasis will be laid on the
))demand for rights and people will inquire more and more as to their duty.
))The question will rather be: What is our duty as man, as woman, e.g., in
))this or that situation of life? The present epoch that demands rights
will
))be succeeded by an epoch that asks after duties."
)He was a prophet. Only eight years after he died, a movement "where less
)and less emphasis will be laid on the demand for rights and people will
)inquire more and more as to their duty" took power, the Nazis. Was this
)"attributable to the influence of the anthroposophical spiritual
)world-conception," though? Not directly, but Anthroposophy did help.
(-Dan)
Anthroposophy helped a lot, in so far, as it helped to make certain beliefs
acceptable for the intelligence. It also made Blavatsky's ideas popular and
accepted as well. It is a not well known fact that Adolf Hitler believed in
Blavatsky as well. Hitler's understanding of Hinduism were darkly
influenced by her literature.
In my opinion, when Rudolf Steiner claimed to be a Christian (he meant
"Catholic"), he did this out of a strategic advantage for his mission on
'Spiritual Science'.
After all, Adolf Hitler was a Catholic, too.
birds of a feather nest together.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1457.10 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: waldorf
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:31:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
))))) Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com) - 9/17/99 12:22 AM
)))
)confesses:
))I can't believe, that Waldorf parents find everything good what is going
on
))in the schools.
)Please let us know where (this side of Paradise) you, or someone else,
finds _everything_ good going on. Cordially, /MRx)))
Nowhere this side of Paradise. I personally only know the German
schoolsystem, and I know, that parents of children in public schools have a
lot more influence on what is going on in the schools, in the class,
between the teacher and the child. The rules in public schools are
generally accepted. There are exceptions, though. If there is a struggle
between a child and the teacher, the parent can easily bring the facts to
the school director. The rights of the parents are highly respected. There
is always more than one school-psychologist available, and the parents can
speak with him/her without the teacher or the director knowing it. He then
would advise what to do, and can act as a mediator between the teacher and
the child/parents. In most of the cases this works out very well.
It is the duty of every school, to give every parent everytime the
possibility, to go with his/her concerns to someone, who cares, and who has
the power to make a change.
I don't know the system of the Steiner schools in this regard.
I regarded problems as such as were described by Diana, as they regard the
direct welfare of the child.
Christian
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1457 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1458 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Max's new blessing
002 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: what's in a name (hideswell)
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: please post anon
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Max's new blessing
005 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
006 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Max's new blessing
007 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Steve
008 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Max's new blessing
009 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Max's new blessing
010 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: anon replies to Premo
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Max's new blessing
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:08:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Debra Snell]
) I picked Max up after his third day of school. We are
) chatting during the
) ride home and he says, "We have a different blessing at my
) new school."
) Surprised, I asked what his new blessing was. He said, "I
) haven't memorized
) it all yet, but it starts out 'I pledge allegince to the flag...'"
Wonderful story, Debby!
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.2 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: what's in a name (hideswell)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:47:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) "Luke Schelly" (lschelly JackRouse.com) - 9/17/99 5:06 PM )))
notes that:
)MICHAEL RONALL queried
)
))How 'bout just for clarity we call Debra's dictator -- uh, you know what I mean )-- "Rosie," after the Rosicrucian motto she/he/it [don't say it too fast] )))))))cited? /M
and proffers that:
)I prefer *hideswell* (because of the other statement). it is more descriptive too.
Hmmm... "Hide Swell" -- Y'mean because one needs a thick skin to be on this list? /M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:14:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com) - 9/17/99 6:05 PM )))
writes:
)when Rudolf Steiner claimed to be a Christian (he meant "Catholic")
Hi, Christian.
What evidence do you have to suport this claim? It's a new one to me, but then, I'm here to learn. Best, /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 19:07:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/16/99 6:09 PM )))
Hi Debra -- Seeing who sent it, I would have read this post even if I _hadn't_ feared the subject header represented yet another mangling of my long-suffering initials.
)When Max transferred to public school [from Waldorf] in mid-second grade,
)he thought I had placed him in a school for gifted children. He was sure
)that he was not gifted, and worried about his performance. He was truly
)behind, scoring 0.0 on a reading comprehension test. (With the help of
)special reading program, a tutor, and his dogged determination, Max was
)reading at 3rd grade, 4th month level by the end of the year.)
Once again (and I believe that you know this and disagree with it), Waldorf pedagogy clearly and distinctly holds that faster does not always, and not in this case, mean better. It holds, and avows that it holds, that literacy acquired gradually over the course of the early grades achieves better long-term results than literacy acquired ASAP, so that a "failed" literacy test in mid-second grade disturbs Waldorf enthusiasts as little as would a prepubescent's "failed" biological fertility test.
It is one thing to dispute Waldorf's claim that its method is effective, which you certainly have the right to do, and another to profess astonishment when it varies from a standard it holds alien. It is meaningless to "prove" the failure of a method by a test that its practitioners are not striving to meet, and _say_ they are not striving to meet.
If you were to find, say Waldorf _high-schoolers_ illiterate (and if Waldorf supporters were to agree with you [which they would] that high-school students should be reading fluently), your critique _would_ merit attention. My Waldorf high school classmates read well. A Waldorf father I know who reluctantly suspended his concern about his daughter's gradual acquisition of literacy when his daughter was in the early grades related to me his satisfaction when she was in sixth grade and he found his trust fully vindicated because of how much she loved to read.
It would equally be absurd to claim that non-Waldorf pupils whose teachers thought it unimportant that they learn to knit and play a musical instrument "failed" to do so. I myself would fail any test on spectator sports, the content of current television shows, the mechanics of aircraft-piloting. An exclusively breast-fed baby can be expected initially to "fail" a bottle-sucking or meat-chewing test. It is just _because_ Waldorf teachers place such a high value on literacy, on pupils' learning to read carefully, closely, deeply, imaginatively, and -- beginning at an appropriate age (which we know you and others disagree about) -- skeptically, that its pedagogy prizes a slow and careful introduction of the alphabet through a recapitulation of its historical precipitation from visual images: Children zealously enter into their drawing of a mountain range until it coalesces into the letter "M"; they trace the upright tree-trunk until it terminates as a "T"; they plunge into the w!
aves of the water until its surf tosses up a "W." When this _slow_ process is completed, they have re-enacted humanity's discovery of the tool to name the world; they "own" the written word. (Each teacher is individually challenged to invent apt techniques to appeal to their charges' imaginations: For one middle-aged alumna I know, "Q" is still the Queen who never forgets her "U"mbrella.)
Yeah, at mid-second grade pupils will flunk a standardized test and not know who the President or his mistress is. If the information you received about reading acquisition in Waldorf schools promises otherwise, you have a right to complain.
)I picked Max up after his third day of school. We are chatting during the
)ride home and he says, "We have a different blessing at my new school."
)Surprised, I asked what his new blessing was. He said, "I haven't memorized
)it all yet, but it starts out 'I pledge allegiance to the flag...'"
Ah, Debra. See what you are telling us! Your young child is (unsurprisingly to Waldorf enthusiasts) unable to distinguish among varieties of devotion. Now, you have the right to prefer that your children offer uncritical allegiance to their government as opposed to the World Creator, though (as you might guess), my money's on the Creator "Who moves in sunlight and in soul-light" (from the morning verse we Waldorf pupils spoke while our counterparts in state schools were ritually contemplating the glories of "the Republic" [er, not Plato's]).
When I transferred from public school to Waldorf school after two years of daily pledging allegiance to the American Flag, I was suspicious. Why was there no national flag hanging in the classroom? Was this community cultivating sedition? [Don't answer that, Dan!] ;+) Would there be there any time in the year that they would be forced to swear fealty? Though I didn't have access to those terms, those were truly my sentiments. The Republic (Plato's this time) rightly estimates the depth of the impressions that early training engraves in the soul -- I mean, uh, the organism.
My inference from your anecdote is that children will stubbornly demand to look up to something uncritically. If you are confident that an icon of your federal government provides a worthier "altar," then now it is _I_ who envy _your_ idealism! But perhaps it is closer to what you really think to say that a second-grader can and should learn to distinguish patriotism from nationalism. In that case we disagree. Or that the content of the authority to which a child is guided is irrelevant. In that case we certainly disagree. But I speculate.
Well, I would encourage you and your boy's teachers to lead him to love his country and find in the red, white and blue a reflection of as much of his purpose on earth as it can provide him. It's the "how" more than the "what" that figures most consequentially in the growing human being's path towards social, including civic, responsibility. Your accounts give every indication that the devotion (though you might use another term) to your son's progress will nourish it. So please forgive my gratuitous observation of the good fortune he has incurred. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.5 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:22:39 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909150056.RAA09873 lists1.best.com)
Dear List,
I have been away for the whole summer and forgot to cancel my mail while I
was away. Needless to say, I must have missed alot during this time.
Sorry if I repeat something that was already said.
At 20:53 14/09/99 -0400, Rev. wrote:
)Let me just preface what I am going to say with a discussion of who
)Satan is from the Bible .
)
)For some reason, King James' scribes translated the original Hebrew
)description of Satan as "serpent," when actually, the original Hebrew
)uses the word "nachash" which in English can be rendered a description
)of a rather attractive, enticing, loving
)and caring "being of light."
I'm not sure I understand everything in your post, but just to clarify one
point -
"nachash" in Hebrew means "snake" in English. I'd like to know where you
got this other translation.
Thanks,
Cara
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.6 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 02:35:58 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170528.WAA04636 lists1.best.com)
At 23:09 16/09/99 +0100, Debra Snell wrote:
)When Max transferred to public school [from Waldorf] in mid-second grade,
)he thought I had placed him in a school for gifted children...
...We are chatting during the
)ride home and he says, "We have a different blessing at my new school."
)Surprised, I asked what his new blessing was. He said, "I haven't memorized
)it all yet, but it starts out 'I pledge allegince to the flag...'"
)-ds
This is a great story.
It reminds me so much of my son's going out into the "real" world. (I don't
know if you remember my story. I wrote just before the summer. My son had
to redo kindergarten, and we put him in a "normal" one the second time
around.)
He still feels out of place and shy when the other kids play games like
tag, hide-and-seek, musical chairs, etc. and at the age of 6, he was just
finding out about these games.
It must be hard for an older child to make the change and to be such an
outsider in society.
Good luck in the future,
Cara
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.7 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Steve
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 20:44:16 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve--
You have the best humor! Thanks for all the chuckles! ;-) And of course your
comments. I'm not blind to the Waldorf problems myself, but I was beginning
to think I was becoming more and more of a Waldorf defender as well because
of the posts. It will be great when things get back to a place of reasonable
debate.
Thanks again for the laughs.
--Wendi
) Maybe if Bob Tolz is a "Waldorf critic
) critic," I'm becoming a Waldorf critic critic critic.)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.8 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 02:52:46 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909172312.QAA29416 lists1.best.com)
At 19:07 17/09/99 -0400, Michael Ronall wrote:
)Once again (and I believe that you know this and disagree with it),
Waldorf pedagogy clearly and distinctly holds that faster does not always,
and not in this case, mean better. It holds, and avows that it holds, that
literacy acquired gradually over the course of the early grades achieves
better long-term results than literacy acquired ASAP, so that a "failed"
literacy test in mid-second grade disturbs Waldorf enthusiasts as little as
would a prepubescent's "failed" biological fertility test.
)
In the Waldorf school where I taught for two years (My son was in the
kindergarten and they asked me to teach English at the school, even though
that is not my profession. This is Israel, and English is taught as a
foreign language.), parents were told that while in the regular school
system, reading and writing is taught in 1st grade and math in the 2nd
(which is incorrect - both are taught in the 1st grade), in the Waldorf
school the order is the opposite:
first math and then reading and writing. By the end of 2nd grade, the
children were supposed to be at the same level as the regular school system.
This was a lie they told the parents, who would otherwise not have placed
their children in the school.
Cara
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.9 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:56:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909172312.QAA29416 lists1.best.com)
At 12:07 AM +0100 9/18/99, MICHAEL RONALL wrote:
)
)Hi Debra -- Seeing who sent it, I would have read this post even if I
)_hadn't_ feared the subject )header represented yet another mangling of my
)long-suffering initials.
Do you have a neon victim sign you could sent with your signature? :+)
)Once again (and I believe that you know this and disagree with it),
)Waldorf pedagogy clearly and )distinctly holds that faster does not
)always, and not in this case, mean better. It holds, and avows )that it
)holds, that literacy acquired gradually over the course of the early
)grades achieves better )long-term results than literacy acquired ASAP, so
)that a "failed" literacy test in mid-second grade )disturbs Waldorf
)enthusiasts as little as would a prepubescent's "failed" biological
)fertility test.
Yes, I know that is absolutely true for private Waldorf schools. However,
our entire class full of parents were promised that most of our children
would be reading at the end of first grade (public Waldorf alert). Do you
have any evidence that children who are taught to read slowly achieve
better long-term results? I've been looking for some, and haven't run
across any...
[snip MRx's valid argument]
)It would equally be absurd to claim that non-Waldorf pupils whose teachers
)thought it unimportant )that they learn to knit and play a musical
)instrument "failed" to do so. I myself would fail any test )on spectator
)sports, the content of current television shows, the mechanics of
)aircraft-piloting. An )exclusively breast-fed baby can be expected
)initially to "fail" a bottle-sucking or meat-chewing test. It )is just
)_because_ Waldorf teachers place such a high value on literacy, on pupils'
)learning to read )carefully, closely, deeply, imaginatively, and --
)beginning at an appropriate age (which we know you )and others disagree
)about) -- skeptically, that its pedagogy prizes a slow and careful
)introduction of )the alphabet through a recapitulation of its historical
)precipitation from visual images:
"introduction of the alhabet through a recapulation of its historical
precipitation from visual images"? Please elaborate.
)Children zealously enter into their drawing of a mountain range until it
)coalesces into the letter "M"; )they trace the upright tree-trunk until it
)terminates as a "T"; they plunge into the w!
)aves of the water until its surf tosses up a "W." When this _slow_ process
)is completed, they have )re-enacted humanity's discovery of the tool to
)name the world; they "own" the written word. (Each )teacher is
)individually challenged to invent apt techniques to appeal to their
)charges' imaginations: )For one middle-aged alumna I know, "Q" is still
)the Queen who never forgets her "U"mbrella.)
I've seen it all. Trouble with my son's class was the lack of emphasis on
the "M". Somehow the children didn't associate the mountain with an "M".
)Yeah, at mid-second grade pupils will flunk a standardized test and not
)know who the President or )his mistress is. If the information you
)received about reading acquisition in Waldorf schools )promises otherwise,
)you have a right to complain.
I have the right to complain because his teacher said that she _was_ going
to teach early reading.
))I picked Max up after his third day of school. We are chatting during the
))ride home and he says, "We have a different blessing at my new school."
))Surprised, I asked what his new blessing was. He said, "I haven't memorized
))it all yet, but it starts out 'I pledge allegiance to the flag...'"
)
)Ah, Debra. See what you are telling us! Your young child is
)(unsurprisingly to Waldorf enthusiasts) unable to distinguish among
)varieties of devotion.
Exactly the point PLANS tries to make. That is why parents should be fully
informed _before_ they send their children to WE.
)Now, you have the right to prefer that your children offer uncritical
)allegiance to their government )as opposed to the World Creator, though
)(as you might guess), my money's on the Creator "Who )moves in sunlight
)and in soul-light" (from the morning verse we Waldorf pupils spoke while
)our )counterparts in state schools were ritually contemplating the glories
)of "the Republic" [er, not )Plato's]).
I have the right to request my son not participate in this activity at all.
I have the right to know that he would not be discriminated against for
choosing not to say The Pledge of Allegiance. He would still be educated
the _same_ as everyone else. I wonder what would happen if parents chose
for their children not to participate in Anthroposophical activities at a
public Waldorf school. I don't think they would be educated.
(End rant)
)Well, I would encourage you and your boy's teachers to lead him to love
)his country and find in the )red, white and blue a reflection of as much
)of his purpose on earth as it can provide him. It's the )"how" more than
)the "what" that figures most consequentially in the growing human being's
)path )towards social, including civic, responsibility. Your accounts give
)every indication that the devotion )(though you might use another term) to
)your son's progress will nourish it. So please forgive my )gratuitous
)observation of the good fortune he has incurred. /MRx
My sarcasm light bulb comes on here, MRx. Just because Max attends a public
school who is required to say The Pledge of Allegiance does not mean that
every second of his school day focus is on "the red, white and blue."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1458.10 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: anon replies to Premo
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:01:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170710.AAA00877 lists1.best.com)
At 03:08 17/09/99 EDT, Patti wrote:
)I am fascinated by this statement - "It is not even essential that Waldorf
)teachers are aware that they are deceived." Do you mean, like, at first and
)maybe for a long while, teachers are not quite wholly aware that they are
)devil-worshippers being trained to devour souls? Sincerely, Patti
)
)
In the WE school where I taught, only the class teachers and the recorder
teacher were anthroposophically inclined. All of the special class
teachers (English, Arabic, music - she had alot of problems with the way
she was used to teaching, and crafts) were not connected with anthroposophy
before teaching at the school. We all discovered what was going on at our
own paces. We weren't invited to staff meetings (where they did Eurythmy
and discussed Steiner) until they decided we were "one of them".
Cara
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1458 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1459 --------------
001 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Steve
002 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: please post anon
003 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: Max's new blessing
004 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - Re: RE: RE: please post anon
005 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Virtue in the mean
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: anon replies to Premo
008 - "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall - typo is Re: Max's new blessing
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - restrictions on out-of-district charters blocked
010 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Max's new blessing
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.1 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Steve
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 21:34:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) (GypsyArdor aol.com) - 9/17/99 8:44 PM ))),
that is, Wendi, says:
)Steve--
)
)You have the best humor! Thanks for all the chuckles! ;-) And of course your
)comments. I'm not blind to the Waldorf problems myself, but I was beginning
)to think I was becoming more and more of a Waldorf defender as well because
)of the posts. It will be great when things get back to a place of reasonable
)debate.
)
) Maybe if Bob Tolz is a "Waldorf critic
) critic," I'm becoming a Waldorf critic critic critic.)
Truly. When and if. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.2 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 22:35:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Michael Ronell wrote
that Christian wrote:
))when Rudolf Steiner claimed to be a Christian (he meant "Catholic")
)Hi, Christian.
)What evidence do you have to suport this claim? It's a new one to me, but
then, I'm here to learn. Best, /MRx
Dear Michael,
The parentheses were a part of my opinion. Sorry that this was not clear in
the text.
However, Steiner re-translated in 1919 the Roman Catholic Mass.
Sounds not like evanglical Christian, rather like catholic Christian.
They both exclude each other, and I don't believe, that there is something
else which could be defined "Christian".
As far as I know, Steiner never distanciated himself never from the
catholic faith, although he was not a professed catholic.
I believe, that if Steiner would have been a 'real' Catholic, he would have
never admitted it. I follow this from his attitude to as much opposition as
possible.
Steiner wrote a book "Mysticism at the Dawn of Modern Age", in which you
would find more information about his 'catholizism'.
In this book, Steiner referred to Meister Eckhard (a dominican) in a
complete different way as an evangelical christian would have done it.
(The evangelical Christian would say, that Meister Eckhard was an
occultist, to say the least.)
The source (that R. Steiner translated the Catholic Mass in 1919): A text
from Peter R. Koenig, "Theodor Reuss and Rudolf Steiner", who gave
following references:
Transcripts of some mentioned documents in: P.R. Koenig: "Der Kleine
Theodor Reuss Reader" (reader.txt)(ARW, Muenchen 1993). Worldwide for the
first time, facsimiles of pertinent Steiner-Reuss-documents are published
in: P.R. Koenig: "Der Grosse Theodor Reuss Reader" (gross.txt)(ARW,
Muenchen 1997). Rudolf Steiner's rituals can be found in: Rudolf Steiner:
"Zur Geschichte und aus den Inhalten der erkenntniskultischen Abteilung der
Esoterischen Schule 1904-1914" (Dornach 1987 = CE 265). Reuss'
O.T.O.-rituals (rituals.htm) in: P.R. Koenig: "How to make your own McOTO"
(mcoto.txt) (ARW, Muenchen 1996). Reuss' O.T.O.-system in: P.R. Koenig:
"Materialien zum OTO" (material.txt) (ARW Muenchen 1994). Hartmann about
Kellner, in: Theosophische Rundschau: "Dr. Karl [sic] Kellner, ein Opfer
des Okkultismus", XII;6, 1924. Steiner and Magick: Klaus J. Bracker:
"Anthroposophische Esoterik und die hermetische Tradition des 19.
Jahrhunderts", in "Novalis" 4/1996, Schaffhausen. Hella Wiesberger: "Rudolf
Steiners esoterische Lehrtaetigkeit" (Dornach 1997).
Help with translation provided by Richard Metzger, Stephen Luzny and Paul
S.
Kind regards.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.3 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:15:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) - 9/17/99 1:56 PM )))
wrote that:
At 12:07 AM +0100 9/18/99, MICHAEL RONALL wrote:
)
)Hi Debra -- Seeing who sent it, I would have read this post even if I
)_hadn't_ feared the subject )header represented yet another mangling of my
)long-suffering initials.
[DS:]
Do you have a neon victim sign you could sent with your signature? :+)
[MRx:]
]]]]]] My signature IS a neon victim sign, as the archives of this list will reveal.
[DS quotes MRx:]
)Once again (and I believe that you know this and disagree with it),
)Waldorf pedagogy clearly and )distinctly holds that faster does not
)always, and not in this case, mean better. It holds, and avows )that it
)holds, that literacy acquired gradually over the course of the early
)grades achieves better )long-term results than literacy acquired ASAP, so
)that a "failed" literacy test in mid-second grade )disturbs Waldorf
)enthusiasts as little as would a prepubescent's "failed" biological
)fertility test.
[DS responds:]
Yes, I know that is absolutely true for private Waldorf schools. However,
our entire class full of parents were promised that most of our children
would be reading at the end of first grade (public Waldorf alert). Do you
have any evidence that children who are taught to read slowly achieve
better long-term results? I've been looking for some, and haven't run
across any...
[MRx:]
]]]]] Not my yob, mon. Only anecdotal evidence. But isn't the burden of proof on a critic? If I were to claim that you were wrong about aircraft mechanics, television shows or sports figures... (It's a pleasure to correspond with you.)
[DS:]
[snip MRx's valid argument]
]]]]]] Sometimes it's a _supreme_ pleasure to correspond with you :+)
[DS quotes MRx:]
)[Waldorf] pedagogy prizes a slow and careful
)introduction of )the alphabet through a recapitulation of its historical
)precipitation from visual images:
[DS:]
"introduction of the alhabet through a recapulation of its historical
precipitation from visual images"? Please elaborate.
]]]]] Heieroglyphics, ideograms. Sorry I wasn't clear.
[DS quotes MRx:]
)Children zealously enter into their drawing of a mountain range until it
)coalesces into the letter "M"; )they trace the upright tree-trunk until it
)terminates as a "T"; they plunge into the w!
)aves of the water until its surf tosses up a "W." When this _slow_ process
)is completed, they have )re-enacted humanity's discovery of the tool to
)name the world; they "own" the written word. (Each )teacher is
)individually challenged to invent apt techniques to appeal to their
)charges' imaginations: )For one middle-aged alumna I know, "Q" is still
)the Queen who never forgets her "U"mbrella.)
[DS responds]
I've seen it all. Trouble with my son's class was the lack of emphasis on
the "M". Somehow the children didn't associate the mountain with an "M".
]]]]]]] All my classmates learned to read. There were NO illiterates in the classes two grades below me (I started in sixth grade) or any above me. All I know is the many literate and eloquently literate Waldorf alumni I have met. I don't know how long it's supposed to take. Sorry I can't be of more help here.
[DS quotes her favorite author -- Gosh, and you guys get tired of hearing "Steiner sez"?]
)Yeah, at mid-second grade pupils will flunk a standardized test and not
)know who the President or )his mistress is. If the information you
)received about reading acquisition in Waldorf schools )promises otherwise,
)you have a right to complain.
[DS:]
I have the right to complain because his teacher said that she _was_ going
to teach early reading.
[MRx:]
]]]]]]] I am here to defend Waldorf education against unfair or misguided attacks and, to the best of my ability [for God and My Country -- Cub Scout's pledge], to clarify misconceptions to the extent that I can for those who are interested in reality. The fact of a sinning cleric does constitute an indictment of his creed. I am not here to defend practices that are alleged to have happened in circumstances I know nothing about! Do you think I'm way out of line here?
[DS quotes MRx:]
)See what you are telling us! Your young child is
)(unsurprisingly to Waldorf enthusiasts) unable to distinguish among
)varieties of devotion.
[DS responds:]
Exactly the point PLANS tries to make. That is why parents should be fully
informed _before_ they send their children to WE.
[MRx rants:]
]]]]]]] Do I stint on information? Someone just has to ASK. What _I_ object to is MISinformation or DISinformation such as is frequently offered here as a supposed "balance." The Nazi stuff, allegations of dunce caps, Satan worship, anonymous posters who say they are beaten daily... a lotta guilt by free association, I'd call it. Anthroposphy taught in the classroom... I've described here already how in my five years as a Waldorf pupil NO Anthropospohy was taught in my class, NO Satan worship. Not even ONE Satan worship. Not ONE.
I think parents should be very pro-active: Ya hear about the "Rudolf Steiner School"; ya hear nice things about; ya think of sending ya kids there... WELL? YA LOOK UP WHAT THE GUY SAID. Today, you don't even need to leave your home -- the Society represents Anthroposophy on the Web! What could be simpler? If I sent my kids to the "George Q. Poindexter School" or the "Debra Snell School" (or in this city, say, Horace Mann) I think it's up to ME to find out what Poindexter or Snell or Mann believed in. What's the Snellian or Ronallian or Mannian way to treat kids? But if parents don't bring up the question; if they _act_ unconcerned, I would call it offensive to press data on them.
_Some_ people _care_ about the policies of corporations in which they hold stocks -- What is their record on ecology, gay rights, apartheid... Others don't; they're just happy with the profits. Leave me alone, I'd say, if I don't ask.
[DS quotes MRx:]
)Now, you have the right to prefer that your children offer uncritical
)allegiance to their government )as opposed to the World Creator, though
)(as you might guess), my money's on the Creator "Who )moves in sunlight
)and in soul-light" (from the morning verse we Waldorf pupils spoke while
)our )counterparts in state schools were ritually contemplating the glories
)of "the Republic" [er, not )Plato's]).
[DS responds:]
I have the right to request my son not participate in this activity at all.
[MRx:]
]]]]] I don't know which activity you mean, the Flag Pledge or the Steiner Verse. If you mean the Pledge, then why send him to a government school? If you mean the Verse, why send him to a Waldorf school? (By "right" I supose you mean moral, not legal right; the latter is a matter of fact, to which discussion I have nothing to contribute.)
[DS:]
I have the right to know that he would not be discriminated against for
choosing not to say The Pledge of Allegiance. He would still be educated
the _same_ as everyone else. I wonder what would happen if parents chose
for their children not to participate in Anthroposophical activities at a
public Waldorf school. I don't think they would be educated.
[MRx:]
]]]]]] Justifying ANY public schooling is not something I am capable of doing.
[DS:]
(End rant)
[MRx:]
]]]]] Shucks.
[DS quotes MRx:]
)Well, I would encourage you and your boy's teachers to lead him to love
)his country and find in the )red, white and blue a reflection of as much
)of his purpose on earth as it can provide him. It's the )"how" more than
)the "what" that figures most consequentially in the growing human being's
)path )towards social, including civic, responsibility. Your accounts give
)every indication that the devotion )(though you might use another term) to
)your son's progress will nourish it. So please forgive my )gratuitous
)observation of the good fortune he has incurred. /MRx
[DS:]
My sarcasm light bulb comes on here, MRx.
[MRx:]
]]]]]] That short-circuit is my responsibility. Utterly no sarcasm was intended, and I'm sorry for having miscommunicated. What I was ineffectively trying to say is that there are many ways to skin a destiny, and I would be very hard pressed for company if I believed that every good person attend a Waldorf school or be an anthroposphist. And I would be failing to apply the phenomenology that is the heart of anthroposophical practice, such as recognizing a good thing when I see it, like your devotion to your offspring, be it ever so nonthroposophic. Like the chicken soup in "Franny & Zooey," offered to a fasting, spiritually seeking teenager by her mother, and rejected because it wasn't vegetarian, until her older brother berates her for not recognizing consecrated food when she sees it.
[DS:]
Just because Max attends a public
school who is required to say The Pledge of Allegiance does not mean that
every second of his school day focus is on "the red, white and blue."
[MRx:]
]]]]]]] Chesterton (not only not-an-anthroposophist, but a Critic in his time, and one of my heroes anyway) said that the danger that arises when a man stops believing in God is not that he will believe nothing, but that he will believe anything. Give a child something tough to chew, and s/he can vigorously spit it out later ifs/he choose. I am (no sarcasm here, believe it or not) genuinely _grateful_ for the days of my reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public school before I got to the Waldorf School. It gave me something to think, feel, and will about. Yes, I believe it slightly contaminated the efficiency with which I subsequently formulated political judgments. But it would have been worse to have been given nothing, or only jingles from TV to revere. (And even _that_ would be better than nothing.) It was (imo) still better to have something of greater value, which is what I got at the Waldorf school. But that may be just me. /MRx
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.4 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: Re: RE: RE: please post anon
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:39:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
))) Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com) - 9/17/99 11:35 PM )))
writes:
)Michael Ronell
[MRx:]
Ronall
[Christian:]
)wrote
)
)that Christian wrote:
)))when Rudolf Steiner claimed to be a Christian (he meant "Catholic")
)
))Hi, Christian.
))What evidence do you have to suport this claim? It's a new one to me, but
)then, I'm here to learn. Best, /MRx
)
)Dear Michael,
)
)The parentheses were a part of my opinion. Sorry that this was not clear in
)the text.
)
)However, Steiner re-translated in 1919 the Roman Catholic Mass.
)Sounds not like evanglical Christian, rather like catholic Christian.
)They both exclude each other, and I don't believe, that there is something
)else which could be defined "Christian". [snip]
[MRx:]
'Nuff said.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.5 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Virtue in the mean
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:15:19 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil wrote: The idea of finding virtue in the mean is certainly not alien to
Christianity.
I would suggest contemplation of the familiar Christian exhortation, "Be in
the world, but not of it."
well, I like very much your seeking example from the Bible, yet I heartily
disagree... think that virtue as a mean is like "salt which has lost its
savor."
"Be in the world, but not of it," I feel is simply a kindly admonition to not
be worldly. (i.e.: just because we are in the world doesn't mean we have to
be 'worldly').
If we say the virtue of Jesus is that He served God, how can that be
interpreted as a mean?
( please forgive if I sound hard-headed).
There's that one scripture, where a woman touched Jesus' garment, and He
said something about feeling the virtue leave Himself - wonder what virtue
meant in that case?
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:21:59 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thankyou, Dan, for that excellent history regarding Waldorf schools and
Naziism. It may be that Steiner avoided mentioning Jews, then, and possibly
also beginning classes with the "Heil Hitler" out of caution/political
correctness.
It is difficult, within the political medium one finds oneself, to be totally
free - Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: anon replies to Premo
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:31:01 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
thankyou, Cara, for your thoughtful reply,
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.8 ---------------
From: "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com)
Subject: typo is Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:28:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Whoopsy-poo.
))) "MICHAEL RONALL" (mronall rabecker.com) - 9/17/99 11:15 PM )))
carelessly omitted the word "not" from the middle of:
)The fact of a sinning cleric does constitute an indictment of his creed.(
Younger readers may place it at the end, as a separate sentence. /M
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.9 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: restrictions on out-of-district charters blocked
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 21:47:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
RESTRICTIONS ON OUT-OF-DISTRICT CHARTERS BLOCKED
Assembly Bill 696 (Washington, D-Compton), which would have restricted a
school district's ability to grant charters to schools located outside the
district's
boundaries, failed passage in the Senate Education Committee. AB 696 was
sponsored by the California School Boards Association and failed despite
strong
support from Chair Dede Alpert (D-Coronado). The proposed measure is by no
means defeated. Instead, it is now a "two year bill," meaning that it could
be
brought up again when the Legislature reconvenes in 2000 for the second
year of the legislative biennium. The bill may become a vehicle for
addressing
implementation of a proposed school facilities bond initiative measure (see
below) that will likely appear on the March ballot.
)From Charter Schools Development Center 1999 California Charter School
Legislative Summary
http://www.csus.edu/ier/charter/news_9_17_99.html
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1459.10 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Max's new blessing
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:58:28 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909180323.UAA12869 lists1.best.com)
At 4:15 AM +0100 9/18/99, MICHAEL RONALL wrote:
[ds asks:]
) Do you
)have any evidence that children who are taught to read slowly achieve
)better long-term results? I've been looking for some, and haven't run
)across any...
)
)[MRx:]
)
)]]]]] Not my yob, mon. Only anecdotal evidence. But isn't the burden of
)proof on a critic?
The burden of proof lies with the author of the statement, honey. We keep
hearing the Anthroposophists make these claims. We're hoping to see some
evidence. It's only been 80 years, I know, but it is time to start thinking
about it...
[snip with no comment]
)]]]]]]] All my classmates learned to read. There were NO illiterates in
)the classes two grades below me (I started in sixth grade) or any above
)me. All I know is the many literate and eloquently literate Waldorf alumni
)I have met. I don't know how long it's supposed to take. Sorry I can't be
)of more help here.
wasn't the case at my kids' school. In 5th grade, 40% of the children were
not reading.
)]]]]]]] I am here to defend Waldorf education against unfair or misguided
)attacks and, to the best of my ability [for God and My Country -- Cub
)Scout's pledge], to clarify misconceptions to the extent that I can for
)those who are interested in reality. The fact of a sinning cleric does
)constitute an indictment of his creed. I am not here to defend practices
)that are alleged to have happened in circumstances I know nothing about!
)Do you think I'm way out of line here?
No. PLANS needs to stay sharp. We _love_ our critics or "Defenders of the
Faith".
)]]]]]]] Do I stint on information? Someone just has to ASK. What _I_
)object to is MISinformation or DISinformation such as is frequently
)offered here as a supposed "balance." The Nazi stuff, allegations of dunce
)caps, Satan worship, anonymous posters who say they are beaten daily... a
)lotta guilt by free association, I'd call it. Anthroposphy taught in the
)classroom... I've described here already how in my five years as a Waldorf
)pupil NO Anthropospohy was taught in my class, NO Satan worship. Not even
)ONE Satan worship. Not ONE.
So prove us wrong with evidence... I'm not holding my breath. YOU are a
successful WE student. You are an Anthroposophist. I rest my case.
)]]]]]] Justifying ANY public schooling is not something I am capable of doing.
Clearly.
)]]]]]] That short-circuit is my responsibility. Utterly no sarcasm was
)intended, and I'm sorry for having miscommunicated. What I was
)ineffectively trying to say is that there are many ways to skin a destiny,
)and I would be very hard pressed for company if I believed that every good
)person attend a Waldorf school or be an anthroposphist. And I would be
)failing to apply the phenomenology that is the heart of anthroposophical
)practice, such as recognizing a good thing when I see it, like your
)devotion to your offspring, be it ever so nonthroposophic. Like the
)chicken soup in "Franny & Zooey," offered to a fasting, spiritually
)seeking teenager by her mother, and rejected because it wasn't vegetarian,
)until her older brother berates her for not recognizing consecrated food
)when she sees it.
I love my kids. I know how to communicate that love too. I had wonderful
parents. It is generational. My boy says, "My Mama" in a drug out sort of
voice, while he gives me hugs and sits on my lap. I say, "Your Mama LOVES
her boy." He responds, "I know. Her boy loves his Mama." He tells me
everything - even stuff I don't wanna know sometimes...
-ds
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1459 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1460 --------------
001 - jellesonja computextos.ne - Re: waldorf
002 - jellesonja computextos.ne - Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
003 - jellesonja computextos.ne - PAWS
004 - jellesonja computextos.ne - Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
005 - jellesonja computextos.ne - Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
006 - "Brian & Christine" (bmax - Re: waldorf
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
008 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Hostility and bigotry
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: waldorf
010 - "Brian & Christine" (bmax - Re: Steiner and the heart
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.1 ---------------
From: jellesonja computextos.net (Gerard Schottelndreier)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:29:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com) (199909170246.TAA02015 lists1.best.com)
Dear Christine,
I agree with you thanking Diane for her story, because it is something I
(shamefully) recognize from Dutch experience. It is important that this
cramped attitude is exposed.
However, I disagree with your generalised statement about Waldorf schools.
In the Netherlands it is changing, in the last few years. Not just because
of disappointed parents, also because of us teachers. Now we see a coming
back to the roots: our relationships with the children and with ourselves.
The general attitude is definitely more relaxed, more real.
Sincerely,
Jelle Sch–ttelndreier
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.2 ---------------
From: jellesonja computextos.net (Gerard Schottelndreier)
Subject: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 22:56:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909170706.AAA28738 lists1.best.com)
In response to the lady who easily compares WE and Treblinka:
My country was occupied by Nazis for five years. My family suffered from
them.
If you can make a connection betweenWE and Nazis in your brain, you must
have something ugly in your heart and something stupid or very superficial
in your brain.
Sure there were Jewish children at the first Waldorf school, like there were
close Jewish friends and coworkers among the leading anthroposophists, like
there are today. Like there are Jewish teachers now in Waldorf schools. Take
a look at a WE website: you find them led by Jews in Israel (and in other
countries), by Islamics in Egypt, by Walakota in the US, by blacks in
Africa, by Hindus in India.
Jelle Sch–ttelndreier
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.3 ---------------
From: jellesonja computextos.net (Gerard Schottelndreier)
Subject: PAWS
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:36:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Dear Mr. Dugan,
as you are concerned with raising false expectations, I offer the suggestion
to change the name PLANS to People Against Waldorf Schools, PAWS. In
abstract reasoning you might venture that diminishing Waldorf pedagogy is
equal to being for legal schools. In reality, being *for* something implies
a positive,constructive action.
Many people agree that education is in crisis, not just in the US. We do
need every hand of people who do something FOR children in schools.
Still I thank you for creating this list, because I became more aware of
serious flaws that we good Waldorf teachers also have.
And because it offers an opportunity for people that have been hurt by
Waldorf teachers, which is very important.
Although I can't be absolutely certain it's not a fiction smear attack - I
think some people on this list are capable of that - I believe a story like
Rosie's and I am ashamed it happened. I want to say I'm really sorry. I'm
more aware and determined to not let these things happen.
Sincerely,
Jelle Sch–ttelndreier
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.4 ---------------
From: jellesonja computextos.net (Gerard Schottelndreier)
Subject: Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:31:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Dear Mr.Dugan,
you posted a quote which might lead the reader to believe that Steiner was
deceiving, by (from my memory of the quote) publicly claiming that the
students don't get exposed to anthroposophy, while encouraging the teachers
to put as much anthroposophy into the lessons as possible. And not telling
about that?
I don't know how it was then, but as long as I can recall, in the
Netherlands, Waldorf educators have always been very open about the
anthroposophical basis of the didactics. To the parents and everyone
interested. To the parents, because they choose as adults. Not to the
children, because they don't have the age, nor the interest to hear about
didactics. Teachers lecture as much as possible, about what makes it
different from other schools, and try to get parents to courses about
anthroposophy, either to spread the word or to explain the didactics
further. I think it is logical that in lectures they start with A and not
with Z, but Z can be heard by everybody who sticks around a little, as is
clear from postings on this list. And everything is available in print.
There is no hiding, no deceiving where I come from.
And the didactics should indeed be made as anthroposophical as possible.
That is the source, but others can enjoy the results without engaging in the
source. Like we enjoy the fruits of other schools of pedagogy in elaborating
on our beginnings. Realistisch Rekenen (Realistic Math) and Constructivist
methods are taught in universities throughout the world. Those come very,
very close to the Waldorf approach: playing and exploring the senses
extensively and intensively before abstracting, doing lots of physical
crafts, stimulating multiple intelligences, developing head, heart and hand.
Mr. Mollet WaldorfEdu aol.com (one who teaches Waldorf without
anthroposophy) hopes that there are Waldorf teachers who take (as he does as
a public school teacher) the following quote from Steiner as the basis for
part of their work:
"Moreover, I should like to point out to you that the real aim and
object of our education is not to found as many schools as possible ...
but our education concerns itself with methods of teaching, and is
essentially a new way and art of education, so every teacher can bring
it into their work in whatever kind of school they happen to be ... and
I have declared that the methods can be taken into any school. The
methods can be introduced into every situation where someone has the
good will to do it." -RS
1 Within Steiners 10.000 or so lectures, you can often forge a quote out
of context that will 'prove' your point. It's difficult to contextualize
correctly, especially because most of his talks were fit to a specific time,
place and audience.
2 A very rough guess of mine is that among 3000 people who work in WE in
the Netherlands, only a few have read all his works and lectures.
3 I even heard someone say that he said that within 100 years all of his
lectures would be outdated and only his Philosophy of Freedom would matter.
What these 2 points, and the uncertain third, lead to is that in judging
Waldorf education, you can not rely on quotes, not even from a teacher
training source. When you have anthroposophy as your guide, like I do, you
might follow a quote from Steiner that opposes what the teacher says.
Actually, I frequently have in my Waldorf training. If you do not, you're
even less inclined to take for granted what a teacher says.
So you can only judge the individuals and the team that actively make up a
particular school. What are the individuals' views, attitudes and acts and
how do they interact with the others', forming the team's views, attitudes
and acts?
I'm a Waldorf teacher but would not work in any Waldorf school.
I advised my sister to send her child to any school where she feels okay
with the particular teacher who'll have him. Still I'm happy that both times
when there was a new step (first toddler group and now kindergarten) she
picked the Waldorf one.
By the way, she and her husband are atheists. (A little cultural info for
USers:) This is quite common in the Netherlands in general and with Waldorf
parents it may be even more common. It is likely the least religious country
in the world. But we do have, I think, around 50% traditionally religious
schools, - just like the 100 Waldorf schools, they're all financed by the
state. Some have Catholic classroom prayers, others Protestant, some
Islamitic. No public worries, they're no worse than the state schools.
Some questions about the US: When Dutch see students in the US having a
daily ceremony of pledging allegiance to a flag, we mostly think that's
dangerous or a little obscene. More so in this age of nationalist disasters.
Is the US public okay with this?
How is there a separation af church and state if every dollar calls on God
and every presidential candidate does the same?
(sure this is off-topic, but you're the only USers I'm in contact with at
the moment, excuse me, and feel free to mail my private adress: I saw the
Iowa Straw Poll and I was shocked when I heard them talk about values and
God while smearing others and displaying dirty demagogy like I never hear in
Europe's respected political parties. How can you get that together?)
Sincerely,
Jelle Sch–ttelndreier.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.5 ---------------
From: jellesonja computextos.net (Gerard Schottelndreier)
Subject: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:42:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: (199909171638.JAA09553 lists1.best.com)
Now I see what Mr. Ronall means with misinformation on this list:
In quick reading I thought that Mr. Czachary quoted Steiner, but on close
reading I found that it is only his suggestion:
)From: Christian Czachary (....)
)we can tell what Steiner's attitude would have been
)towards Nazis: "It is IRREVELANT, because it's Karma, Karma."
)
)(Quotes from "Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman", Linz 1915,
)Introduction by Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. It is included in Das Geheimnis
)de
)s Todes (The Secret of Death)
)
)Sincerely
)Christian
To someone who's framing suggestions with such a content, like "he doesn't
care about the ultimate evil" , I don't know what to say. This is so
rotten.
Anyone who takes one look at what Steiner did, knows better.
What is this rottenness, is it hate? It must be, but why?
Or is it only wanting to have something sensational or seemingly important,
in order to attract attention, or a kind of career?
A frustrated idealist who can't fight any real wrong? Who thinks he can't do
anything valuable?
There are insane lies about Steiner, things he was farthest from, like
Nazism, black magic sex, and opposing attacks, like being a communist, a
capitalist, a friend of jews (this he was not farthest from, but there are
people who use it as an attack), an antisemite, whatever.
I strongly believe that Christians real? quotes are also misleading.
Unfortunately, I don't
have the context of their source, nor a contraquote at hand, being in Peru,
but Steiner warned very seriously that the cultivation of Blut- und
Bodenideale (blood/race- and soil/territory/land-ideals, the Nazi stuff)
could only take civilization into the gravest destruction.
In the several places I read about this, he said NOTHING about karma. In
general,
I've never read anything about escaping responsibility. On the contrary, I
know no other philosopher who calls so solemnly and so often to our
responsibility.
During public lectures, people tried to kill him two times - most likely
Nazis, though there is no proof of that. They were active in Munich in the
twenties.
More important than quoting bits out of context is judging Steiners overall
activity. His energetical multiyear effort after WW1 to organize society in
a way that would prevent the consequences of nationalism and Versailles
(WW2), deserves praise. Adressing broad circles - politicians,
anthroposophists, elite, huge factory halls full of workers - he tried to
get enough support for his genial idea: distance
the cultural (identity, religion, national, ethnic, science, art)
aspects and organisations in society from
the economical (consumption, production, trade - what everybody needs
and can offer). So on the basis of political EQUALITY for everybody, there
can be LIBERTY for ethnicities, scientific and artistical work, schools,
believes, national aspects and BROTHERHOOD in our basic production and
needs, because the religious, national or ethnic forces are distanced from
or kept out of political power (army, legislation, and so the state monopoly
on legal violence), and out of economical power. If you want to constitute
the Church of Original Purplebearded Serbs, that's okay, but you can't claim
territory or privilege for it politically, nor buy those economically.
This would have prevented the nationalist horrors that we witness today.
Also, it might prove a good medicine for the economical power that nowadays
goes far beyond its reign, in consuming people, resources and nature and in
buying and determining science, information time and media (also belong to
the cultural life) and education for its own profits.
Brotherhood and liberty are likely to conflict if they're not applied to
their distinct dominions.
Here's a link to the East and West that has been discussed in other
contributions to this list. In the USSR there was no freedom in the cultural
life. It was conformist and monopolised by a political ideology in the name
of brotherhood, and it determined economic activity. In the West there is no
brotherhood either, but liberty in the economical life, which very much
dominates the political and cultural life. But liberty is impossible here.
We share one world, and what I consume, someone else can't consume. In the
cultural life this is opposite: youcan have as many thoughts as you like,
without taking away any space for others to think. So on the level of this
Western egoism and Eastern conformism, Lucifer and Ahriman change places.
Apart from campaigning aginst this and for a real benificial application of
the three moral forces, Steiner also took responsibility to put it into
practice and set up an association of enterprises in a way that practiced
brotherhood instead of greed at the expense of others.
Sincerely,
Jelle Sch–ttelndreier
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.6 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:56:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com) (199909170246.TAA02015 lists1.best.com) (199909180737.AAA04267 lists1.best.com)
----- Original Message -----
From: Gerard Schottelndreier (jellesonja computextos.net)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: waldorf
)Dear Christine,
I agree with you thanking Diane for her story, because it is something I
(shamefully) recognize from Dutch experience. It is important that this
cramped attitude is exposed.
However, I disagree with your generalised statement about Waldorf schools.
)
I only meant that it was the first clear description I've read of an actual
classroom setting and it helped me get a better picture in my mind of
Waldorf schools. I admit my ignorance. I know very little about Waldorf.
The reason I'm on this list is to learn more.
(snip)
)The general attitude is definitely more relaxed, more real.
More real? I'm wondering what you think about Steiner's belief that the
heart doesn't pump blood. Have you read the previous posts discussing it?
This topic seemed to show that Steiner's "spiritual" values were more
important that scientific facts. Steiner actually believed the heart
doesn't pump blood, but
Steve Premo wrote:
)As I understand it, Steiner believed that blood is a "spirit
substance" that only takes material form on leaving the body, and
moves through the body by itself. The heart has a role in regulating
it, as well as a role in thinking and feeling.
But I have not read Steiner, so perhaps someone with more knowledge
of Anthroposophy could better answer your question.
)
(I'm not trying to get you into trouble, Steve, it's just this post was the
only one I hadn't deleted yet about this topic)
I would like to hear what you have to say about the heart pumping blood.
I'm not making accusations, just trying to see what you think so I can
understand better.
Sincerely,
Christine
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 05:45:43 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jelle wrote: "More important than quoting bits out of context is judging
Steiners overall activity..."
Yes, looking at the outward surface level - of favorable Waldorf PR, Steiner
seems like a great guy.
Sincerely, Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.8 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Hostility and bigotry
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 05:50:33 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Deby wrote: "They deny their own belief system to inculcate Anthroposophy
into
unsuspecting children whose parents believe the lie of their non-sectarian
claim. They should admit their mistakes and fully disclose their doctrine
to all parents AND school boards if they want us to leave them alone."
I agree with you totally, Sincerely,. Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 05:59:47 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Winters wrote: "Once in one of the classes I worked in, a boy drawing a
picture asked me how to spell a word which he wanted to write on his picture,
so I spelled it for him. The teacher reprimanded me (in front of the child,
ironically) for spelling the word for him, because it was such a seriously
damaging thing for him, supposedly."
Probably many of us can relate to this story. Interesting, how Waldorf
teachers don't hesitate to reprove and show parent as "wrongful."
Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1460.10 ---------------
From: "Brian & Christine" (bmax ulink.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner and the heart
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:15:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com) (199909170246.TAA02015 lists1.best.com) (199909180737.AAA04267 lists1.best.com) (199909180856.BAA24789 lists1.best.com)
Dear Jelle,
I'd like to make my last post more clear. I wasn't able to give you a
definite quote on what Steiner believed about the heart pumping blood. Your
certainly not on trial to answer for his beliefs, and I'm sorry if my last
post made it sound like you were.
What I am curious about is:
How do you, as a Waldorf teacher, view this idea that Steiner didn't believe
the heart pumps blood. Do you think this is just another wacky idea
floating around the critic's list about Steiner? Do you think there may be
any truth to it? Does the science seem to you to be factual, systematic
science? Or, supposing that Steiner really did believe this way, could this
view of the heart be taught in a Waldorf school? Just curious.
Thanks for any insight you may have,
Christine
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian & Christine (bmax ulink.net)
To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 1999 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: waldorf
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: Gerard Schottelndreier (jellesonja computextos.net)
) To: (waldorf-critics lists.best.com)
) Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 3:29 PM
) Subject: Re: waldorf
)
)
) )Dear Christine,
) I agree with you thanking Diane for her story, because it is something I
) (shamefully) recognize from Dutch experience. It is important that this
) cramped attitude is exposed.
) However, I disagree with your generalised statement about Waldorf schools.
) )
)
) I only meant that it was the first clear description I've read of an
actual
) classroom setting and it helped me get a better picture in my mind of
) Waldorf schools. I admit my ignorance. I know very little about Waldorf.
) The reason I'm on this list is to learn more.
)
) (snip)
)
) )The general attitude is definitely more relaxed, more real.
)
) More real? I'm wondering what you think about Steiner's belief that the
) heart doesn't pump blood. Have you read the previous posts discussing
it?
) This topic seemed to show that Steiner's "spiritual" values were more
) important that scientific facts. Steiner actually believed the heart
) doesn't pump blood, but
)
) Steve Premo wrote:
) )As I understand it, Steiner believed that blood is a "spirit
) substance" that only takes material form on leaving the body, and
) moves through the body by itself. The heart has a role in regulating
) it, as well as a role in thinking and feeling.
)
) But I have not read Steiner, so perhaps someone with more knowledge
) of Anthroposophy could better answer your question.
) )
) (I'm not trying to get you into trouble, Steve, it's just this post was
the
) only one I hadn't deleted yet about this topic)
)
) I would like to hear what you have to say about the heart pumping blood.
) I'm not making accusations, just trying to see what you think so I can
) understand better.
)
) Sincerely,
)
) Christine
)
)
)
)
)
)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1460 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1461 --------------
001 - GypsyArdor aol.com - Cara/kids' games
002 - GypsyArdor aol.com - not
003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ - Waldorf kindergarten
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
005 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: restrictions on out-of-district charters blocked
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re: Waldorf kindergarten
007 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
008 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
009 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
010 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.1 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: Cara/kids' games
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 06:22:07 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Cara--
Maybe it was just the particular school you were in, or maybe your son is
naturally shy, but my daughter started the Waldorf kindergarten two weeks ago
and came home to tell me all about playing "chase" and what fun it was. "The
other kids called it 'tag' but I call it chase," is what she said. Of course
her father and I were excited to hear about her day...and to hear that she
was actually playing with other children (since she is an only child and was
never really around other children much).
--Wendi
) He still feels out of place and shy when the other kids play games like
) tag, hide-and-seek, musical chairs, etc. and at the age of 6, he was just
) finding out about these games.
) It must be hard for an older child to make the change and to be such an
) outsider in society.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.2 ---------------
From: GypsyArdor aol.com
Subject: not
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 06:39:34 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) Younger readers may place it at the end, as a separate sentence. /M
lol
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.3 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Waldorf kindergarten
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 05:55:13 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hi, to all who responded to my description of the kgartens in my son's
Waldorf school. Christian asked, How did other parents react to what was
going on? and Wendi asked for more about what goes on . . . Let me just say
first off I really do think a lot of what goes on in the kgartens at least
(I have less info about the grades) is wholesome, age-appropriate,
nurturing. I do think Wendi's right to expect that her child's classmates
are less likely to bring guns to school, because these families are
self-selecting! An awful lot depends on the teacher. My son was fortunate to
have a couple of really talented teachers (and a couple of other
not-so-talented teachers, and I have to say the latter were the
true-believer anthroposophists).
Because I was a classroom aide (attended faculty meetings, etc.), I saw a
LOT more of what was going on than most parents did. Most parents were not
aware of the severe discipline problems. Any parent who came in to observe
in these classes was disturbed by what they saw and some who observed took
their children out of the school. However, at least at our school, the
teachers strongly DISCOURAGE parents from visiting or observing their
child's class! Supposedly, the parent's presence changes the dynamic of
what's going on so you don't get a true picture anyway . . .but naturally I
wasn't the only one who wondered, Do they just not want us to SEE what's
going on? They really don't like to have to explain themselves to
unenlightened parents. They were not interested in the idea of being
accountable to parents.
Again, though, this depends on the teacher. The teachers who were not
hardline anthroposophists, were more open to parental involvement and were
not as judgmental of parents. These classrooms were not out of control. But
it was hard to avoid concluding that the fanaticism of the one-true-way
Waldorf teachers leads to this shut-out-the-outside-world mentality, where
parents (who are part of the outside world) are usually wrong. One teacher
advocated in faculty meetings that it become policy that PARENTS NOT BE
ALLOWED IN CLASSROOMS. Parents were always messing up what she was trying to
do, by asking questions or commenting, which supposedly ruined it for the
children. Fortunately,more moderate views prevailed.
Most parents in our school were definitely not anthroposophists (only a
handful). Most did not understand how much anthroposophy influenced what the
teachers were doing. But (more importantly to me) the parents did not know
how judgmental the teachers' attitudes were toward the parents. There were
maybe two or three families (out of about 60 in the school) who were really
sold on Waldorof-all-the-way and tried to make their home life conform (all
the right toys, no TV/video/movies/computer ever, candles at dinner, etc.) .
The rest took a sort of, "I'll take what I like here and ignore the rest,"
attitude, which is probably healthy, but they didn't realize that this was a
difficult situation for the child because the teacher
thought the parents were all wrong, and this comes through to the child.
(Child relates eagerly something fun they did at home, teacher says "OH I
SEE..." in haughty, knowing tone, or just ignores the child, bursts into
song ... The children don't get what this is about, but they FEEL
dismissed.)
I came to feel that while sometimes the teachers were right about a
particular thing the parents were supposedly doing wrong, this attitude was
very damaging and unhealthy.
Christian asked, what did parents do at home if children asked to read and
write? Many agreed that delaying reading was better, and felt guilty if
their child was insisting on learning . . . There's this whole mentality of,
"I swear I didn't teach him that, he just LEARNED on his own . . . I'm not
encouraging him, but he keeps asking. I can't stop him . . . Don't tell the
teacher."
Others felt, I think, that it was good their child wasn't being pushed in
school to read, so that it was okay if they did a little of it at home if
the child was interested. This too I think is a healthy attitude, but most
parents didn't realize how dreadfully in the wrong the teachers thought they
were. (Likewise the parents might feel pleased their children were never
shown videos in school, so feel it was okay if they watched an occasional
video at home, also in my opinion a healthy attitude but not shared by the
teachers.)
The parents did not, for the most part, understand that the teachers (not
all the teachers, but in our school at least the "powers that be") felt
parents generally to be obstacles to what the teachers were trying to
accomplish.
Wendi asked about the teeth thing. Steiner stated that the change of teeth
at about 5-7 years of age indicates (well, it indicates all sorts of things
anthroposophically) that the child is ready to learn to read. (That's
greatly oversimplifying, probably.) In the early years, to simplify, the
child is building his/her body and should not have mental forces taxed for
an abstract process like learning to read. Getting the "big teeth" is a sign
this process is finished and the child has other forces available for
learning. The Waldorf hardliners ignore the fact, for one thing, that this
is a pretty wide range of time, that the process of losing and getting new
teeth goes on for years in some children. To me, this is not as wacky as it
may sound at first--it seems to me as reasonable and no more abitrary an
indicator than just chronological age--but if they could only view it as ONE
INDICATOR, one thing on a check list, varying from child to child. But they
make a fetish of it, and will sometimes say a child isn't ready for first
grade just because he/she has no loose teeth yet, whether or not other signs
indicate readiness.
Hope this is useful.--Diana.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:16:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Christian Czachary]
)
) A Question: Why do you think, used Adolf Hitler an INDIAN
) Hindu symbol for
) his warfare, the SWASTIKA ("Hakenkreuz", the Hindu symbol for
) 'power')?
) It is all there, it cannot be explained away.
[Bob Tolz]
Christian, I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.5 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: restrictions on out-of-district charters blocked
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 12:25:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Dan Dugan]
) RESTRICTIONS ON OUT-OF-DISTRICT CHARTERS BLOCKED
)
) Assembly Bill 696 (Washington, D-Compton), which would have
) restricted a
) school district's ability to grant charters to schools
) located outside the
) district's
) boundaries, failed passage in the Senate Education Committee.
Dan, do you know what the vote was?
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Waldorf kindergarten
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:25:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909181256.FAA29319 lists1.best.com)
At 1:55 PM +0100 9/18/99, Diana Winters wrote:
)Hi, to all who responded to my description of the kgartens in my son's
)Waldorf school. Christian asked, How did other parents react to what was
)going on? and Wendi asked for more about what goes on . . . Let me just say
)first off I really do think a lot of what goes on in the kgartens at least
)(I have less info about the grades) is wholesome, age-appropriate,
)nurturing. I do think Wendi's right to expect that her child's classmates
)are less likely to bring guns to school, because these families are
)self-selecting! An awful lot depends on the teacher. My son was fortunate to
)have a couple of really talented teachers (and a couple of other
)not-so-talented teachers, and I have to say the latter were the
)true-believer anthroposophists).
One's first impression of Waldorf is that it is a liberal school - not so.
Waldorf is very ridged. The more the teacher is into Anthroposophy, the
more ridged the environment gets, and the more judgemental the teacher is.
I mean, if the parents won't build that pedestal for their child's teacher,
the teacher will do it themself.
)
)Because I was a classroom aide (attended faculty meetings, etc.), I saw a
)LOT more of what was going on than most parents did.
As a board member I saw LOTS too. The faculty is not necessarily
compatable. They hold Anthroposophy over each others heads. The _one_ who
knows more can bully the others.
Most parents were not
)aware of the severe discipline problems. Any parent who came in to observe
)in these classes was disturbed by what they saw and some who observed took
)their children out of the school.
My son said, "If you would COME to that school and SIT in my class, you
wouldn't make me go there anymore." I had to make an appointment to do so.
My appointment was made for a week ahead. I was horrified by the teacher.
She was so busy controlling the class that _no_ teaching occured. At one
point during my observation, I watched her _run_ from one side of the
classroom to the other to discipline a child. She was frantic. I watched
the children's faces. One child who was labeled a troublemaker, was truly
zoned out. I mean he was not even present in his body. I spoke to his
father, a good friend of mine. I told him that his son was getting an "A"
in mind travel. My own son said, "I feel like I'm going to be hypnotized
However, at least at our school, the
)teachers strongly DISCOURAGE parents from visiting or observing their
)child's class! Supposedly, the parent's presence changes the dynamic of
)what's going on so you don't get a true picture anyway . . .but naturally I
)wasn't the only one who wondered, Do they just not want us to SEE what's
)going on? They really don't like to have to explain themselves to
)unenlightened parents. They were not interested in the idea of being
)accountable to parents.
)
)Again, though, this depends on the teacher. The teachers who were not
)hardline anthroposophists, were more open to parental involvement and were
)not as judgmental of parents. These classrooms were not out of control. But
)it was hard to avoid concluding that the fanaticism of the one-true-way
)Waldorf teachers leads to this shut-out-the-outside-world mentality, where
)parents (who are part of the outside world) are usually wrong. One teacher
)advocated in faculty meetings that it become policy that PARENTS NOT BE
)ALLOWED IN CLASSROOMS. Parents were always messing up what she was trying to
)do, by asking questions or commenting, which supposedly ruined it for the
)children. Fortunately,more moderate views prevailed.
Like I said, it took me a week to get in to observe. I wanted my husband to
observe as well. The teacher made his appointment a week and a half away.
Max didn't make it. He said, "You have 5 days to find a new school for me
because after that, I'm not going back." I _knew_ he meant it. He drug me
out of Waldorf kicking and screaming.
)
) "I'll take what I like here and ignore the rest,"
)attitude, which is probably healthy, but they didn't realize that this was a
)difficult situation for the child because the teacher
)thought the parents were all wrong, and this comes through to the child.
)(Child relates eagerly something fun they did at home, teacher says "OH I
)SEE..." in haughty, knowing tone, or just ignores the child, bursts into
)song ... The children don't get what this is about, but they FEEL
)dismissed.)
YES! I saw the teachers trying to cure the children from their home lives.
The cure included questionable discipline practices.
)
)I came to feel that while sometimes the teachers were right about a
)particular thing the parents were supposedly doing wrong, this attitude was
)very damaging and unhealthy.
)
)Christian asked, what did parents do at home if children asked to read and
)write? Many agreed that delaying reading was better, and felt guilty if
)their child was insisting on learning . . . There's this whole mentality of,
)"I swear I didn't teach him that, he just LEARNED on his own . . . I'm not
)encouraging him, but he keeps asking. I can't stop him . . . Don't tell the
)teacher."
At our Waldorf school, the teachers had the parents well trained. No one
_ever_ asked about academics. It was not mentioned. I was worried about my
older son who was still not reading in the spring of 4th grade. I thought
he had learning problems. I confessed to another parent as we were waiting
outside the school. She was shocked. She thought _her_ son was the only one
in the class who couldn't read. She and I took a poll. Half the class could
not read. No one knew other children were having problems. When we talked
to the teacher AS A GROUP, he decided he would not be returning for the
following year. That sent the class into crisis. The majority of the
parents were so loyal to him. There seemed to be little to no concern that
their children were lagging so far behind, even by Waldorf standards.
)The parents did not, for the most part, understand that the teachers (not
)all the teachers, but in our school at least the "powers that be") felt
)parents generally to be obstacles to what the teachers were trying to
)accomplish.
At a board meeting, one Waldorf teacher (big time Anthropop) said, "Parents
should do the work that the teachers tell them to do. Nothing more.They
should be cleaning the school, organizing festivals and earning money for
the school by Faculty approved fundraisers."
)
)Hope this is useful.--Diana.
Very,
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.7 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 12:47:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
)[Christian Czachary]
))
)) A Question: Why do you think, used Adolf Hitler an INDIAN
)) Hindu symbol for
)) his warfare, the SWASTIKA ("Hakenkreuz", the Hindu symbol for
)) 'power')?
)) It is all there, it cannot be explained away.
)
)[Bob Tolz]
) Christian, I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
) Bob Tolz
The point was to show the influence of Theosophy on Faschism, especially
the teachings of Blavatsky and Hinduism.
This could explain existing familiarities between Anthroposophy (which is
influenced by Theosophy as well) and Faschism.
However, I do NOT say that Steiner was a Nazi or something like this.
But I say, that it is possible that Steiner's writings were interpreted by
faschists to the extend, that for the evolution of mankind it is necessary
to eliminate (get rid of) certain races, which have no right for existence
anymore, i.e. the Jews for example.
This then would indicate, that Anthroposphy amongst other ideologies played
a role in preparing the way for Faschist Germany or rising the general
acceptance of the faschist ideology.
In the Waldorf literature Steiner is represented as far away from Theosophy
as possible (as far as I know), because the problem is known. This is not
the right attitude towards this problem, because still Anthroposophy and
Theosophy has a lot of influence on the intelligencia.
Waldorf education itself is not faschist by any means. But as long as WE
does not distanciate itself sharply from any of these influences, WE grows
into the danger of being a helpmate for a mystic/faschist ideologies, which
may arise in the near future again, by means of making certain
"Weltanschauungen" (World-views) acceptable.
Nobody would say: "Look, this is a black man. Kill him."
A Waldorf teacher might teach the child: "These are the black, they are of
the night. We are the whites, we are the children of the sun."
Since in the General sub-consciousness the Night is associated with danger
or evil, the text (as innocent as it might sound) could implement an idea
in the child, (which alone would do nothing) which together with many other
factors could rise the acceptance of viewing certain races as minor,
dangerous, parasitic or something like that.
Christian Czachary
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.8 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:09:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: (199909180738.AAA06458 lists1.best.com)
At 01:31 18/09/99 -0500, Jelle Sch–ttelndreier wrote:
)
)
)Dear Mr.Dugan,
)
)...I'm a Waldorf teacher but would not work in any Waldorf school.
)I advised my sister to send her child to any school where she feels okay
)with the particular teacher who'll have him. Still I'm happy that both times
)when there was a new step (first toddler group and now kindergarten) she
)picked the Waldorf one.
)
)By the way, she and her husband are atheists. (A little cultural info for
)USers:) This is quite common in the Netherlands in general and with Waldorf
)parents it may be even more common.
In Israel, ALL parents who place their children in the Waldorf
preschool-kindergarten and school are non-religious. The mistake they make
is that, being non-religious, some are so anti the religious establishment
that they think anything is fine, as long as it's not religious Judaism.
They don't realize that their children are going through a very "spiritual"
indoctrination during their very impressionable years. This is something
that becomes a part of the children, and will have its effect throughout
their lives.
When we removed our son from his Waldorf kindergarten for another year of
"real" kindergarten, we felt like exorcists trying to rid him of all the
psychological damage that had been done.
All I can say is Thank God (or whatever) that one year later (after an
intensive year of regular kindergarten, physio-therapy and classes for
gifted children - where they actually allow children to be curious and
learn things), we can smile and see that things are working out well,
although there are still a few matters (social, especially) where the
damage is deep and hopefully time will heal the wounds.
Cara
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.9 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Quoting creatively, WE without anthroposophy, judging.
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:24:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909180738.AAA06458 lists1.best.com)
On 18 Sep 99,, Gerard Schottelndreier wrote:
) Some questions about
) the US: When Dutch see students in the US having a daily ceremony of
) pledging allegiance to a flag, we mostly think that's dangerous or a
) little obscene. More so in this age of nationalist disasters. Is the
) US public okay with this?
Yes, for the most part. People here are very patriotic. I don't like
it, personally, and I particularly don't like the idea of using
government-run education to indoctrinate kids into a nationalistic
attitude.
My personal theory is that, being a young country which has
always had the same form of government, people equate love of
country with support for the government. This attitude has
decreased significantly since the 60's, when young people started
questioning it, but it's still very prevalent.
) How is there a separation af church and
) state if every dollar calls on God and every presidential candidate
) does the same?
Presidential candidates are free to say whatever they want. It's
that free speech thing. They're speaking for themselves, not for the
government.
The invocation of God on our money has never, to my knowledge,
been tested in court. Personally, I think it's unconstitutional.
) I saw
) the Iowa Straw Poll and I was shocked when I heard them talk about
) values and God while smearing others and displaying dirty demagogy
) like I never hear in Europe's respected political parties. How can you
) get that together?
It surprises you that the folks who express the strongest religious
convictions are the most likely to condemn others for perceived
moral transgressions or for holding contrary views? Those are the
folks who I would expect to smear others, frankly, because they
tend to be the least tolerant of those with other views.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1461.10 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 13:30:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
) Jelle Schottelndreier:
)Now I see what Mr. Ronall means with misinformation on this list:
)In quick reading I thought that Mr. Czachary quoted Steiner, but on close
)reading I found that it is only his suggestion:
)
))From: Christian Czachary (....)
))we can tell what Steiner's attitude would have been
))towards Nazis: "It is IRREVELANT, because it's Karma, Karma."
))
))(Quotes from "Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman", Linz 1915,
))Introduction by Peter Mollenhauer, Ph.D. It is included in Das Geheimnis
))de
))s Todes (The Secret of Death)
))
))Sincerely
))Christian
)
[Jelle Schottelndreier]
)To someone who's framing suggestions with such a content, like "he doesn't
)care about the ultimate evil" , I don't know what to say. This is so
)rotten.
)Anyone who takes one look at what Steiner did, knows better.
[Christian Czachary]
I did not quote Steiner at all, but Peter Mollenhauer.
I tried to make Mollenhauer's texts distinct by using single quotes for all
quotations instead of double quotes.
It is dangerous to read my texts quick, because my english is not perfect,
so you might easily misinterpret my text.
But sorry that I did not make it clear enough which was quoted and from
whom and what was my suggestion.
My suggestion about a possible attitude of Steiner towards Nazis doesn't
include his attitude towards what the Nazi's actually did. The question for
Steiner would have been for example "Why did nobody prevent that something
like this happened?"
In _my_ opinion Steiner would have answered himself "Because it was the
destiny of Central Europe".
Note, that Waldorf education is not regarded in this context. It was
Steiner's hypotetical attitude towards Nazism which was addressed in my
post.
Sincerely
Christian Czachary
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1461 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1462 --------------
001 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: RE: waldorf
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: public schools-charter schools
003 - Christian Czachary (chris - RE: RE: waldorf
004 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
005 - Christian Czachary (chris - Article of Janet Biehl
006 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry?
007 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: waldorf
008 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: waldorf
009 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Cara/kids' games
010 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Waldorf kindergarten
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.1 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: RE: waldorf
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 12:03:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909172148.OAA02424 lists1.best.com)
Christian, you wrote,
)It is the duty of every school, to give every parent everytime the
)possibility, to go with his/her concerns to someone, who cares, and who has
)the power to make a change.
)
)I don't know the system of the Steiner schools in this regard.
)I regarded problems as such as were described by Diana, as they regard the
)direct welfare of the child.
In Waldorf the class teacher is supposed to be the point of contact between
the parents and the school. When I had issues with Waldorf at the San
Francisco school, I nonetheless had a good relationship with my son's class
teacher. Therefore I asked to meet with the College of Teachers to discuss
my problems with Waldorf in general. There is no Principal in Waldorf, only
the College.
The College was "too busy." They delegated a committee of three, two
College members *and my son's class teacher* (who was not in the college),
to give me an ultimatum to stop making trouble or leave. The class teacher
was forced to become involved.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: public schools-charter schools
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 15:53:29 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
someone in the news recently pointed out how public education is
essentially "welfare" education, as it is free, government funded.
Equivalent to government-funded medical treatment, government-funded housing.
There is a certain standard to the government-funded choices that maybe is
not so good, but for some is blessing when there is no choice. For example,
government-funded medical treatment at a county hospital is of course better
than none in an emergency. Similarly, government-funded shelter in a housing
project is better than being homeless.
Probably all of us want better than the standard for our children. Perhaps
charter schools offer a way to improve that standard from within/without the
system, while offering educational choices also to those who otherwise
wouldn't have a choice.
One of the problems with private education is that children come from all
parts to attend the private school, whereas in public school, children attend
with their neighborhood friends and the children of their own town. Charter
schools could offer the best of both worlds.
Sincerely, Patti M.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.3 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: RE: RE: waldorf
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:26:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dan, you wrote,
)In Waldorf the class teacher is supposed to be the point of contact
between
)the parents and the school. When I had issues with Waldorf at the San
)Francisco school, I nonetheless had a good relationship with my son's
class
)teacher. Therefore I asked to meet with the College of Teachers to discuss
)my problems with Waldorf in general. There is no Principal in Waldorf,
only
)the College.
That the class teacher is _the_ point of contact between the parents and
the school can be a hindrance in any effort to resolve eventual existing
problems between the teacher and the child/parents.
In a school of the community in Germany (most schools are schools of the
community rather than of the state) this would not be acceptable. If a -non
private- school would act the way you described, the parents could go to
the "Schulamt" (school-office of the community) first, then to the
Schul-Ministerium (I don't know the proper counterpart in the US for the
German Schul-Ministerium).
I don't know the written law by which this would be solved, but I know the
general practice in this regard. It is always possible to get official
information from the "Schul-Ministeriat" about the actual situation about
the law.
A private school in Germany (like Waldorf) doesn't need to fit _all_ of
these regularities, but there are a few fundamental rules which try to
protect the welfare of the child that have to be met by every school. Here
also I don't know the letters of the law. However, the private schools are
highly self-regulated.
If you have a problem with a practice in a private school and you would
complain by the School office (Schulamt), they would simply advise you to
get your child out of this school. Exceptions would be: Racist
activities/indoctrination, Sexual abuse, Physic (body-related) abuse,
Psychologic abuse etc.. In this case, the Ministerium would be activated,
and an investigation would be made also in a private school. However, in
these strong cases, gathering the evidence would be extremely difficult.
There is yet another point of difference between Waldorf schools and
community schools in Germany. In a community school it is the duty of the
school to have an official students-representative, who is a student at
that particular school. Mostly there are three representatives, for each
age-group one. They three together are voted (yearly) by the students of
the school, no teacher or director has any influence on the vote or
anything surrounding it. The group of three students-representatives meet
together with all the students-representatives of the classes (every class
votes every year its "class-speaker" who is then the one who brings the
concerns of a student to the representative) on a weekly basis.
This is called in Germany SMV (Schueler-MitVerantwortung), pointing out
that students have rights and responsibilities in the school, too.
The SMV is mostly the place of the first complaint, if a student has any
problems with a teacher or other students in the school.
In most Waldorf schools in Germany, this practice is forbidden. The
school-board says, that the student doesn't know what is good for him, so
they shouldn't have any power in the school. I find this a very weak point
in Waldorf education.
To be fair I must mention, that Waldorf schools begin to introduce a
similar SMV system. However, I believe that they do this because they were
attacked sharply and regular by the students because of the lack of the SMV
in Waldorf schools for years.
The SMV's of all schools of a community meets half-yearly, and they have
certain contacts in the offices where things can be discussed and decisions
can be made.
All discussions and decisions by the SMV must be publicized regularly
(quarteryearly) in all the schools.
I personally as student felt very comfortable because of this system. I
never needed it to make complaints by the SMV, but I knew, that whatever
happens, I have my rights and I knew that it was possible to get my rights
if needed. I knew students who needed the help of the SMV, and I don't
know, what they could have done, would they have been in a Waldorf school.
Christian Czachary
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.4 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 16:40:42 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Jelleson,
I was not comparing the superficial aspects of Treblinka and Waldorf
Education. I was offering the pictorial image based on something which
actually did physically occur (Treblinka) as a representation for something
which occurs spiritually - when one is persuaded to quell one's own instincts
in a situation where something is hidden/occult while outside looks
"reassuringly pretty."
Maybe, it would be more acceptable to you for me to simply refer to the
gingerbread house in the story, "Hansel & Gretel." But because it is a fairy
tale, one might not be compelled to refer to it as a real potentiality so
much as Treblinka.
It is horrifying that to streamline their killing operations, for this
whole other agenda of to kill as many Jews as efficiently as possible, the
commandant of Treblinka had the exterior of the buildings meticulously
painted with realistic-looking windows (even painted-on curtains and a large
painted-on clock) and the grounds carefully manicured and planted with pretty
flowers.
Because it all "looked ok," people were persuaded, despite their gut
instincts, despite the barbed wire, despite the fact that the train tracks
came to an end at that station, despite the smell of burning human flesh in
the air, that all was "ok."
Nevermind that the barbed wire, never mind the smell of burning human
flesh, never mind that the train tracks came to an end at that station. I
ponder the lengths to which the passengers must have gone in order to cling
to that painted-on surface reality: as they reassured themselves and drew
closer and then noticed the windows were only paint, did many still maintain
denial? When truth is so horrifying, it is so hard to embrace. Elie Wiesel
spoke of this in his book, "Nacht," where the town "fool," (who was actually
a brilliant master of Jewish Kabbala but who "hid well"), tried to tell
everyone that the Nazis were shipping Jews off to murder them all, but no one
believed him. To what lengths will people go to disregard a truth and
believe a lie? I ask myself this question all the time.
There is a whole hidden spiritual agenda of anthroposophy and Waldorf
education, which, like Treblinka, like the gingerbread house, would reassure
with its pretty exterior, while leading willing souls toward the devouring
flames. As I said before, it is much much easier to believe a pretty lie
than an ugly truth. But we must force ourselves to look at truth always if
we would not deny our very spirit away.
If there is some certain right or privelege to be able to refer to the
Holocaust without scorn and reproof: I am of Jewish heritage.
Sincerely, Patricia Zimmermann Fahey Morey
Jelleson wrote: "f you can make a connection betweenWE and Nazis in your
brain, you must
have something ugly in your heart and something stupid or very superficial
in your brain."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.5 ---------------
From: Christian Czachary (christian gammaresearch.com)
Subject: Article of Janet Biehl
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 17:24:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I quote here part of an article of janet Biehl published at
www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/janet.html. This part refers to
the affiliation of Anthroposophy and National Socialism.
Anthroposophy and the World League for the Protection of Life
(by Janet Biehl)
Political parties like these have an assortment of 'Old' Right -- that is,
Nazi -- connections upon which they may draw in their search for
'ecological' modernization. One such connection is the World League for the
Protection of Life (Weltbund Schutz des Lebens, or WSL). This group is not
without a certain general appeal in the Federal Republic, since its outlook
is based on Anthroposophy, a body of occult ideas formulated earlier in
this century by Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925). Steiner, the leading German
figure in the nineteenth-century esoteric 'wisdom' cult Theosophy, founded
the German Theosophical Society; he went on to found his own doctrine,
Anthroposophy, and the Anthroposophical Society thereafter. He wrote many
books on his occult spiritualistic philosophy.
Anthroposophy holds a particular attraction in the German counterculture
today, as it did in the volkisch movement of the 1920s. The Waldorf
Schools, for example, were founded on Steiner's educational principles and
are respectable in many German and American countercultural circles. (There
are more than sixty in the Federal Republic today.) Founded by Steiner in
1920, they provide children with an alternative, reformed education, one
that is free from aggression and from pressures to achieve, one that places
emphasis on the musical aspects of life and on feelings over understanding.
Steiner is also the founder of biodynamic farming, a form of organic
agriculture that does without pesticides and tries to foster a more organic
relationship between cultivator and soil. Biodynamic agriculturists today
produce a line of organic foods under the brand name Demeter and a line of
cosmetics under the name Weleda. Many people have been and continue to be
innocently attracted to these efforts and to Anthroposophy without any
notion of the less savory aspects of Steiner's work.
Yet not all of Steiner's beliefs were benignly ecospiritual. For one thing,
Anthroposophy classifies humanity into 'root races' in an esoteric
evolutionary theory. 24 Building on a similar doctrine in Theosophy, the
root-race theory is integral to Anthroposophy's cosmology. According to
this doctrine, a series of root races of human beings evolved sequentially
over the millennia, each superior to the ones that preceded it, each with a
higher level of development of self-consciousness. The first two root
races, the Polar and Hyperborean, were 'astral-etheric'; they are now
extinct -- the evolutionary process superseded them. The next people to
evolve were a bit higher, but they were still half animal, purely
instinctive, lacking the capacity for conceptual thought and memory. The
fourth root race finally began to be recognizably human; finally came the
Atlantans, to which Europeans belong. The European whites, as the most
highly developed so far, are at the summit of the hierarchical scale of
humanity; they have brought everything that is good to humanity, since they
"are the only ones who have developed humanity within themselves." 25 These
various races have been mostly killed off in various catastrophes of one
kind or another, after which only certain people -- presumably the fittest
-- survived; "in the case of the inferior kinds of human beings," wrote
Steiner, ". . . the life body was not sufficiently protected to enable it
to withstand the Luciferic influence." 26 There are numerous subdivisions
within these basic root races. Blacks, for example, must live in Africa, we
learn, a land of much heat and light; blacks soak up this heat and light,
and their brains are specially constructed to process it; their supposed
highly instinctual nature results from all this processing.
"And since the sun, light, and heat are retained in his epidermis, [the
black's] whole metabolism proceeds as if he were being cooked inside
himself by the sun. From this results his instinctive life. Within the
black, he is continuously being cooked, and what stokes this fire is his
posterior brain. 27 "
Once blacks emigrate out of Africa, the balance of light and heat is
different, and therefore they will die out -- "they are in fact a declining
race, they will die out of their own nature, since they are receiving too
little light and heat." 28 Such a theory would justify accelerating the
extinction of races since they are presumably going to die off anyway. In
the future, wrote Steiner in 1909, certain people who have not reached a
"high level of development" will incline toward evil: "The laggard souls
will have accumulated in their karma so much error, ugliness, and evil that
there will form, for the time being, a special union of evil and aberrant
human beings who voluntarily oppose the community of good men." 29
Perhaps this root-race theory was what appealed to Rudolf Hess about
Anthroposophy, for he became an Anthroposophist. As Ditfurth points out,
"The root-race ideology of the Theosophists and the Anthroposophists melded
seamlessly into the National Socialist idea of the purity of the 'Aryan
race.'"30 Certainly Steiner's ideas on biodynamic farming influenced some
National Socialists. Anthroposophical ideas are eminently usable by
ecofascists today, and there is a strong right wing within the
Anthroposophists that is closely connected with the ultra-right. Author
Gunther Bartsch is an Anthroposophist who is also a National Revolutionary
of the Solidarist variety; the author of an adulatory 1989 biography of
Otto Strasser, he attempts in his publications to synthesize ecological
themes based on Steiner's ideas with Strasser's political ideas. 31 It
should be noted that Anthroposophy is also well funded by huge
multinational corporations like Siemens and Bertelsmann. 32
Among the ultra-right adherents of Anthroposophy today are officials of the
World League for the Protection of Life (WSL), a small but influential and
very wealthy environmental organization in the Federal Republic. The garden
at its educational center is cultivated according to biodynamic methods,
and visitors are served organic refreshments. Yet this organization was
founded in 1958 by former members of the National Socialist party, and
today it links protection of 'life' (that is, 'right-to-life') themes and
the environment with racism and a revival of volkisch ideology. The 'life'
it is most interested in protecting is of course German 'life'; thus the
WSL is rabidly anti-abortion, believing that German women should be devoted
to giving birth to 'Aryan' babies.
The spiritual leader of the WSL and its key figure for most of its history
has been Werner Georg Haverbeck. Born in 1909, Haverbeck became an active
Nazi at an early age; it should be recalled that Nazism was largely a youth
movement, so that members like Haverbeck are still alive. 33 Haverbeck
joined the SA in 1928 and from 1929 to 1932 was a member of the Reich
Administration for the National Socialist Student League (Reichsleitung der
NSDAP-Studentenschaft) and a leader of the Reich Youth Leadership of the
Hitler Youth (Reichjugendfuhrung der Hitlerjugend). He served as a leading
official of the Strength Through Joy organization, which controlled
recreational activities under the Third Reich; in 1933 Rudolf Hess saw to
it that Haverbeck's passport was stamped "This man is not to be arrested."
He survived the Rohm purge to help organize the Nuremberg Party Congress
and join Hess's staff. It was Hess who converted him to Anthroposophy.
During the war he conducted radio propaganda in Denmark and worked in South
America; by the end of the war he was an officer. 34
After the Allies rudely aborted Haverbeck's many efforts on behalf of the
Third Reich, he contented himself for a time working as a pastor for the
Anthroposophical Christian community. He founded an educational center
called the Collegium Humanum in 1963, where today ecofascist, esoteric,
volkisch, Anthroposophist, neopagan, and primitivist groups meet and hold
workshops. He co-founded the WSL and served as its president from 1974 to
1982. In 1981, he was a signatory of the notorious Heidelberg Manifesto, a
document drawn up by a group of professors to warn the German people of the
dangers that immigration posed to them. Its first draft began:
"With great concern we observe the subversion of the German people through
the influx of many millions of foreigners and their families, the
foreignization of our language, our culture, and our nationhood. . . .
Already many Germans have become foreigners in their living districts and
workplaces, and thus in their own Heimat.35 "
Routine as this language may sound now, when opposition to immigration in
the Federal Republic is much more tolerated and neofascists pander to it
relentlessly, the Manifesto had to be toned down at the time (1981) because
of the public outcry it raised.
In accordance with Anthroposophical root-race beliefs, Haverbeck is notable
for propounding the thesis that the two world wars in this century in fact
constituted a thirty years' war waged by foreign aggressors against the
German people and their spiritual life. Apparently, German spiritual life
stood in the way of "the strivings for world domination by the Anglo-Saxon
race," behind which lay "the intensive image of a call to world dominance,
like the old Jewish consciousness." Indeed, Haverbeck maintains, the two
world wars amounted to a conspiracy against the German people and spiritual
life. It is a "historical lie" that the Nazis ran "mass-murder camps,"
argues Haverbeck, and is actually "enemy propaganda." It was Russia that
was the aggressor in the Second World War. 36
In his 1989 book Rudolf Steiner: Advocate for Germany, Haverbeck lauds
Steiner (who died in 1925) for understanding the existence of this ongoing
conspiracy early on.
"During the first world war, Rudolf Steiner delivered a multitude of
lectures about contemporary history, and he toiled inexhaustibly for the
truth about the question of "war guilt." . . . Steiner presented his
listeners with maps that showed that goals that had been proclaimed back in
1889 were being fulfilled [during World War I]. These maps anticipated the
separation of Central Europe that would be ultimately achieved with the
loss of East Germany. . . . What was not fully achieved through the
Versailles treaty in 1919 was in fact completed in 1945: the demolition of
Germany. . . . The leading forces of both parties to the cold war were
united in this common struggle against spiritual Germany. "This war [World
War I] was a conspiracy against German spiritual life," said Steiner. 37 "
When Haverbeck's book on Steiner's nationalism was published, it caused an
outcry of protest among outraged countercultural Anthroposophists who send
their children to Waldorf Schools, use Demeter products, and are in no way
racists or fascists. Yet as researcher Wolk points out, their protests were
unwarranted, since Haverbeck was only presenting Steiner as what he
actually was -- "a crude nationalist whose demonizations were shared by the
volkisch groups of his day" -- to show his usefulness for nationalist and
neofascist groups today. 38
This alleged conspiracy against German spiritual life pervades much of the
WSL's current thinking, notes Wolk. WSLers consider the "flood of
asylum-seekers," the destruction of the environment, and the ongoing
transformation of the Federal Republic into a multicultural society to be
part of the spiritual war against the Germans. They regard the protection
of the environment as part of the protection of a people, of its biological
"substance" and its national identity. Indeed, WSLers see the battle for a
healthy environment as part of the all-encompassing spiritual struggle
against the homogenizing forces of modernity and "Western civilization."
Haverbeck's wife, Ursula Haverbeck-Wetzel, another former WSL president who
"for religious reasons refuses to dissociate herself from any human being,
including Adolf Hitler," 39 observes:
"Whenever a person comes to feel that he belongs to the cultural strain
that is deeply rooted in his people which has not only a material existence
but a spiritual reality that is superior to the material plane -- he has
broken out from being a manipulated consumer. He has escaped the mass
homogenization of completely manipulated people who are "amusing themselves
to death" (as Neil Postman put it), which is the goal of "One World"
advocates, intent on power and domination. The person who is faithful to
his religious convictions and attentive and caring to his culture and
customs, they consider dangerous. 40 "
Ernst Otto Cohrs, the WSL's president since 1989, is another devotee of
Rudolf Steiner, having been an Anthroposophist since 1961. Today Cohrs's
interests seem to lie in promulgating race theories, and publishing and
distributing anti-Semitic literature. In 1982, an official of the WSL's
Bavarian chapter made a public issue of Cohrs's activities inside the WSL.
He wrote a letter to a WSL membership assembly saying that it should
dissociate itself from Cohrs because, among other things, he was sending
anti-Semitic literature to WSL members, running advertisements in
ultra-right magazines like Bauernschaft (the journal of the notorious
Holocaust-denier Thies Christophersen), permitting neofascist periodicals
to reprint WSL leaflets, and himself distributing such writings as There
Were No Gas Chambers and The Auschwitz Myth.41 Many members withdrew from
the WSL as a result of this letter; those who remained were overwhelmingly
those who shared Cohrs's anti-Semitic ideas and were not disposed to
contradict him. Among them was Baldur Springmann, the 'ecofarmer' who was
involved in the Greens in the early days, whose book Partner Erde (Partner
Earth) was published by an ultra-right publisher (Arndt Verlag), and who
writes for the 'New' Right publication Nation Europa; and Dr. Arnold
Neugebohrn, a Republican candidate for the provincial legislature who takes
pride in his NSDAP 'gold medal.' Concludes Wolk, "The internal crisis
caused by Cohrs's activities in 1981-82 may have diminished the ranks of
the WSL, but it also strengthened the WSL's neofascist orientation."
Cohrs's current activities are still primarily the dissemination of
Holocaust-denial literature. 42
One collective member of the WSL is a Hamburg-based organization known as
the Society for Biological Anthropology, Eugenics, and Behavioral Research
(Gesellschaft fur biologische Anthropologie, Eugenik, und
Verhaltensforschung, or GfbAEV), whose head is Jurgen Rieger, a "neo-Nazi
in lawyer's robes" (as the newspaper Die Zeit called him) who is currently
defending two fascist groups that the Federal Republic banned in 1992; one
of the GfbAEV's fellows is the leading ideologue of the French Nouvelle
Droite, Alain de Benoist. Its periodical is the notorious quarterly journal
Neue Anthropologie, which maintains, among other things, that there has
always been environmental destruction in the history of humanity, that in
fact one could even say this was part of human nature were it not for one
sole exception:
"Only the Germans were different. In pagan times they worshipped groves and
trees, and because of their closeness to nature, they had a caring
orientation toward nature. Even the love of animals is much more pronounced
among the Germanic peoples than it is, for example, among the
Romance-language-speaking peoples. It is thus no coincidence that even
today the most stalwart environmentalist efforts -- private as well as
state -- are those conducted by peoples who have a larger proportion of the
Nordic race. 43 "
Footnotes:
24. The following section on the root-race theory is based on Wolk, "Neue
Trends," pp. 120-21, and Ditfurth, Feuer, pp. 217-22. In English, a mild
'revised' account appears in Rudolf Steiner, An Outline of Occult Science
(Spring Valley, N.Y.: Anthroposophical Press, 1972), especially chap. 6.
25. Rudolf Steiner, lecture (3 March 1923), Gesamtausgabe, vol. 349, pp.
52-67, cited in Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 221.
26. Steiner, Outline, p. 216.
27. Quoted in Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 216.
28. Quoted in Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 216.
29. Steiner, Outline, p. 361.
30. Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 200.
31. See Wolk, "Neue Trends," p. 123.
32. Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 222.
33. He is mentioned in passing in Laqueur, Young Germany, p. 194n.
34. Ditfurth, Feuer, p. 224.
35. Quoted in Betz, "On the German Question," p. 36.
36. Werner Georg Haverbeck, Rudolf Steiner: Anwalt fur Deutschland (Munich,
1989), pp. 143f, 242f, 324, cited in Ditfurth, Feuer, pp. 224-26.
37. Werner Georg Haverbeck, "Das Ringen um Volker- und Geistesfreiheit," in
Europa (Feb. 1990), p. 41f, cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," pp. 131-32.
38. Wolk, "Neue Trends," p. 132.
39. Letter from the WSL's provincial executive for Schleswig-Holstein to
the WSL presidium (28 July 1981), cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," p. 133;
also in Vlothoer Tageblatt (19 Nov. 1982), cited in Ditfurth Feuer, p. 225.
40. Ursula Haverbeck-Wetzel, "Vom Wirtschaftskrieg zum Geisteskampf," in
Europa (Mar. 1990), p. 28, cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," p. 132.
41. Helmut Roehrig, letter (2 Apr. 1982), cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," p.
133.
42. Cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," pp. 13-34. On Springmann in the Greens,
see, e.g., Werner Hulsberg, The German Greens: A Social and Political
Profile, trans. Gus Fagan (London and New York: Verso, 1988), pp. 94-95.
43. Neue Anthropologie 3-4 (1988), p. 91, cited in Wolk, "Neue Trends," p.
131.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.6 ---------------
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry?
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 14:15:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[John Morehead asked me to post this for him. -dD-]
Steve Premo wrote:
"I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward
) anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct,
) of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
) of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
) basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments,
) which I consider to be legitimate concerns."
It would seem that Mr. Premo has fallen victim to postmodern thinking.
He, and our broader culture, currently believes that while all religious
or irreligious choices are equally subjective and valid, the epitome of
bigotry is to critique someone else's religious perspective.
In response, note that this itself exhibits the bigotry, allegedly, that
it claims to oppose, in that it opposes another religious viewpoint. We
could also note that it is self-contradictory as well. If no valid
criticism of religious choice is valid, then to criticize who critique
Waldorf is invalid as well. This view refutes itself.
Second, please understand that objective, documented critique of
Anthroposophy or any religious or irreligious perspective is not bigotry
or hostility. It's simply honest intellectual inquiry! Why should
Anthroposophy be immune from criticism? Orthodox Christianity certainly
isn't, both from my fellow skeptical board members in PLANS, nor from
Anthroposophists, other occultists or a variety of other sources of
criticism.
John Morehead
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.7 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:16:30 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com)
At 18:37 16/09/99 PDT, Diana wrote:
)
)Hi,I'm new to this list.
Diana,
Welcome to the list. It amazes me as I read your post, as well as others,
how identical our experiences with Waldorf have been. When our son was in
the preschool, we just assumed that our problems were unique to our son. I
am now so completely convinced that it is the system that breeds these
problems. It just can't be circumstance.
)
)
)Like the other parents in our school who became disillusioned, I had no
)objections to any of their teaching methods, or really to any of the
)curriculum or anything that went on in the classroom. The Waldorf
)kindergartens are beautiful and nurturing and I really believe what they're
)doing with the children is developmentally appropriate and wholesome.
They sure are beautiful and APPEAR nurturing. In our experience, the
opposite turned out to be true. We believed in the school (not
anthroposophy - they said they weren't an anthroposophical school) and
trusted their judgement. Only after our son's third year there (his
kindergarten year) did we realize what they had been doing to him. They
didn't approve of close friendships between the kids in the school. Our
theory is that when kids became so important to each other, the teachers
lost their complete control over them, and this couldn't be. Our son was
separated from his best and only friend during his second year there (age 4
1/2). They weren't allowed to play or sit together indoors, only outside.
We were told that they were disruptive to the group and that the other boy
was a bad influence on our son. We also didn't realize that they had been
completely separated. After a time that both kids didn't want to go to
school each morning, they somehow found the strength to stand up for
themselves and they were finally allowed to be together again. The next
year (age 5 1/2) they were again separated, but this time our son's friend
found others to play with. Our son was left alone with no one to play with
at all. The teachers didn't help him. They ignored him. He became
withdrawn and violent and we were told that we should examine our
relationships at home!
The school recommended we keep him there for an additional year of
kindergarten (because he was "emotionally" unready for 1st grade) and we
had him tested at the psychological unit of the Tel-Aviv (Israel)
municipality, where we were told that he has the IQ of a near genius, but
that he couldn't yet even hold a pencil, so 1st grade would be a terrible
idea - better to re-do kindergarten. Only after the end of the school
year, while we were debating what to do, our son mentioned something which
opened up a whole discussion with him. He hadn't realized that something
was wrong with the school, of course, so he hadn't mentioned anything to
us. He just thought the problem was him. Only then, after one good year
and two bad, did we realize what had been going on.
How
)can you argue with the idea that it's good for small children to bake bread,
)garden, listen to stories, play with wooden toys?
That's how they sucker us in. You're absolutely right.
... or talk to small children "scientifically" (which I came to see meant,
you shouldn't answer childrens'
)questions at all, if you can get away with it).
Exactly! I should have known something was wrong right from the start. At
the very beginning, I noticed an interesting musical instrument hanging in
the room. I asked one of the teachers what it was, and his answer was "I
don't know what it's called". I thought to myself, "is that the answer he
gives the kids when they ask questions?", but I let it go.
When our Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was murdered, my son wanted very much
to talk about it. They wouldn't deal with it at all, saying that the kids
are too small to understand these things. They also reprimanded my husband
and myself for "telling him about such difficult things". I had given him
an explanation about a bad man who did a bad thing, etc. (something a
little boy could understand). We were "making him anxious and worried".
When Holocost Remembrance Day came around, we also had a problem. This is
a very important day in our home because my father-in-law (who lives with
us) was in Aushwitz, even escaped from Aushwitz, and lost his whole family
in the Holocost. These are things that are talked about in our home. In
Israel, there is a siren at 11:00 in the morning on that day, and the whole
country stands silently in remembrance. Even cars stop wherever they may
be and drivers get out and stand. When the siren sounded, our son and a
few others stood in silence in honor of his grandfather. The teachers went
on with their business, and were even angry with him for doing what he did.
He, of course, was devestated and cried later.
None of this is "nurturing".
)
) I came to feel that the hard line on late reading
)ignores the individual differences between the children too, in favor of
)absolutism about WHEN SHOULD CHILDREN READ (never mind the teeth thing . .
).)
What about the arm over the head and touching the opposite ear!!
)
)Many of us who signed up our 3-year-olds for the preschool liked very much
)that they wouldn't be drilled in numbers and letters or forced to fill in
)worksheets . . .
Those are the things that drew us to the school, too.
)
)I could go on and probably will! Thanks, everyone, for letting me "get this
)off my chest."
It's really good to hear these things from you. It somehow validates our
feelings about what we went through.
By the way, does anyone know what happened to Michael Kopp? I so enjoyed
reading his posts.
Cara
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.8 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: waldorf
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:26:24 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909170148.SAA16803 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909170318.UAA22136 lists1.best.com)
At 20:15 16/09/99 +0100, Deby wrote:
... This was "a healing". Max
)said, "Get me out of this school." I did, but placed him in another
)Waldorf kindergarten. Some of us Mom's are slow learners. At the time, I
)thought it was just _that_ teacher.
)
)Thanks for sharing.
)Deby
)
You're not the only slow learner. It's amazing when you look at the
parents of kids in the Waldorf schools here in Israel - They're not
anthropops at all, not even bohemian, etc. Only a very few are. The great
majority are professional people, mostly very well-off. The only thing all
have in common is the wish to give their kids a more humane, nurturing and
creative school experience.
Cara
)
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.9 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Cara/kids' games
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:33:35 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909181022.DAA09697 lists1.best.com)
At 06:22 18/09/99 EDT, Wendi wrote:
)Hi Cara--
)
)Maybe it was just the particular school you were in, or maybe your son is
)naturally shy, ...
I'd like to explain myself better. My son is the opposite of shy in most
circumstances. It's just that being in situations since leaving Waldorf
where ALL the kids know the games and he doesn't, makes him feel very out
of place. We're working on it.
I just wrote a lengthy answer to Diana, which gives a bit of background on
what we went through.
Cara
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1462.10 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Waldorf kindergarten
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:49:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199909181256.FAA29319 lists1.best.com)
At 05:55 18/09/99 PDT, Diana wrote:
)Hi, to all who responded to my description of the kgartens in my son's
)Waldorf school...
Diana,
I swear you're writing about our school.
)Because I was a classroom aide (attended faculty meetings, etc.), I saw a
)LOT more of what was going on than most parents did.
I taught English in their school for two years, and also saw and heard alot
more than did the other parents. At our school, the teachers also talked
about what a problem the parents were, and how to keep them from being a
part of decision-making, etc.
I am a classical singer and my husband studied cantorial singing. After a
short time in the preschool, our son began to tell us that only quiet
singing was real music. His teachers told him that. We were making such a
terrible noise. Before that, he had loved the evening blessings over the
candles and wine on Friday night. From that time on, it became unbearable,
and eventually we just stopped doing it.
Cara
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1462 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1463 --------------
001 - cara (cara internet-zahav - Re: Waldorf kindergarten
002 - jdaar concentric.net - Re: Admin: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n144
003 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
005 - njpmail mindspring.com (Y - Re: Is the Bible True?
006 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Re: waldorf
007 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: Article of Janet Biehl
008 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
009 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
010 - "Steve Premo" (premo cruz - Re: [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.1 ---------------
From: cara (cara internet-zahav.net)
Subject: Re: Waldorf kindergarten
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:54:37 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909181256.FAA29319 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909181624.JAA16306 lists1.best.com)
At 10:25 18/09/99 +0100, Deby wrote:
)At a board meeting, one Waldorf teacher (big time Anthropop) said, "Parents
)should do the work that the teachers tell them to do. Nothing more.They
)should be cleaning the school, organizing festivals and earning money for
)the school by Faculty approved fundraisers."
)
This sounds like a direct quote from meetings I attended, too.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.2 ---------------
From: jdaar concentric.net
Subject: Re: Admin: Re: Re: Re: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n1441
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:40:05 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: (199909151628.JAA08499 lists1.best.com)
Dear Dan: What is a digest subscriber?
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) This is a good time to remind digest subscribers that when you reply to a
) message, you need to:
)
) 1) edit the Subject field to exactly the subject of the message you're
) replying to, and
)
) 2) delete all the text of other messages and unnecessary parts of the
) message you're replying to.
)
) Really, digest subscribing is convenient for lurkers. If you're going to
) participate, change your subscription to singles.
)
) -Dan Dugan
) Moderator
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.3 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Blavatsky's Luciferianism
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:13:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
) )
) )[Bob Tolz]
) ) Christian, I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
) ) Bob Tolz
)
[Christian]
) The point was to show the influence of Theosophy on Faschism,
) especially
) the teachings of Blavatsky and Hinduism.
Christian, I think you've got it a bit backwards. Blavatsky,
Theosophy and Hinduism didn't *influence* Fascism. What happened was that
the Nazis appropriated for themselves whatever they could to rationalize
their own warped world-view.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:19:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Patti]
)
) If there is some certain right or privelege to be able
) to refer to the
) Holocaust without scorn and reproof: I am of Jewish heritage.
)
) Sincerely, Patricia Zimmermann Fahey Morey
Sorry, Patti, but being of Jewish heritage doesn't give you the
right to refer to the Holocaust without scorn and reproof. I too am Jewish,
and I will restate what I have stated on this list many times: I find it
extremely offensive when someone juxtaposes the Holocaust against Waldorf
Education. Consider yourself reproofed.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.5 ---------------
From: njpmail mindspring.com (Yael Resnick)
Subject: Re: Is the Bible True?
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 23:22:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Several days ago (while I was out of town), Dan posted:
))Whoa, folks, interesting as this discussion may be, it's off topic for
))waldorf-critics. Please carry on in private mail or in an appropriate forum.
and Michael responded:
)
)...Aw, just when I was hoping Yael would come back... ( ; ) )
) /MRx
I'm still here, Michael - too busy to write, but actively reading (and
biting my tongue).
By the way - the next issue of Natural Jewish Parenting will include
several letters to the editor in response to the Waldorf articles in the
last issue. Due out in several weeks; I'll let you know when it hits the
stands.
Back to lurkdom, Happy New Year to all -
Yael
*****
Yael Resnick, Publisher/Editor, Natural Jewish Parenting
The only magazine dedicated to a holistic Jewish perspective
on childraising and family health.
mailto:njpmail mindspring.com
173 Speedwell Ave., Suite 127, Morristown, NJ 07960
phone (973) 538-3737 fax (973) 539-5454
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.6 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: waldorf
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 00:28:04 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cara wrote: "Our son was left alone with no one to play with
at all. The teachers didn't help him. They ignored him. He became
withdrawn and violent and we were told that we should examine our
relationships at home!"
Cara, this sounds so much like what happened to my son in Waldorf, too.
Maybe it is typical for Waldorf to manipulate the children's classroom
relationships, and then suggest something is wrong with the child or home.
Your post was so honest and heartfelt. I hope your son is happier and
enjoying school now.
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.7 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: Article of Janet Biehl
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 00:35:29 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Christian, how do you find these fascinating and informative articles? Which
search engine do you use?
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.8 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 21:31:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909182042.NAA09772 lists1.best.com)
On 18 Sep 99,, Kanefer aol.com wrote:
) There is a whole hidden spiritual agenda of anthroposophy and
) Waldorf
) education, which, like Treblinka, like the gingerbread house, would
) reassure with its pretty exterior, while leading willing souls toward
) the devouring flames.
That's pretty strong language. On the other hand, as a Christian
who apparently believes that the rest of us are all headed for "the
devouring flames" in any event, doesn't this criticism apply equally
to all non-Christian spiritual paths? Does it not apply equally to,
say, the Baha'i faith, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism,
American Indian religions, and so on?
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.9 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:07:44 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Gosh, Bob, I am NOT juxtaposing the Holocaust with Waldorf Education! I am
offering extreme specific true real-life example of: external beauty hiding
internal ugliness - namely: the beautification of train station at death
camp Treblinka. The purposefulness of its beautification, like that of the
gingerbread cottage, is especially horrifying.
But concepts of denial of truth and belief in lie despite gut instincts -(
the perhaps Need to grasp at comfort of beautiful lie and Profound Difficulty
of accepting horrific truth) - offer much to think about, as well as
affirmation of importance of honoring one's instincts, feelings, intuition.
If unconsciously one knows while consciously one denies, clinging to mere
surface appearances and reassurances, what is most precious is sacrificed.
We have to be able to look at specific examples from history in order to
learn from them. Here, we see the process of: a beautification of externals
in order to promote an internal lie. I feel it is a process of Satan.
We see this process also in Joseph Smith's beautification of his "book of
mormon" with King James English and Biblical scriptures.
And, we see lovely Waldorf classrooms hiding the occult and Luciferian
concepts upon which Waldorf education is founded.
There are undoubtedly many more examples...
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1463.10 ---------------
From: "Steve Premo" (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry?
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:17:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199909182152.OAA09211 lists1.best.com)
On 18 Sep 99,, Dan Dugan wrote:
) [John Morehead asked me to post this for him. -dD-]
)
) Steve Premo wrote:
)
) "I consider Anthroposophy a religion, and consider hostility toward )
) anthroposophy to be a form of religious bigotry. This is distinct, )
) of course, from criticism of Waldorf in the public schools, criticism
) ) of the lack of disclosure in Waldorf schools regarding the religious
) ) basis of the pedagogy, and criticism of Steiner's racist comments, )
) which I consider to be legitimate concerns."
)
) It would seem that Mr. Premo has fallen victim to postmodern thinking.
) He, and our broader culture, currently believes that while all
) religious or irreligious choices are equally subjective and valid, the
) epitome of bigotry is to critique someone else's religious
) perspective.
That is not what I believe; nor is it what I said.
) Second, please understand that objective, documented critique of
) Anthroposophy or any religious or irreligious perspective is not
) bigotry or hostility. It's simply honest intellectual inquiry!
I agree. I enjoy such discussions, and participate in them. I find
your posts to be in that category, and entirely acceptable. I also
find Michael Kopp's posts on religion to be in that category, and
likewise acceptable, although sometimes a bit too harshly
expressed for my taste.
On the other hand, scurrilous misstatements about a religion,
unsupported by fact or reason, and motivated by hostility, do tend
to evidence bigotry. I expressed my suspicion that the post to
which I was responding was in the latter category, and invited the
author to prove me wrong by showing that there was a factual basis
for his/her statements. She/he provided none.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n1463 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n1464 --------------
001 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
002 - Kanefer aol.com - Re: outer -vs- inner reality
003 - "Diana Winters" (winters_ -
004 - "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNS - RE: outer -vs- inner reality
005 - John & Wendy Morehead (mo - Re: [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry
006 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Occult Wet on wet
007 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Why Waldorf is better
008 - Debra Snell (snell netshe - Re:
009 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
010 - Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.c - Re: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.1 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: RE: Jelleson, outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 03:07:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
[Patti]
)
) Gosh, Bob, I am NOT juxtaposing the Holocaust with Waldorf
) Education!
Gee, Patti, as the expression goes: You could have fooled me!
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.2 ---------------
From: Kanefer aol.com
Subject: Re: outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 06:21:10 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bob - call the diabolical beautification of the Treblinka train station what
you will, it would be ironic to thus facistly label what I say as "Holocaust"
solely to dismiss it - and on such a miserly basis.
Even so, the Holocaust is not a sealed book to be safeguarded in a shrine.
It is a tragic procession of events that we would do well to learn from. It
wasn't so long ago, and the thought-processes are still there.
Sincerely, Patti
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.3 ---------------
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject:
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 05:08:54 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hi,
Cara, Thanks for your post. Did you say you are a Waldorf teacher, but would
not teach in a Waldorf school again? Are you actually Waldof-trained? I
still think there is so much good in what they are doing, and if we could
just get teachers with some common sense who are not blinded by ideology, it
is a shame to toss out the baby with the bath water (though I do agree with
the PLANS goal to prevent the opening of Waldorf public schools).
I think it is a fascinating phenomenon that people are drawn to these
schools thinking they are liberal, progressive, etc., and they want a more
nurturing environment for their children, as Cara mentioned, and Wendi. They
meet like-minded parents there and feel confirmed in their choice. And/or
they are drawn to the idea of an arts-based education and think this will
nurture their child's creativity. It is so ironic that most of this turns
out to be a mirage.
Deby said the environment is rigid. A good example in the kindergarten is
the watercolor painting. I really loved this at first (as an aide in the
classroom, I got to paint too, and I really looked forward to that
activity). The teacher tries to make it reverent, and make a ritual out of
it. Everything is done in a certain order, with slow movements, supposedly
maintaining silence and everyone enraptured by the beautiful colors. If this
works, great. It's a nice experience for the kids. In my experience, it does
work, a few times, and it's neat. But once the teacher has in her head, this
must be done this way, it starts to spiral out of control. It went from
something I, at least, eagerly anticipated, to something I dreaded, and was
certainly no longer meaningful for the kids---it became a travesty,
impossible to maintain order, with the kids mocking the teacher, while she
doggedly insisted there be silence before she would pass out the brushes,
etc. She would just keep singing her little song while the children jumped
around and shouted as little kids will do. Partly, they were tired of only
being allowed to use red and blue after six weeks of painting. Probably,
they went home after school and would be allowed to paint using a normal
palette of colors.
This is encouraging creativity? parents do not realize that in artistic
activities, choice of materials will be sharply limited (though they do use
very high quality materials), only certain themes will be permitted, certain
ways of doing things, highly ritualized, will be allowed.
Likewise, I agree the nurturing is more an image than reality, though I hate
to paint all Waldorf teachers with a broad brush since my son had two very
good ones, truly caring people with a gift for being with small children. I
observed early on that these two teachers knew how to be with children and
just did not let Waldorf dogma intererfere with their relationships with the
children. I found Cara's stories about her son not being allowed to discuss
the murder of the prime minister or pay tribute to his grandfather on
Holocaust Remembrance Day very sad, but very familiar. In my son's class
there was a child with a serious disease that was apparent to the other
children. I did not realize until the end of that year that nothing had been
said to the children about it. Doubtless, ordinary caring parents had tried
to explain it to their children so they would know how to be kind to this
child and not be frightened but the teacher was of the opinion that talking
to them about it was "intellectualizing" it and they were not sophisticated
enough to understand. She strongly discouraged parents from discussing it
with their children. This doubtless frightened the children, who must have
been thinking, Could this happen to me? I think if you don't acknowledge the
children's concerns and fears, you just reinforce them. I think what is
communicated to the children is that the TEACHER is threatened by the topic
(it's so bad it can't be talked about) and this is even more frightening to
the kids.
This is the opposite of nurturing. Some on this list have expressed doubts
about stories of beatings in Waldorf schools, but I am not surprised. I
observed pinching, ear pulling, shaking, and lifting by the neck in one
classroom, and another teacher in our school repeatedly hit the children.
Another once washed a child's mouth out with soap. I don't think it has to
be this way. They either have to lighten up, let in the light of day on some
of their antiquated ideas, open themselves up to criticism and discussion of
their practices, or expect this stuff to be exposed. --- Diana
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.4 ---------------
From: "Tolz, Robert" (RTolz TNSJ-LAW.COM)
Subject: RE: outer -vs- inner reality
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 09:55:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
)
) Bob - call the diabolical beautification of the Treblinka
) train station what
) you will, it would be ironic to thus facistly label what I
) say as "Holocaust"
) solely to dismiss it - and on such a miserly basis.
)
Now you're saying I'm "facistly" labelling something you said?
You're too much, Patti.
When someone raises the Holocaust and juxtaposes it against Waldorf
Education, as you very certainly did, it minimizes the Holocaust by
attempting to use it as a smear technique.
Bob Tolz
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.5 ---------------
From: John & Wendy Morehead (morehead mail2.quiknet.com)
Subject: Re: [Morehead] Critique of Anthroposophy hostility and bigotry?
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 06:56:17
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199909182152.OAA09211 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199909190528.WAA12616 lists1.best.com)
At 10:17 PM 9/18/99 -0700, you wrote:
)That is not what I believe; nor is it what I said.
Glad to hear it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
)On the other hand, scurrilous misstatements about a religion,
)unsupported by fact or reason, and motivated by hostility, do tend
)to evidence bigotry. I expressed my suspicion that the post to
)which I was responding was in the latter category, and invited the
)author to prove me wrong by showing that there was a factual basis
)for his/her statements. She/he provided none.
)
Agreed. I think we're on the same page after all.
John Morehead
)
==============================================
John W. Morehead
Associate Director
Watchman Fellowship, California branch office
http://www.watchman.org/ca/index.htm
(watchman quiknet.com)
P.O. Box 227
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 631-7897
(916) 631-0413 - fax
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n1464.6 ---------------
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Occult Wet on wet
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 09:38:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have posted this quote on the list before, but as I was reading Diana's
post about the art lesson, I thought it may be time to post it again. This
book was loaned to me by my son's Waldorf teacher. She said that she read
it as part of her teacher training.
-ds
"... The colour sequence works as a cleansing re-orientation of soul,
helping the individuality to accept the present incarnation in a physical
body. This is clearly shown in the pictures which pupils make...
These exercises are not suitable until the twelfth has been reached and
chronological history (I take this to mean Theosophy's world view.-ds)
has been introduced. It is at this time that the first awareness of the
skeleton wakens into consciousness...During such a process the pupil
improves his whole bearing and outlook. Problems of the soul are solved
in sleep life and the individuality takes hold of his body with his whole
will.
To prepare the first colour sequence which is vermillion with a magenta
star form, let the pupil first experience his body as a star, standing
with his feet apart, his arms raised horizontally from his sides, head
erect. He could be reminded of the verse with its movements that he
learnt in Class Four.
1. 'I place myself steadfastly into existence.'
(from standing with feet together, place the
left foot to the left away from the body.)
2. 'With confidence I tread the path of life.'
(Right foot placed to the right of body - the child
is now standing with feet apart.)
3. 'Love I nurse in the core of my being.'
(Left arm raised to the side shoulder level, remaining
held so.)
4. 'Hope I lay into all my doing.'
(Right arm raised to shoulder level.)
5. 'Confidence I impress into my thinking.'
(Head held so that pupil gazes straight in front but
with the head pressed slightly back.)
Release the star gesture in the following order. Relax head pressure,
right arm to side, left arm to side. Right foot to centre, left foot to
its side so that both feet are together as at the beginning of the verse.
This experience can be strengthened by jumping into the star-form, one or
three times.
The painting can now be made. There are two methods which may be used.
First exercise. Cover the paper with vermillion red using long unbroken
brush strokes across the paper from left to right, commencing at the top
of the page. In this way the nervious 'brushing' of the paint is
controlled and the pupil learns how to put on a good wash. The brush
stroke can be repeated from the place where the colour lightens to obtain
an even tone. The star form can then be taken out of this colour-mass by
brish or sponge. Alternatively, the vermillion wash may be made and the
star form left uncoloured. This is suitable when repition of the colour
sequence is repeated. Nothing is said about the quality of the vermillion
red or its effect on the soul. (Deception alert-ds)
In this first exercise only, I ask the pupil what colour he would choose
for the star, so that the vermillion red is held back from the star and
kept in balance. Most children immediately say - yellow - and therein
lies the problem. Yellow is the colour which should not be confined, it
needs to dissolve and fly away. The soul is 'holding on' to something
which needs to be released. The vermillion is drawing out the 'congealed'
yellow in the soul. I have allowed the pupil to paint-in the star with
yellow,