return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
RE: contrary indications
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: contrary indications
By alice javanet.com
Catch 22?
By peter_zegers runbox.no
No books, no answering questions (was: Loose ends)
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: contrary indications
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Joel's do-it-yourself instructions for attaining
Anthroposophical Truth
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: contrary indications
By waldorf_kh hotmail.com
Re: No books, no answering questions (was: Loose ends)
By waldorf_kh hotmail.com
Re: No books, no answering questions
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: No books, no answering questions
By selkieschild64 yahoo.com
Re: No books, no answering questions
By waldorf_kh hotmail.com
Re: No books, no answering questions
By kateabooth yahoo.com.au
Re: Question for Joel
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: No books, no answering questions
By sjgreen seidata.com
Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
By alice javanet.com
RE: Loose ends
By linda highstream.net
Re: No books, no answering questions
By momof2gals mindspring.com
re: more on loose ends
By momof2gals mindspring.com
re: boredom/was "no books ...."
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By cffrey mindspring.com
re: no books, no answering questions
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: contrary indications
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By awaldenpond home.com
Re: PLANS
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Steiner & socialism
By dan dandugan.com
Re: steiners doctorate credentials
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Steiner on Blavatsky
By TTirrell1 aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 12:15:21 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: contrary indications
Joel Wendt wrote:
) Dear Jennifer,
)
) Didn't you just admit in another post to not reading Steiner? In which
) case you can hardly know anything about anthroposophy. If what you
) think you know about anthroposophy comes form this list then you are not
) only uniformed, but ill-informed, for this list is the last place to
) learn anything about anthroposophy.
Hi Joel; I don't want *you* to read this because it's really for the
rest of us that I am posting.
I want to point out that we have been assured by other anthros that we
really "do" know about "your belief system" and perhaps much more than
you would like us to know.
)
) And the teachers certainly have a right to be human beings and
Who said they didn't have "a right to be human beings?" I don't recall
anyone here saying that.
to stive
) to develop the spiritual dimension of their lives.
I think you meant strive, yes? And to develop spiritual dimension is
purely a personal journey, which we each take for ourselves in the
privacy of our house of worship. Not something we "practice" on young
minds without parental permission. And I mean "practice" in all senses
of the word.
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:50:19 -0800
From: Alice K (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: contrary indications
on 1/14/02 10:15 PM, walden at awaldenpond home.com wrote:
)
) Charlie:
)
) Apologies for the lask of clarity.
) I was expressing (perhaps poorly for a teacher...even for a Waldorf teacher
) (g)) confusion over what seemed to be two opposite complaints.
) How can one hide Anthroposophy while "recruit[ing]" them into
) Anthroposophical study groups?
) charlie
)
)
) Walden: No need for confusion. It is simple - I saw it regularly for many
) years. Hell - I even used this line after learning it to keep parents at
) our school. At the time I was a foggy minded shill, mind you. Waldorf
) plays it both ways. Here:
)
) Brand New Parent: Excuse me but what is all this strange stuff I heard
) about Steiner and Anthropology?
)
) Experienced admin/parent/teacher - smiling: *Anthroposophy* - literally,
) the Wisdom of Man and it is not really strange but yes - Steiner can be
) difficult to read. In any case - Anthroposophy is not in the classroom at
) all... it is a non-sectarian education... your son/daughter is soooo cute
) and doing well, I hear. It is wonderful....how are things with you?
)
) Slightly more experienced parent after lots of time and $$ invested and
) realizing how difficult the reality (child behind academically, etc) is of
) taking their child from the W school and going elsewhere: Excuse me but I
) am having some trouble understanding how things work around here. Where
) does the buck stop? Who do I ask about ...?
)
) Experienced admin/parent/teacher- smiling and nodding: Yes it is a mystery
) but it all works out. Consensus is not always easy but we strive together
) in the community. Not like public schools with their chaotic
) beaurocracies... I remember so-and-so came here so confused and is thriving
) now. How are you doing? How is your husband/wife? Did you know there is a
) study group forming soon? You might want to come....
)
)
) There you go, Charlie. My guess is this type of scenario happens all the
) time. No malice involved - it's a religious thing.
)
) - Walden
)
)
Alice here:
wow, Walden.
Thank you...chills of familiarity on these scenarios..
Happens every day I know...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:10:19 +0100
From: Peter Zegers (peter_zegers runbox.no)
Subject: Catch 22?
Dear Charlie,
You seem to have a peculiar understanding of "open-mindedness". Blind
acceptance of Steiner's teachings is the same as "open-mindedness",
whereas skepticism is prejudice. Don't you realize that this rhetoric
device can be used by everyone to argue for his or her beliefs? It is
the same as saying: "just accept what I say at face-value." If one
doesn't accept the truth, this means that this person must have some
prejudice. It is a very authoritarian way of arguing. It presupposes
that the teacher has all the right answers (a closed mind, so to speak).
It doesn't invite to critical and independent thinking, but to
submission and blind adherence. It is the exact opposite of a skeptical
attitude. There is a difference between an open mind and mindlessness.
It doesn't allow for an exchange of views. Why would I accept Steiner as
an infallible teacher? Why do you accept Steiner as an infallible
teacher? Why not someone else? Why not a skeptical, critical,
independent attitude toward teachers?
Still a skeptic,
Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:20:50 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: No books, no answering questions (was: Loose ends)
Linda:
)When critics make comments like this, it gives me a sense of where their
)frictions with Waldorf might really come from.
You don't have to be "sensing" or reading between the lines in my posts, I
try to spell it out.
)You really don't get it, do you? There can be as much generosity in
)receiving as in giving. And there is often little generosity in either.
I agree, and I suppose my remark offended you. I thought that to
suggest it was "generous" of the teacher to accept a gift from your
son, reflects an attitude I saw often - parents and children grateful for
the teacher's approval. It's only generous to *receive* a gift if there's
some reason the person wouldn't want or need the gift, doesn't really like
it, and makes sure you realize this. Not actually a generous attitude.
(I asked:)
)can the children reach the bookshelf? If so, can the children take one of
)these two books off the shelf during free play?
)Yes, they could.
This is something to look for, and to ask teachers explicitly. None
of our 3 kindergartens allowed children free access to books. Two of the 3
had no books at all, though one of the assistants brought books from home to
read to the kids at rest time, innocent things like Beatrix Potter, Peter
Rabbit. The teacher disapproved, but she needed a break.
about why the teacher shouldn't talk during activities:
)But I'm getting weary of this already----I'm not trying to change your
)mind, and I'm not sure I understand what difference it makes?
No, you're not going to change my mind, I had it changed in the
classroom. I write here so new or prospective parents will be cued
in to these problems in Waldorf, which are not apparent in the
PR.
)I'm mystified why anyone who is so troubled with this (as so many here are)
)would choose Waldorf?
This isn't what I chose, as this isn't what they advertised. I liked that
they weren't going to "intellectualize" the children. I
thought that meant they didn't make them do worksheets at the
expense of romping outdoors, didn't encourage a sort of premature
pseudo-sophistication about worldly events, which you see in some
kids today. I thought they emphasized creative play over endless
drilling in phonics, etc.
I liked that the classroom was not littered with words labeling every
object, which some preschools do and which seems overstimulating and
unnatural to me. I would rather see 3- and 4-year olds making felt pictures
or baking bread than tracing numbers and letters.
Note that I do *not* say 5- and 6-year-olds should not trace numbers
and letters. I didn't have a 5- or 6-year-old at the time, so I
guess I didn't understand how much they change and develop in that
short time - though you'd think teachers would - but Waldorf believes there
is no difference developmentally between a 3- and a 6-year-old; the program
is the same for both.
I would never have guessed that "not intellectualizing" them meant
not answering simple questions or encouraging normal inquisitiveness
- not "chatting," not discussing why you add salt to the bread dough. Or
that any natural interest in reading and writing, coming from the child,
would be squelched or ignored.
I liked that they would not be forced to write their names. I didn't know
that the ones who were already proudly writing their names would be told not
to, or have their paper quickly turned over so other children wouldn't see.
I come from a bookish family, and couldn't live without books. I
wanted to avoid pressuring my son into early academics, help him be
well-rounded ("whole child"). I can't believe I ever bought that it
made sense to actually *ban* books around preschoolers.
)Remember Piaget wasn't acting as teacher when he asked these
)questions. He was acting as researcher into the way very young children
)think.
Right. But I have a book by a fellow who tried to interpret/apply
Piaget in advice for teachers. There isn't a single thing in it I
found a Waldorf K. teacher would approve of. For instance, those
sort-by-shape block boxes for toddlers, since this age is busy learning to
classify. If I have time I'll post some more examples.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:25:26 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: contrary indications
Charlie Frey wrote:
)How can one hide Anthroposophy while "recruit[ing]" them into
)Anthroposophical study groups?
By recruiting those who are sympathetic and interested, and keeping quiet
around those who are not.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:29:27 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Joel's do-it-yourself instructions for attaining
Anthroposophical Truth
Charlie Frey:
)Two of Steiner's 5 main exercises involve open-mindedness, and here is
)someone who admits that he is "too much of a skeptic" to attempt
)open-mindedness! That's some catch, that catch-22!
It's a good idea to be skeptical when you're invited to be open-minded,
especially when you already have a lot of information about the agenda of
those asking you to be open-minded.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:22:36 -0700
From: "Kathy Harlan" (waldorf_kh hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: contrary indications
)Lubert:
)
)Hi Kathy,
)Sounds good from here, but don't forget to add in your aforementioned
)guilt-ridden grant and scholarship parents (""locked into" their positions
)of loyalty", silenced I would say). How horribly ungrateful would they
)look and feel were they to speak up after such selfless help has been
)provided, when they have been rescued from possible (or rumored, or
)class-related, or *spiritual* ) disaster in other local schools. Any idea
)on percentages there? The schools usually seem proud enough of their
)community outreach programs, foundations, and funding that they might even
)make some numbers available.
Great point! I've just learned about this dynamic from a friend who is
receiving financial aid at our W school. It sounds like a very stressful
fence to be sitting on. I don't know the percentage of families receiving
aid at our ex-school.
Kathy
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:44:58 -0700
From: "Kathy Harlan" (waldorf_kh hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions (was: Loose ends)
Diana wrote:
)This is something to look for, and to ask teachers explicitly. None
)of our 3 kindergartens allowed children free access to books. Two of the 3
)had no books at all, though one of the assistants brought books from home
)to
)read to the kids at rest time, innocent things like Beatrix Potter, Peter
)Rabbit. The teacher disapproved, but she needed a break.
Kathy:
When my mom came for grandparents day she observed that the 3 kindergarten
rooms and the 1st and 2nd grade classrooms had no books in them at all. She
taught 1st grade and reading for 17 years in a public school. She was
extremely bothered by this fact. When we left the school and couldn't help
saying 'I knew something was wrong when there weren't any books in the
classrooms.'
Diana:
)Note that I do *not* say 5- and 6-year-olds should not trace numbers
)and letters. I didn't have a 5- or 6-year-old at the time, so I
)guess I didn't understand how much they change and develop in that
)short time - though you'd think teachers would - but Waldorf believes there
)is no difference developmentally between a 3- and a 6-year-old; the program
)is the same for both.
Kathy: This is so true! I am truly amazed at what 5 and 6 year olds are
ready for. W does not meet the needs of kids that are writing and reading
at these ages. In K, the 5 year olds continue to do all the activities that
the 3 and 4 year olds do.
In grade 1 there was no setup for teaching children that were already
reading. Those kids were forced to copy capital letters from the board with
everyone else. This is tedious and boring to a kid who is already reading.
What's the point? What negative impact does this forced retardation in the
learning process have on a child's early educational experiences? What's
even more amazing is all the kids that were 7 at the beginning of grade 1!
their parents were convinced the kids needed another year of K. What? They
weren't ready to copy capital letters from the blackboard?
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 20:12:36 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
Kathy wrote:
)the 3 kindergarten rooms and the 1st and 2nd grade classrooms had no books
)in them at all.
I've heard Waldorf teachers try to one-up each other, bragging about
how long they avoided bringing books into their classrooms. Waiting
till the beginning of second grade is good, if you can hold out till
the second half of second grade, even better. Parents are getting worried by
then, though.
)In grade 1 there was no setup for teaching children that were already
)reading. Those kids were forced to copy capital letters from the board
)with everyone else. This is tedious and boring to a kid who is already
)reading.
They insist they can make this magical and wondrous, this endless
copying, even for those already reading. I admit I haven't seen this
in action, but I find it very hard to believe. They believe
that these poor first graders who are already reading have been robbed of
their childhoods. They need to to go back and "reverence" the alphabet or
something.
)What's even more amazing is all the kids that were 7 at the beginning of
)grade 1! their parents were convinced the kids needed another year of K.
)What? They weren't ready to copy capital letters from the blackboard?
It took me awhile to think this through, too. First grade in Waldorf is a
kindergarten curriculum at best, sometimes even lower. They are telling you
your kid isn't ready for academics, but there *is* no academics. It's a
2-year delay, not just 1.
You have some 6- and 7-year-olds who spend FOUR YEARS repeating the
kindergarten content (kindergarten is a misnomer because it's actually
preschool; they never get kindergarten), listening to The Little Red Hen and
Sweet Porridge week after week. Bored stiff is putting it mildly, some of
these kids are very angry, and start acting out to call attention to their
misery.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 12:32:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Kelly (selkieschild64 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
))Bored stiff is putting it
mildly, some of
these kids are very angry, and start acting out to
call
attention to their
misery.
Diana((
This wasn't the case with us. My older children
started in public school, were pushed into reading
earlier than they were ready, struggled to learn (my
daughter would cry when she had reading homework in
first grade), and now loathe reading of any kind.
My youngest son spent two years in a Waldorf
kindergarten before beginning first grade. He loved
school, and went each day enthusiastically. He's now
in a sixth grade Waldorf school, and is about to begin
reading Tolkien because he *wants* to (after he's
finished the last Harry Potter). He has a wonderful
imagination, and is the only child of my 4 who reads
for pleasure.
Kelly
=====
Leaves are falling all around;Its time I was on my way.
Thanks to you I'm much obliged;
Such a pleasant stay.
But now its time for me to go;
The autumn moon lights my way.
But now I smell the rain and with it pain
And it's heading my way. --Led Zeppelin
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:06:09 -0700
From: "Kathy Harlan" (waldorf_kh hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
) ))Bored stiff is putting it
)mildly, some of
)these kids are very angry, and start acting out to
)call
)attention to their
)misery.
)Diana((
)
Kelly responded:
)This wasn't the case with us. My older children
)started in public school, were pushed into reading
)earlier than they were ready, struggled to learn (my
)daughter would cry when she had reading homework in
)first grade), and now loathe reading of any kind.
)My youngest son spent two years in a Waldorf
)kindergarten before beginning first grade. He loved
)school, and went each day enthusiastically. He's now
)in a sixth grade Waldorf school, and is about to begin
)reading Tolkien because he *wants* to (after he's
)finished the last Harry Potter). He has a wonderful
)imagination, and is the only child of my 4 who reads
)for pleasure.
I've done a lot of thinking about this post-Waldorf. I was very concerned
about 'pushing' my daughter academically. I wanted her to enjoy her early
academic experiences so that she would enjoy learning her entire life. The
experience your older children had is exactly what I was trying to avoid.
The flip side of that is that I think the Waldorf academic pace is slowed to
a point that can cause just as much damage to a child's early learning
experiences as a schedule that is too hurried.
In my daughter's case she began reading the summer before grade 1. She was
bored beyond belief at W. At her new school her reading is celebrated and
she is challenged in ways that I consider healthy. She helps other kids who
are still learning. She writes stories while other kids focus on their
phonics. She reads chapter books while others read early readers and still
others are learning their alphabet. There are all kinds of ways in which
kids can be uniquely challenged by their teachers while still meeting the
needs of the class as a whole and not rushing anyone before they're ready.
This type of multi-activity approach to meeting kids' varying academic
levels in the same class is a very promising and progessive trend. W is
woefully behind the times as it relates to their approach to teaching kids
to read. Add to this the actual spiritual developmental reasons why they
don't teach reading in 1st grade. I'm not exactly sure what I think of the
approach at all. Does it even count as educational theory? I just feel
fortunate my daughter isn't there anymore.
Kathy
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:35:30 +1100 (EST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Kate=20Booth?= (kateabooth yahoo.com.au)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
Dear Kathy H I have been enjoying your posts so
thankyou.
My son also became extremly bored in kindergarten
along with many others to the point that it led into
behavioral problems.The class 6 teacher (the only male
in the whole school)explained that he was already
"earthed" and since no child could progress a year
earlier into class 1 it was recommended by the schools
co-ordinator and supported by us that he attend a
mainstream school. Reading was instentanious as we are
also very much a book family and the class structure
was very progressive all children supported at their
own pace...no pushing the curriculum ...I know that I
live in Australia but our Public schools particularly
the one my son attends are very progressive with a
wonderful balanced faculty of no less than 7 full time
male teachers (this is another story!).
To cut a long story short when I spoke to our sons
prospective 1st grade teacher at the Waldorf school he
would return to her first question to me was "I hear
...is returning next year" and when I replied yes she
said "goodness I hope he doesn't get bored!"
Needless to say he didn't return.
Kate
--- Kathy H (waldorf_kh hotmail.com) wrote: ) )
))Bored stiff is putting it
) )mildly, some of
) )these kids are very angry, and start acting out to
) )call
) )attention to their
) )misery.
) )Diana((
) )
) Kelly responded:
) )This wasn't the case with us. My older children
) )started in public school, were pushed into reading
) )earlier than they were ready, struggled to learn
) (my
) )daughter would cry when she had reading homework in
) )first grade), and now loathe reading of any kind.
) )My youngest son spent two years in a Waldorf
) )kindergarten before beginning first grade. He
) loved
) )school, and went each day enthusiastically. He's
) now
) )in a sixth grade Waldorf school, and is about to
) begin
) )reading Tolkien because he *wants* to (after he's
) )finished the last Harry Potter). He has a
) wonderful
) )imagination, and is the only child of my 4 who
) reads
) )for pleasure.
)
) I've done a lot of thinking about this post-Waldorf.
) I was very concerned
) about 'pushing' my daughter academically. I wanted
) her to enjoy her early
) academic experiences so that she would enjoy
) learning her entire life. The
) experience your older children had is exactly what I
) was trying to avoid.
) The flip side of that is that I think the Waldorf
) academic pace is slowed to
) a point that can cause just as much damage to a
) child's early learning
) experiences as a schedule that is too hurried.
)
) In my daughter's case she began reading the summer
) before grade 1. She was
) bored beyond belief at W. At her new school her
) reading is celebrated and
) she is challenged in ways that I consider healthy.
) She helps other kids who
) are still learning. She writes stories while other
) kids focus on their
) phonics. She reads chapter books while others read
) early readers and still
) others are learning their alphabet. There are all
) kinds of ways in which
) kids can be uniquely challenged by their teachers
) while still meeting the
) needs of the class as a whole and not rushing anyone
) before they're ready.
)
) This type of multi-activity approach to meeting
) kids' varying academic
) levels in the same class is a very promising and
) progessive trend. W is
) woefully behind the times as it relates to their
) approach to teaching kids
) to read. Add to this the actual spiritual
) developmental reasons why they
) don't teach reading in 1st grade. I'm not exactly
) sure what I think of the
) approach at all. Does it even count as educational
) theory? I just feel
) fortunate my daughter isn't there anymore.
)
) Kathy
)
)
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
) MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print
) your photos:
) http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
)
)
)
http://my.yahoo.com.au - My Yahoo!
- It's My Yahoo! Get your own!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:20:42 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Question for Joel
Joel, I caught wind of a fairly recent conversation in which the mind was
translated as "soul". If I have got this wrong please disregard the rest of
this post.
If the mind is the soul, then the mind is peach blossom because it lives in
the colour of the skin which is peachblossom.
Steiner said that man does not think with his brain but with his skeleton,
and when thought becomes "real" instead of sharply defined, thinking goes
over to the whole man (Rosicrucianism and Modern Initiation 64-68). So the
mind is everywhere the skeleton and skin are?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 20:07:05 -0500
From: "Green Family" (sjgreen seidata.com)
Subject: RE: No books, no answering questions
The mom who made the post about the gift of a book (apologies for forgetting
her name) said she knew it wasn't "waldorfy" to give a book in Kindergarten.
So she did not refute the original point at all...Waldorf does not like
books for Kindergarteners. Jennifer
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 20:05:55 -0800
From: Alice K (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
on 1/15/02 7:20 PM, mysplum at mysplum earthlink.net wrote:
) Joel, I caught wind of a fairly recent conversation in which the mind was
) translated as "soul". If I have got this wrong please disregard the rest of
) this post.
)
) If the mind is the soul, then the mind is peach blossom because it lives in
) the colour of the skin which is peachblossom.
)
) Steiner said that man does not think with his brain but with his skeleton,
) and when thought becomes "real" instead of sharply defined, thinking goes
) over to the whole man (Rosicrucianism and Modern Initiation 64-68). So the
) mind is everywhere the skeleton and skin are?
)
Alice here:
As a student of an alternative bodywork,"Body Mind Centering", I have to say
this intrigues me.(www.bodymindcentering.com)
As part of this discipline we learn that there is a "mind" of various
tissues of the body and through intention we can contact another body/person
cell-to-cell. I know that some of you think this stuff is woo-woo, and so
did I until I saw a BMC practitioner ten years ago and my chronic severe
headaches were helped enormously. After being a client for several years, I
took the certification program, a four year program. I finished the course
work two years ago.
In this BMC theory the skeleton/bones have cerebro-spinal fluid as the fluid
of influence. And the cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) connects one to the
sky/heaven. It is the balancing "energy" to gravity which helps the
multi-system, developmental process of a baby lifting it's head, for
instance.
As I have mentioned before,I am playing with the theory that Steiner
mis-interpreted his own inner senses... and instead of seeing
higher,spiritual worlds, he became more in touch with his own physiology.
It is similar to what they are now finding out about "near death"
experiences...the experience can be induced by certain parts of the brain
being stimulated...white light, the faces of the already dead, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:40:39 +0000
From: L G Clemens (linda highstream.net)
Subject: RE: Loose ends
) Walden: By continuing with the above thought pattern you simply
prove my
) point. Do you honestly not see this? I guess not. Try this: the
impact
) Frobel may have had on today's Kindergarten cannot be compared to the
impact
) Steiner has had on today's Waldorf. The analogy you used is
illogical.
)
{sigh} Are you just bickering with me for the sake of bickering?
Imagine for a minute that you are me. A short time ago you landed on a
board full of parents with complaints against Waldorf schools, and one
of the chief complaints you find them making against these schools is
that it seemed like everything was "Steiner - Steiner - Steiner", with
no one able to give rhyme or reason to why things should be done the way
they were done without starting off with "Steiner says ..."
These critics also complain that when questions or concerns were raised,
all they heard was 'according to Steiner ...'. And, these critics say,
whenever they challenged the status quo, they were told by the powers
that be they couldn't possibly 'understand' why things were the way they
were unless they read Steiner. As Greg put it just a few days ago: "I
am appalled that some members of the list are hanging onto the assertion
'read Steiner before you criticise'. To that, I call bunk."
Now imagine your astonishment to discover these critics, who have taken
their children out of
the Waldorf school and put them in another school system, have stepped
into the role of "talmid chacham" of the education. Not the education
*their* children are participating in now. Not the early educational
philosophers such as Fr–bel, Dewey, and others whose impact on the
mission, form and substance of their children's schools cannot be
overstated. Not the special
interests, including but not limited to the textbook publishers and
standardized test industry, whose impact on the mission, form and
substance of their children's schools cannot be overstated. Not on the
research (or lack of) behind legislative and administrative laws in
education, such as the proposed "No Child Left Behind Act", that impact
the mission, form and substance of their children's schools to an extent
which can't be overstated. No, these critics are the "talmid chacham"
for Rudolf Steiner.
These learned Steiner scholars will say that this is a Waldorf ed board,
and their in depth investigations into the education their children
currently receive are Off-Topic. Instead, here the reportage is
restricted to issues central to Waldorf ed. Besides the assiduous
studies on Steiner, these scholars share the insights they've gained by
thugging through the internet to gather "pertinent" information on
Waldorf ed supporters, such as their political affiliations and their
personal views on the second amendment, to fellow hecklers on the
Waldorf Critics board. You, being the hapless newcomer, are *awestruck*
by the level of 'scholarship' to be found in this august group.
To continue, you find the critics are more urgently insistent than the
most starry-eyed anthroposophist you've ever met. There's a serious
problem when Waldorf teachers refer you to Steiner when you're
displeased, they tell you, but it's a mission of mercy when Waldorf
critics refer you to Steiner when you're completely satisfied. It's
imperative, they say, that you read Rudolf Steiner, not to alleviate
confusions or to come to any understanding of why Waldorf schools do
what they do (as the critics' erstwhile Waldorf teachers regrettably
recommend) but so you who are very pleased with your children's Waldorf
education will, hopefully, find some reason to dislike it after all.
Now, continue pretending you're me. You know that, to these critics,
anyone who has read Steiner and continues to believe their children are
getting a good education at their Waldorf school, must be 'woowoo'.
Indeed, it is a given in their mind that any sensible minded person
would be horrified by Steiner. You know that unless you too express
outrage at what you've
read, these critics will continue to dismiss the positive experiences
you report, just as they did before. You know that, in truth, your
children's educational experiences, be they positive or negative, exist
independent of your having read Steiner and reading Steiner will not
alter those experiences. You know that the only purpose to be served is
to help the critics to classify whether you, the happy Waldorf parent,
are either 'deluded' or 'woowoo'.
Remember, you're me. And you have offered the opinion that Waldorf
schools and teachers should NOT blindly follow Steiner as if it were
inviolable, and you didn't approve of Waldorf educators adopting a
strict fundamentalist doctrinal approach to everything "Steiner". You
have said parents should NOT blindly buy what they're told by Waldorf
educators. You have said
that you yourself have judged Waldorf on its own, OUTSIDE Steiner's
why's and wherefores, and admitted that you didn't find his "becauses"
as persuasive as those of others who do make sense to you. And imagine,
in view of all this, here comes this critic who, despite not having read
Steiner until late in the game him/herself, imperiously disqualifies
your 'excuse' for not reading Steiner yourself, pronouncing your
reasoning "illogical"..........
Add to the picture a big white rabbit hurrying through as he struggles
to pull a watch out of his waistcoat pocket. This, I hope, gives you
some sense of what things looks like from my seat.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 21:25:03 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
) The mom who made the post about the gift of a book (apologies for forgetting
) her name) said she knew it wasn't "waldorfy" to give a book in Kindergarten.
) So she did not refute the original point at all...Waldorf does not like
) books for Kindergarteners. Jennifer
)
Lisa here: Most of the nursery/kindergarten teachers at our former Waldorf
school certainly viewed books as inappropriate for children in their classes
(read: all children under the age of 7.)
I say "most" because when we were there the school did have one
nursery-kindergarten teacher who *did* allow some books on her classroom
shelves, and ended up being chastised quite often by a senior teacher for
doing so.
This teacher also had a few puzzles (the big wooden kind, but puzzles
nonetheless) in the room, and wore pants instead of the required skirts and
dresses* -- all things that got her into trouble. (I recall one more
experienced mom telling me that our teacher was called the "Waldorf Wild
Child" because she resisted being reined in by the senior teachers who
wanted her to move in lock-step with them.)
It is interesting to note that the "wild child" teacher (who was always
our favorite and always will be!) came to the school from a regular,
mainstream early childhood background (bachelor's degree from a local state
university). Before coming to Waldorf, she spent years managing and teaching
at a local daycare franchise (run out of a church.)
* For the first three years we were there, our former school required women
teachers to wear flowing skirts, dresses or jumpers. When I asked the "wild
child" teacher about it, she said it was "complicated Steiner stuff." I
pressed on, stating that I thought the rule was anti-feminist, and she said
"Well, it has something to do with your etheric body. A woman's etheric body
is male, and a man's etheric body is female." I of course asked what the
heck an "etheric body" is, and she said it sort of the "aura" or "feeling"
around a person, and not to worry about it, that it didn't matter.
The school eventually loosened this restriction, allowing female
teachers to wear pants. Most wore very loose, baggy trousers made of flowy
fabric with elastic waists, but once in a blue moon you would see someone
with an ordinary pair of chinos.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 21:29:18 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: more on loose ends
Linda says:
Imagine for a minute that you are me. A short time ago you landed on a
board full of parents with complaints against Waldorf schools .... (snip)
Lisa here: Linda, unless there I am quite mistaken, you did not "land" here
by accident. You came intentionally to the "Waldorf CRITICS List."
Does it surprise you that many members of this list are, well, critics?
If so, what did you think the purpose of this list was before subscribing?
Honestly wondering ....
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 21:46:55 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: boredom/was "no books ...."
Kate Booth, replying to a post by Kathy H, acknowledges:
((My son also became extremly bored in kindergarten
along with many others ... (snip))
Lisa here: Boredom was a big problem in my younger daughter's kindergarten
class at our former Waldorf school.
The class had a large percentage of "older" children: kids who, in a
public or other more mainstream school, would have actually been in first
grade. (As someone else pointed out here recently, many children in Waldorf
schools turn 7 before entering first grade. But that is another topic ...)
This led to some pretty wild behavior, especially in the case of the oldest
boys. During the "free play" portion of the morning, these boys would get
wilder and wilder and louder and louder. One morning (when I was visiting
because it was my child's birthday), three of these boys actually moved a
large, heavy wooden wardrobe that was on a ledge in the classroom!
My older daughter, on the other hand, found that Waldorf got more and
more boring the farther she went along in the school. In other words, she
started out having a wonderful time in the nursery school at age 4, and got
progressively more bored the older she got! (I would think that the fact
that she learned, on her own, to read at age 4.5 probably had something to
do with this! (g))
By the second month of 4th grade, she was bored out of her mind. This
expressed itself as great frustration; I recall picking her up in the
carpool line at the end of the day and feeling as if I had a tiger in the
backseat of the car! She turned from a very sweet, sensitive but sunny child
into a brooding, unhappy and decidedly unpleasant child to be around.
Questions about what was wrong elicited one word, sharp-tongued answers.
Finally, however, the frustration boiled over and she began to complain
about "doing the same boring, baby things day after day." She also asked,
repeatedly, "When am I going to be allowed to paint a picture that *I* want
to paint? Why do I have to copy, copy, copy the teacher all day long? I HATE
to copy!"
Adding to the problem was the fact that she continued to be harrassed by
a classmate who (I don't know how else to describe this!) liked her too much
and expressed this affection by hugging, sitting on, grabbing, etc. my
daughter. (One day, my child came home with a big bite mark on her stomach.
The classmate had lifted my daughter up, pulled up her shirt, and given her
a bite!)
Repeated conversations with the class teacher about our daughter's
unhappiness with copying, etc. could be compared to running repeatedly into
a brick wall. The teacher, in fact, cautioned us that if we continued to
allow our daughter to "think so abstractly," she would "become ill in later
life." We were told that allowing our child to think critically would
"harden" her.
When the teacher suggested that we had to do "something" to "move
{Olivia} from her head into her trunk," we realized that something was
seriously wrong here.
We left the school shortly thereafter.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:07:38 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Catch 22?
I can't even begin to go through this letter and separate all of the words
that are being put into my mouth.
This started with my mention of the 6 exercises from "How to Know Higher
Worlds"---or whichever title/edition you choose to ignore.
The exercises outlined therein are very basic, simple exercises that are
quite difficult to maintain. You will NOT become a follower of Steiner by
doing them any more than you will become a follower of Jane Fonda by doing
aerobics. They are no more occult than the idea that you will get better at
math if you do it every day.
These exercises will, over time, improve your thinking, feeling and willing
life in the same way that aerobics will improve your physical life.
They will even make you a more effective Waldorf critic if that is the path
you choose to take.
PLEASE, Peter, DO NOT "just accept what I say at face value", the truth is
never found in this way. You cannot be *told* a truth. Instead, try the
exercises and see how they work. It's no more difficult than, say, quitting
smoking or losing 20lbs. ;-)
xxxooo,
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 9:10 AM
Subject: Catch 22?
) Dear Charlie,
)
) You seem to have a peculiar understanding of "open-mindedness". Blind
) acceptance of Steiner's teachings is the same as "open-mindedness",
) whereas skepticism is prejudice. Don't you realize that this rhetoric
) device can be used by everyone to argue for his or her beliefs? It is
) the same as saying: "just accept what I say at face-value." If one
) doesn't accept the truth, this means that this person must have some
) prejudice. It is a very authoritarian way of arguing. It presupposes
) that the teacher has all the right answers (a closed mind, so to speak).
) It doesn't invite to critical and independent thinking, but to
) submission and blind adherence. It is the exact opposite of a skeptical
) attitude. There is a difference between an open mind and mindlessness.
) It doesn't allow for an exchange of views. Why would I accept Steiner as
) an infallible teacher? Why do you accept Steiner as an infallible
) teacher? Why not someone else? Why not a skeptical, critical,
) independent attitude toward teachers?
)
) Still a skeptic,
)
) Peter Zegers
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:04:50 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: no books, no answering questions
Describing the Waldorf first grade, in which children are "introduced" to
the alphabet letter by letter via stories and copying, Diana says:
((They insist they can make this magical and wondrous, this endless
copying, even for those already reading. I admit I haven't seen this
in action, but I find it very hard to believe. They believe
that these poor first graders who are already reading have been robbed of
their childhoods. They need to to go back and "reverence" the alphabet or
something.))
Lisa here: Unfortunately, it wasn't "magical" for my daughter, who was
already reading well when she entered Waldorf first grade at age 7.
(Olivia's birthday is on Sept. 1, so she had just turned 7. For the sake of
fairness, I do need to say that I am very happy that we "red-shirted" Olivia
and allowed her an "extra" year. Back then, she was very quiet and quite
shy, and being somewhat "older" than other classmates gave her more
confidence.)
Back to the subject, which is boredom. Something quite interesting
happened immediately after we withdrew Olivia from Waldorf at the end of the
first semester in 4th grade: she began reading and reading and reading,
devouring all kinds of books at an amazing rate! In the first two months
post-Waldorf, she read almost 100 books (she kept a list!) -- from regular
old fiction/novels to non-fiction books about animals, dinosaurs, women's
history, etc. She would beg to be taken to the library several times a week,
and spent *all* of her spare time curled up in a big armchair, reading.
I finally asked her about it. She seemed embarrassed, but said "I don't
think they like you to read at Waldorf. Nobody talked about books. I want to
make up for lost time!)
The other day, my sister (a public school teacher with a master's degree
in reading instruction) reminded me about this.
"Remember how she just read and read, like she could not get enough of
it?" my sister said. "Looking back, that seems weird."
Frankly, I don't think it is weird at all. You don't have to be a rocket
scientist (as they say! (g)) to *feel* to anti-intellectual atmosphere at a
Waldorf school. I personally cannot remember a time when a teacher ever
enthused over a book, unless it was "Magical Child" by Joseph Chilton Pierce
or an anti-tv diatribe.
Even when the teachers would give us parents the usual "television is
damaging to your children" lecture, I cannot ever remember them saying "Your
children should be reading instead of watching tv." They always just said
that the children shouldn't watch tv.
I am so thankful that both my girls now attend a school that values
reading and intellectual pursuits.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:17:18 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: contrary indications
It grieves me that you felt that you had to lie or deceive or parrot some
kind of party line that you didn't fully understand.
If anything good comes from PLANS, I hope that it puts an end to any such
behavior.
If I heard a colleague putting out the line of crap that you seem to have
put out, I would be appalled.
Who told you that Anthroposophy means "wisdom of man"? That's not what
Steiner said. I think he'd know.
xxxooo,
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alice Klinge" (alice javanet.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: contrary indications
) on 1/14/02 10:15 PM, walden at awaldenpond home.com wrote:
)
) )
) ) Charlie:
) )
) ) Apologies for the lask of clarity.
) ) I was expressing (perhaps poorly for a teacher...even for a Waldorf
teacher
) ) (g)) confusion over what seemed to be two opposite complaints.
) ) How can one hide Anthroposophy while "recruit[ing]" them into
) ) Anthroposophical study groups?
) ) charlie
) )
) )
) ) Walden: No need for confusion. It is simple - I saw it regularly for
many
) ) years. Hell - I even used this line after learning it to keep parents
at
) ) our school. At the time I was a foggy minded shill, mind you. Waldorf
) ) plays it both ways. Here:
) )
) ) Brand New Parent: Excuse me but what is all this strange stuff I heard
) ) about Steiner and Anthropology?
) )
) ) Experienced admin/parent/teacher - smiling: *Anthroposophy* -
literally,
) ) the Wisdom of Man and it is not really strange but yes - Steiner can be
) ) difficult to read. In any case - Anthroposophy is not in the classroom
at
) ) all... it is a non-sectarian education... your son/daughter is soooo
cute
) ) and doing well, I hear. It is wonderful....how are things with you?
) )
) ) Slightly more experienced parent after lots of time and $$ invested and
) ) realizing how difficult the reality (child behind academically, etc) is
of
) ) taking their child from the W school and going elsewhere: Excuse me but
I
) ) am having some trouble understanding how things work around here. Where
) ) does the buck stop? Who do I ask about ...?
) )
) ) Experienced admin/parent/teacher- smiling and nodding: Yes it is a
mystery
) ) but it all works out. Consensus is not always easy but we strive
together
) ) in the community. Not like public schools with their chaotic
) ) beaurocracies... I remember so-and-so came here so confused and is
thriving
) ) now. How are you doing? How is your husband/wife? Did you know there
is a
) ) study group forming soon? You might want to come....
) )
) )
) ) There you go, Charlie. My guess is this type of scenario happens all
the
) ) time. No malice involved - it's a religious thing.
) )
) ) - Walden
) )
) )
) Alice here:
) wow, Walden.
) Thank you...chills of familiarity on these scenarios..
) Happens every day I know...
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:47:31 -0800
From: "walden" (awaldenpond home.com)
Subject: Re: Catch 22?
Charlie:
) These exercises will, over time, improve your thinking, feeling and
willing
) life in the same way that aerobics will improve your physical life.
Walden (who meditates regularly): Thanks for the exercise suggestion.
Question: I know what "physical life" means. What does "thinking, feeling
and willing life" mean?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:31:18 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: "Chris Day" (chrisgday hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: PLANS
Chris Day (chrisgday hotmail.com), I'm responding to your rebuttal on
the waldorf-critics mailing list. You wrote:
)Thank you for your prompt response, which I found interesting in a
)variety of ways, the most notable that you feel it is alright for
)YOU to promote your views on how others should live their lives (by
)virtue of telling them all that is bad about a particular form of
)education and advising them not to support it) and then
)automatically becoming defensive about my challenging the way YOU
)live your life, which may be a natural reaction but doesn't further
)the cause of PLANS.
I'm not telling anybody how to live their life. I'm sharing my
experience with the Waldorf system. Make of it what you will.
)I would have expected a much more positive response from someone who
)claims to know the inner workings of the Waldorf system,
The more I learned about it, the less I liked it.
)a response which attempted to convince me that you do appreciate
)that others have a free choice in their children's education or that
)you recognised that bigotry IS behind the PLANS site. The dictionary
)defines a bigot as 'obstinate or intolerant adherent of a creed or
)view'. Your anti-Waldorf stance appears to be obstinate intolerance
)of the clearest kind. If it were up to you there would be NO Waldorf
)schools. You must have SOMETHING positive to say about it?
The schools are beautiful. I fell in love with the school when I
enrolled my son.
)I've seen many children go through the system and there are many
)MORE success stories from Waldorf than failures.
I'm sure there are, but what would be useful to know would be how the
lives of Waldorf students turn out compared with students of other
private schools of the same economic class.
)Surely you recognise that there is more to the spiritual development
)of each one of us than that which is found in academic education?
Yes. But I also recognize the right of parents to bring up their
children in their family's spirituality. Waldorf doesn't respect this
boundary and attempts to guide the spiritual development of the
children -in spite of- their families.
)Even if you don't, there is room for all views, all beliefs, all
)people. Just let this be an unequivocal truth in your world too. If
)everyone were as negative about other aspects of life, then the
)world would just grind to a halt. Negativity serves no purpose in
)the end. Say something positive.
)
)Rantings? That's just so typical. Bring to your attention a couple
)of the simple failings of the untouchable USA and it's a European
)ranting. What does it matter where I live? The argument isn't about
)me, is it?
Nor is it about the problems of the U.S.A. You brought up nationality.
)Remember, most of you are descended from 'ranting' Europeans. We've
)got plenty to rant about as the USA tries to convince the world it
)knows best on all topics! But that's another story that I can't say
)much positive about right now. I have a life to live - as positively
)as possible.
)
)Good to talk with you.
)
)Chris
I'm not finding this attempt at dialogue all that good so far.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 02:18:05 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner & socialism
Kathryn, rergarding Steiner's Threefold Social Order, you wrote,
)Alas.
)Again dan you think you"proof read " for others.You act like a
)dictator.I guess you cannot let anybody else think for
)themselves.Companion volumes arent both books or that book.I want
)you to Qoute ver batum what made you think it was Communist?Again i
)see your bigotry coming thru for others in their stead.
I said that Steiner's social order looks a lot like the religious
communism (small 'c') practiced in Catholic religious orders, like
monasteries. Your use of large-C Communism above makes me think you
didn't get the distinction. You are calling me a bigot because you
think I'm calling Steiner a Communist. Steiner vehemently opposed
Marxism (the foundation of Communism); I suspect this was the reason
he was booted from lecturing at the workers' association, they were
turning left and he was turning right.
Religious communism means the renunciation of private property in a
religious community.
"In a social organism which corresponds to the manner of thinking
characterized here, a person's surplus performance, made possible by
his individual abilities, will be passed on to the community just as
the legitimate support for the deficit performance of the less
capable will be drawn from this same community. 'Surplus value' will
not be created for the enjoyment of individuals, but for the
increased supply of intellectual or material wealth to the social
organism; and for the cultivation of what is produced within this
organism but which is not of immediate use to it."
[Steiner, Rudolf. Towards Social Renewal: Basic Issues of the Social
Question. (1923) Trans. Frank Thomas Smith. London: Rudolf Steiner
Press, 1977, pp. 116-117]
"[Stephen Usher] introduced Rudolf Steiner's principle of True Price,
whereby a person's labor would be remunerated in terms of his/her
needs rather than determined by market forces."
[Marilu Finardi, "Threefold Community Dialogue." The Bulletin (Green
Mountain Waldorf School newsletter) December 7, 1998, p. 14.]
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 02:00:00 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: steiners doctorate credentials
Kathryn, you wrote to me off-list,
)RUDOLF STEINER was born in the small village of Kraljevec, Austria
)(now in Croatia) in 1861 and died in Dornach, Switzerland in 1925.
)In university, he concentrated on mathematics, physics, and
)chemistry. Having written his thesis on philosophy, Steiner earned
)his doctorate and was later drawn into literary and scholarly
)circles and participated in the rich social and political life of
)Vienna.
)http://www.anthropress.org/AboutRudolf.htm
I'm not sure why you sent me this, was it in response to your
statement that Steiner was an electrical engineer? I doubted that,
and still do. BTW I have read Steiner's autobiography, Henry Barnes'
"A Life for the Spirit," and Stewart Easton's "Rudolf Steiner: Herald
of a New Epoch." From outside the movement there are good capsule
biographies in James Webb's "The Occult Establishment" and Peter
Washington's "Madame Blavatsky's Baboon." None of them mention his
being an electrical engineer. Could you have been mistaken about that?
Steiner's doctorate wasn't obtained by the regular process. Since
he'd taken the trade school track rather than the academic
-gymnasium-, he wasn't eligible for a doctoral program in his native
Austria. In Germany philosophy professors had more autonomy, and he
found a German professor who accepted his dissertation, met with him
once, and gave him his degree (see Easton, pp. 54-55). Seems a bit
suspicious to me. Apparently he never received any other degree or
certification, no B.A. or masters. There's no mention of his
completing a program at the Vienna Institute of Technology, only that
he attended classes there.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 02:37:50 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
Alice, you wrote,
)As I have mentioned before,I am playing with the theory that Steiner
)mis-interpreted his own inner senses... and instead of seeing
)higher,spiritual worlds, he became more in touch with his own physiology.
)It is similar to what they are now finding out about "near death"
)experiences...the experience can be induced by certain parts of the brain
)being stimulated...white light, the faces of the already dead, etc.
It's funny, Steiner himself put down the mystical experiences of
Theosophists and other rival cults as being due to indigestion.
-Dan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:56:39 EST
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
Subject: Re: Steiner on Blavatsky
--part1_12a.aac8c1a.2976c477_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steiner says: Blavatsky is a women with the most comprehensive
understanding whose works make all others pale in comparison. Her book "The
Secret Doctrine" offers unparalleled wisdom about nearly all areas of
spiritual life.
Richard Hodgson, Society for Psychical Research, says: ... we think that
she (Blavatsky) has achieved a title to permanent remembrance as one of the
most accomplished, ingenious, and interesting imposters of history." (Madame
Blavatsky's Baboon, Peter Washingon, 1993)
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 597
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Catch 22?
By cffrey mindspring.com
RE: more on loose ends
By linda highstream.net
RE: more on loose ends
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
By peter_zegers runbox.no
Re: Steiner & socialism
By mysplum earthlink.net
re: even more on loose ends
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
By alice javanet.com
Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
By alice javanet.com
Re: more on loose ends
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: steiners doctorate credentials
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
By mysplum earthlink.net
RE: more on loose ends/foreign language
By snell gv.net
deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
By dan dandugan.com
Re: No books, no answering questions
By snell gv.net
Re: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
By cffrey mindspring.com
RE: Loose ends
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: steiners doctorate credentials
By charliemorrison btinternet.com
Veneration, devotion, reverence
By peter_zegers runbox.no
Re: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
By charliemorrison btinternet.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By cffrey mindspring.com
RE: more on loose ends
By sufrito53 yahoo.com
Re: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Loose ends
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By awaldenpond home.com
Re: Catch 22?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By peter_zegers runbox.no
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 07:18:07 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Catch 22?
Awwwww, c'mon.
"Think", "feel" and "will" are pretty basic words.
Check your dictionary.
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "walden" (awaldenpond home.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 2:47 AM
Subject: Re: Catch 22?
) Charlie:
) ) These exercises will, over time, improve your thinking, feeling and
) willing
) ) life in the same way that aerobics will improve your physical life.
)
) Walden (who meditates regularly): Thanks for the exercise suggestion.
) Question: I know what "physical life" means. What does "thinking,
feeling
) and willing life" mean?
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:17:56 +0000
From: L G Clemens (linda highstream.net)
Subject: RE: more on loose ends
Lisa Ercolano wrote:
) Linda says:
)
) Imagine for a minute that you are me. A short time ago you landed on a
) board full of parents with complaints against Waldorf schools ....
) (snip)
)
) Lisa here: Linda, unless there I am quite mistaken, you did not "land"
) here
) by accident.
No, Lisa. I didn't "land" here by accident. When I "landed" in London,
it wasn't an accident. When I "landed" in Australia, it wasn't an
accident.
You came intentionally to the "Waldorf CRITICS List."
) Does it surprise you that many members of this list are, well, critics?
It surprises me to find critics complaining that they were told "by
Waldorf teachers to read Steiner", but who can't seem to stop saying
"read Steiner" themselves.
) If so, what did you think the purpose of this list was before
) subscribing?
) Honestly wondering ....
I think I've answered your question. Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:32:44 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: more on loose ends
Linda:
)It surprises me to find critics complaining that they were told "by
)Waldorf teachers to read Steiner", but who can't seem to stop saying
)"read Steiner" themselves.
The teachers were right. If you want to "get it," you need to read Steiner.
Now, someone who has taken their child out, like Greg whom I think you
quoted, isn't *required* to read Steiner before having a right to speak out
about what happened to his child in school, no.
This puzzles you? Makes sense to me to read Steiner earlier rather than
later, if you're going to put your kids through a Steiner school.
)Myself, I'm honestly wondering how so many of you critics managed to
) )"land" in a Waldorf school without any apparent idea beforehand that )it
)was, well, a Waldorf school.......
I explained that in very long detail yesterday. The explanations parents
receive beforehand don't explain what goes on in the classroom. What parts
are you stil wondering about?
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 15:47:33 +0100
From: Peter Zegers (peter_zegers runbox.no)
Subject: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
Dear Charlie,
Even if Steiner has said otherwise (which I doubt), Anthroposophy does
mean "wisdom of man". It is composed of two Greek words: Anthropos (man)
and Sophia (wisdom). What do you think it means?
Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:22:43 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner & socialism
on 1/16/02 2:18 AM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
)
) Religious communism means the renunciation of private property in a
) religious community.
Steiner said that the folks living in Atlantis held property in common. The
settlements looked like gardens, the houses were built of trees entwined
with branches and residents drove vehicles that floated in the air.
Unfortunately, these initiates did not guard their secrets very well and
many became corrupt. Their evil grew to such proportions that the mighty
forces dwelling in nature let loose destroying Atlantis by air and water
(violent undines and sylphs).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:27:34 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: re: even more on loose ends
Linda says:
((....Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......))
Lisa here: I think I speak for most of the critics here when I say that when
we enrolled our children in our former Waldorf schools, we KNEW that they
were Waldorf schools.
The trouble happened because as parents, we believed that Waldorf schools
were just what the teachers/administrators there told us Waldorf schools
were: arts-based, non-sectarian, progressive schools.
Unfortunately, that is NOT what the schools were in truth.
In truth, at least in grades from nursery through grade 4, there is
virtually no art that is creative and self-expressive. (One critic here was
told, when she asked why her child was only copying the teacher's "art,"
that "there is no art in a Waldorf school.")
In truth, the school is NOT non-sectarian; it is a religious school
founded on and run according to the tenets of anthroposophy, a religion that
is an offshoot of another religion called Theosophy.
We critics enrolled our children expecting to get what the school
advertised. That is what *we* thought was meant by "Waldorf."
As we now know, to the teachers who run these schools, the word
"Waldorf" means something far different.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:38:27 -0800
From: Alice K (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
on 1/16/02 2:37 AM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
) Alice, you wrote,
)
)) As I have mentioned before,I am playing with the theory that Steiner
)) mis-interpreted his own inner senses... and instead of seeing
)) higher,spiritual worlds, he became more in touch with his own physiology.
)) It is similar to what they are now finding out about "near death"
)) experiences...the experience can be induced by certain parts of the brain
)) being stimulated...white light, the faces of the already dead, etc.
)
) It's funny, Steiner himself put down the mystical experiences of
) Theosophists and other rival cults as being due to indigestion.
)
) -Dan
)
Alice here:
Thanks Dan! I appreciate the levity...
Do you have a source for this type of thinking?
I would love to find out more about this - What did Steiner did of?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:41:46 -0800
From: Alice K (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
on 1/16/02 10:38 AM, Alice Klinge at alice javanet.com wrote:
) Alice here:
)
) Thanks Dan! I appreciate the levity...
) Do you have a source for this type of thinking?
) I would love to find out more about this - What did Steiner did of?
)
Oops,
supposed to read "die"....
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:58:32 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: more on loose ends
on 1/16/02 6:17 AM, L G Clemens at linda highstream.net wrote:
)
)Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
) so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
) apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......
Sharon: Because we didn't speak or understand the language of occultism. I'd
never heard of Steiner the mystagogue. I knew nothing about magical groups
like the Golden Dawn. My knowledge of Blavatsky was extremely limited, all I
knew pre-Waldorf was that she transmitted the doctrine of root races in her
Theosophy. I knew enough to want to avoid her teachings but had no clue that
Waldorf and Blavatsky were so entwined. I had zero background in
Hermeticism, alchemy, astrology, Rosicrucianism or any of the New Age fringe
religions such as I Am. I was not a seeker then, and I'm not a seeker now, I
was looking for an art based, progressive school for my child, definitely
not a religious path. There was no evidence of the school being religion
based, Steiner was advertised as a scientist, philosopher and educator, not
an occult scientist, esoteric Anthroposophist or religious teacher. The
school claimed to be based on a philosophy, not a religion, and was touted
as nonsectarian. I was extremely ignorant in those days, definitely not in a
position of knowledge of occultism. It was a bad experience to find oneself
speaking a different language, even though at first it sounded like the one
I spoke.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:09:01 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: steiners doctorate credentials
on 1/16/02 2:00 AM, Dan Dugan at dan dandugan.com wrote:
)
) Steiner's doctorate wasn't obtained by the regular process. Since
) he'd taken the trade school track rather than the academic
) -gymnasium-, he wasn't eligible for a doctoral program in his native
) Austria.
Sharon: To this day Austria has very high academic standards. Alternative
medical practices for example are not allowed. I have a friend, an energetic
healer who may not work in Austria as a resident, although he is allowed to
visit as an American and conduct his seminars.
In Germany philosophy professors had more autonomy, and he
) found a German professor who accepted his dissertation, met with him
) once, and gave him his degree (see Easton, pp. 54-55).
Sharon: Yes I read this as well. It was a Platonist professor at Rostock
University who accepted his doctrinal dissertation on Ficht's theory of
knowledge if I remember correctly.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:29:21 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Question for Joe - OT body questions
on 1/16/02 10:38 AM, Alice Klinge at alice javanet.com wrote:
What did Steiner did of?
Sharon: There's a claim of not knowing. How can this be? An important
mystagogue dies and no one knows what from?! My theories are that it was
either something very embarrassing or....it's a secret that somehow relates
to future prophesies, second comings, future core groups and the
establishment of his new religion....etc. Messiahs just don't die from
diseases! If there was a cause, it should not be written so that in 500
years, when Anthroposophy has replaced all world religions, Steiner can be
said to have never died of a disease, instead...the myth will be that
something more mysterious transpired....such as...he slipped out of his
physical body, spiraling up to Devachan, missing Kamaloca entirely... later
entering the small, peach blossom flesh of a girl-child born to Ms. X in
Dornach 2, a lush, green hilly place in North America.(G)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:40:44 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell gv.net)
Subject: RE: more on loose ends/foreign language
At 2:17 PM +0000 1/16/02, L G Clemens wrote:
) ) Linda says:
))
)) Imagine for a minute that you are me. A short time ago you landed on a
)) board full of parents with complaints against Waldorf schools ....
)) (snip)
))
)) Lisa here: Linda, unless there I am quite mistaken, you did not "land"
)) here
)) by accident.
Linda:
)No, Lisa. I didn't "land" here by accident. When I "landed" in London,
)it wasn't an accident. When I "landed" in Australia, it wasn't an
)accident.
Lisa:
)You came intentionally to the "Waldorf CRITICS List."
)) Does it surprise you that many members of this list are, well, critics?
Linda:
)It surprises me to find critics complaining that they were told "by
)Waldorf teachers to read Steiner", but who can't seem to stop saying
)"read Steiner" themselves.
Debra:
Excuse me for butting in here, but the Waldorf teachers at my school
we're telling the parents to read Steiner. In fact, toward the end of
my Waldorf experience, I asked a teacher why Waldorf didn't tell
parents about Anthroposophy. She was crystal clear about the schools
reasoning. She explained that "our local community doesn't support
Anthroposophy, and every time Anthroposophy came up, they lost
enrollment big time. The teachers decided they shouldn't talk much
about it."
But yes, I do believe parents should know about the man they are
leaving their children alone with everyday. Steiner is quite the
Nanny, educationally speaking. Waldorf parents seem to have a couple
choices. Send them to Anthro church all day and educate them at
night, or just forget about the education part all together.
My older son left Waldorf after 5th grade. He is now in high school.
He can't think of one thing he learned at Waldorf that he now finds
useful in any way. Knitting doesn't interest him. He plays guitar,
not violin. He can't speak a word of German, in spite of all his
"foreign language" classes.
How many USA Waldorf kids can actually read, write and speak a
foreign language after Waldorf? The Waldorf schools claim they teach
foreign language beginning in Kindergarten, but they don't! They just
"expose" the kids to foreign languages. Nine or ten years is over
exposure in my book.
--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:16:11 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
LG, you wrote,
)I think I've answered your question. Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
)so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
)apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......
OK, respecting your desire to keep the name of your school secret,
could you excerpt for us from the text of your school's brochure the
portions that mention Rudolf Steiner and Anthroposophy?
Thanks in advance, Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:05:26 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell gv.net)
Subject: Re: No books, no answering questions
At 8:12 PM +0000 1/15/02, Diana Winters wrote:
)Kathy wrote:
)
))the 3 kindergarten rooms and the 1st and 2nd grade classrooms had
))no books in them at all.
Diana:
)I've heard Waldorf teachers try to one-up each other, bragging about
)how long they avoided bringing books into their classrooms. Waiting
)till the beginning of second grade is good, if you can hold out till
)the second half of second grade, even better. Parents are getting
)worried by then, though.
Debra:
Yes, we were worried when Max hadn't been exposed to books by
Christmas time in second grade. The teacher made them their own books
for Christmas. It was filled with Anthroposophy! Even racism! That
"gift" has been entered into evidence now. . .
Diana:
)They insist they can make this magical and wondrous, this endless
)copying, even for those already reading. I admit I haven't seen this
)in action, but I find it very hard to believe. They believe
)that these poor first graders who are already reading have been
)robbed of their childhoods. They need to to go back and "reverence"
)the alphabet or something.
)
))What's even more amazing is all the kids that were 7 at the
))beginning of grade 1! their parents were convinced the kids needed
))another year of K. What? They weren't ready to copy capital
))letters from the blackboard?
Debra:
Yes! We had an insider parent joke.
Q:
How can you tell a Waldorf first grader?
A:
He's the one with a pack of cigarettes rolled up in his shirt sleeve!
)
)It took me awhile to think this through, too. First grade in Waldorf
)is a kindergarten curriculum at best, sometimes even lower. They are
)telling you your kid isn't ready for academics, but there *is* no
)academics. It's a 2-year delay, not just 1.
)
)You have some 6- and 7-year-olds who spend FOUR YEARS repeating the
)kindergarten content (kindergarten is a misnomer because it's
)actually preschool; they never get kindergarten), listening to The
)Little Red Hen and Sweet Porridge week after week. Bored stiff is
)putting it mildly, some of these kids are very angry, and start
)acting out to call attention to their misery.
Debra:
Yes, many WE students either act out, complain bitterly, or learn how
to check out completely and live in their heads. The day I observed
in the classroom. this one kid I swear, looked like he could get
"A's" in mind travel. He was just gone. His father was a good friend
of mine and he was anxious to hear my report after my scheduled far
in advance classroom visit. The dad pulled his kid out shortly after
we left.
--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:46:40 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
Thank you for the etymological lesson. You are, in a literal sense, correct,
although you left out the part about the feminine qualities in "Sophia" and
the fact that this Goddess of wisdom was sometimes known as "Anthropos".
I will do my best to avoid comment on your assumptions about what Steiner
said, and let you in on what he *did* say.
"Anthroposophy" means "awareness of one's humanity", which is close to the
literal, etymological translation, but not exactly the same.
Think of all the institutions that we could do away with if people could
make all of their decisions with full awareness of their humanity. We could
start with the military, police, courts and religions.
xxxooo,
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:47 AM
Subject: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
) Dear Charlie,
)
) Even if Steiner has said otherwise (which I doubt), Anthroposophy does
) mean "wisdom of man". It is composed of two Greek words: Anthropos (man)
) and Sophia (wisdom). What do you think it means?
)
) Peter Zegers
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:07:43 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Loose ends
Linda, maybe I can re-state Walden's argument in logical terms for
you, about Frobel/Steiner. (Not that Walden wasn't logical, but you
don't seem to get it.) The relationship of Frobel to kindergarten
today is not analogous to the relationship of Steiner to Waldorf
today.
Ordinary kindergarten teachers don't spend a "foundation year"
studying Frobel's visions of other worlds, attend Frobel study
groups, follow a personal spiritual path based on Frobelian
meditations, speak in reverent tones about the "gifts we have
received from Frobel," or advise parents on how to feed and dress
their children according to Frobel.
I agree with you that it is strange to find vehement anthroposophists and
vehement Waldorf critics actually agreeing, and telling others they don't
get it. Let me offer a simple explanation. The most vehement critics learned
their anthroposophy from the most vehement anthroposophists, and were told
(vehemently) that the only right way to do Waldorf is the (vehemently)
anthroposophic way. Yeah, we realize there are others who are a little
mellower about their anthroposophy, but the point is watching out for the
kids.
)Not the education *their* children are participating in now. Not the early
)educational philosophers such as Fr–bel, Dewey,
Blah blah blah. Thought we went over this. You have no idea what
anyone participating here knows or what their involvement is in
other school issues, though the fact is there are a lot of very well
informed people here. I started to list examples, describing my fellow
list-mates' talents and accomplishments, but . . . actually I answered this
the other day, and it's off topic, Linda.
)These learned Steiner scholars will say that this is a Waldorf ed board,
)and their in depth investigations into the education their children
)currently receive are Off-Topic.
Is there something you don't understand about this? The list was set up for
critical discussion of Waldorf. Most list serves have a list of topics
covered, and request members stick to those topics, or take the discussion
off-list. Frobel is heading that way really fast.
)Instead, here the reportage is restricted to issues central to Waldorf ed.
That's it! That's what this list is restricted to! There are thousands of
message boards out there. You probably won't have much luck getting a
discussion going about Frobel on the pro-Waldorf lists, either. If you are
really determined to discuss Frobel, type it into a search engine, Linda.
To me, it seems positively bizarre to come onto a discussion about
Waldorf, announce you've never read a word by the founder of Waldorf
and don't intend to, make fun of those who have, and start demanding
to know why we've never read - Frobel.
)You know that unless you too express outrage at what you've
)read, these critics will continue to dismiss the positive experiences you
)report, just as they did before. You know that, in truth, your children's
)educational experiences, be they positive or negative, exist independent of
)your having read Steiner and reading Steiner will not alter those
)experiences.
You sound like you're trying hard to convince yourself. No, if you
read Steiner now, it won't alter your children's experiences, but
you would definitely find you understood some things that never made
sense previously. In reading Steiner I found things our teachers
literally said or did. I would have had no idea why otherwise. In
fact, I had no idea there *was* a reason, other than the teacher's
personal eccentricities.
)You know that the only purpose to be served is to help the critics to
)classify whether you, the happy Waldorf parent, are either 'deluded' or
)'woowoo'.
The purpose is actually to put information out there. Nobody is
trying to convince you of anything, or classify you or whatever,
don't personalize it. I figure somebody will have read this
today, or some day, and be informed that there are no books in
Waldorf kindergartens, or maybe even first or second grade, and
avoid the mistake we made. It actually happens sometimes that the
information here helps someone!
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:20:49 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charliemorrison btinternet.com)
Subject: Re: steiners doctorate credentials
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Dugan" (dan dandugan.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: steiners doctorate credentials
Dan replied to Kathryn:
) Steiner's doctorate wasn't obtained by the regular process. Since
) he'd taken the trade school track rather than the academic
) -gymnasium-, he wasn't eligible for a doctoral program in his native
) Austria. In Germany philosophy professors had more autonomy, and he
) found a German professor who accepted his dissertation, met with him
) once, and gave him his degree (see Easton, pp. 54-55). Seems a bit
) suspicious to me. )
Charlie M:
Are you suspicious of Steiner's ability to gain a degree, Dan? Even although
he funded his own way through higher education by tutoring, teaching himself
the Gymnasium course at the same time, as quotes from his autobiography.
"So I bought Greek and Latin textbooks, and gave myself, without any mention
of this, a private course of Gymnasium instruction, along with the
Realschule course. This required much time, but it also laid the foundation
by means of which I later met, although in unusual fashion yet quite
correctly, the Gymnasium requirements. That is to say, when I was a student
in the Technische Hochschule, in Vienna, then indeed I did have to give many
hours of tutoring, and I soon had a Gymnasium pupil to tutor (The Technuche
Hochscl:ule is an institution in the educational systems of Germany and
Austria resembling the American Institute of Technology.). Circumstances of
which I shall speak later brought it about that I had to help this pupil by
means of tutoring through almost the whole Gymnasium course. I gave him
instruction also in Latin and Greek, so that in teaching him I had to go
together with him through every detail of the Gymnasium instruction."
Dan:
) Apparently he never received any other degree or
) certification, no B.A. or masters. There's no mention of his
) completing a program at the Vienna Institute of Technology, only that
) he attended classes there.
Charlie:
Well he does mention passing the final examination on the mechanical theory
of heat at the institute. He also mentions that since he had gained a
scholarship, in order to draw his allowance he was required to show positive
results from his studies each year. Of course the sign of intelligence is a
fist full of certificates, isn't it?
By the way, since I've only had the briefest look in at the posts in the
past couple of weeks, I feel it would be a bit disjointed to reply to
communications I was involved in previously. If anyone wants me to answer
any questions from them that I haven't answered, could you ask again,
thanks.
warm regards,
Charlie M.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:43:06 +0100
From: Peter Zegers (peter_zegers runbox.no)
Subject: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Dear Charlie,
I looked for the book you mentioned ("Knowledge of the Higher Worlds" GA
10, right?) and I read the conditions Steiner mentioned for starting
with the exercices. His statements to the contrary (it seems he was
aware of the reaction of most people to his words), these quotes do
indicate submission and abandoning one's judgement and intelligence:
"[E]very criticism, every adverse judgment passed, disperses the powers
of the soul for the attainment of higher knowledge in the same measure
that all veneration and reverence develops them."
"It is not enough that I show respect only in my outward bearing; I must
have this respect in my thoughts. The student must begin by absorbing
this devotion into this thought-life. He must be wary of thoughts of
disrespect, of adverse criticism, existing in his consciousness, and he
must endeavor straightaway to cultivate thoughts of devotion."
"Veneration, homage, devotion are like nutriment making it healthy and
strong, especially strong for the activity of cognition. Disrespect,
antipathy, underestimation of what deserves recognition, all exert a
paralyzing and withering effect on this faculty of cognition. For the
spiritually experienced this fact is visible in the aura. A soul which
harbors feelings of reverence and devotion produces a change in its
aura. Certain spiritual colorings, as they may be called, yellow-red and
brown-red in tone, vanish and are replaced by blue-red tints. Thereby
the cognitional faculty is ripened; it receives intelligence of facts in
its environment of which it had hitherto no idea. Reverence awakens in
the soul a sympathetic power through which we attract qualities in the
beings around us, which would otherwise remain concealed."
Rudolf Steiner, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. I How Is Knowledge of
the Higher Worlds Attained? Conditions
Downloaded from:
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA010/English/GA010_c01.html
I am afraid this is really not my cup of tea. I prefer critical thinking
to improve intellectually. By the way, how is your ability to see auras?
Did you reach that stage yet? I am asking because Olav Hammer wrote: "In
spite of the detailed instructions no other person has attained the same
level of spiritual clairvoyance as Steiner himself attained" ("[T]rots
de detaljerade anvisningarna har ingen annan m”nniska uppnÂtt samma grad
av andlig klarsyn som Steiner sj”lv". Olav Hammer, "Profeter mot
str–mmen: Ess”er om mystiker, medier och magiker i vÂr tid." Wahlstr–m &
Widstrand, 1999. p. 334). Is it at all possible to attain the same level
of clairvoyance as Steiner attained in your opinion?
Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:02:03 -0000
From: "Charlie Morrison" (charliemorrison btinternet.com)
Subject: Re: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
Hi Dan,
As you are interested in the contents of WS brochures and I have just come
across a couple of leaflets I picked up at an open day of the Aberdeen
Waldorf School, I thought I'd post these excerpts:
From a leaflet entitled "The Aberdeen Waldorf School":
"A Preparation for Life - Today the world of childhood is increasingly
threatened by methods of education that constrain and weaken the natural
development of the child. But the child is a citizen of the spiritual as
well as the earthly world. To educate the child we must affirm its etemal
being; we must regard childhood as a gradual process of incarnation into
earthly existence. Only by holding firmly to this view of man as a spiritual
being, complete in himself, can we nurture free human beings able to give
purpose and direction to their lives. This is the unique core of Waldorf
education."
and from a general UK leaflet "Rudolf Steiner Education, an introduction":
"TEACHERS IN A RUDOLF STEINER SCHOOL:
work out of a holistic view of life arising out of Rudolf Steiner's
Anthroposophy. Shared by people in many walks of life, Anthroposophy has
its roots in Christianity and offers an approach to education which is
becoming increasingly vital in our modern age and is sufficiently
all-embracing to be developed in the most disparate of cultures in the world
today."
warm regards,
Charlie M.
****
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Dugan" (dan dandugan.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 7:16 PM
Subject: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
) LG, you wrote,
)
) )I think I've answered your question. Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
) )so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
) )apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......
)
) OK, respecting your desire to keep the name of your school secret,
) could you excerpt for us from the text of your school's brochure the
) portions that mention Rudolf Steiner and Anthroposophy?
)
) Thanks in advance, Dan Dugan
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:43:28 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Great stuff, eh?!
Respect, reverence, veneration, sympathy....
So much of these is missing from our society.
Sarcasm and cynicism now passes for criticism and skepticism.
Did you know that Steiner wrote a difinitive book on someone with whom he
disagreed in almost every way? He was aware that one can try on another's
thoughts for a while without losing one's own. This builds judgement, it
doesn't impair it. He was mistakenly labelled a follower of this man's
philosophy, when all he was doing was trying to have sympathy for another's
philosophy and walk a mile in his shoes. The ability to do this was one of
the things that made Steiner a great man.
It seems that on this list, too, people like to walk a mile in someone's
shoes before they criticize him......but it's so, when they do criticize
him, they'll be a mile away, and have his shoes.
xxxooo,
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:43 PM
Subject: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Dear Charlie,
I looked for the book you mentioned ("Knowledge of the Higher Worlds" GA
10, right?) and I read the conditions Steiner mentioned for starting
with the exercices. His statements to the contrary (it seems he was
aware of the reaction of most people to his words), these quotes do
indicate submission and abandoning one's judgement and intelligence:
"[E]very criticism, every adverse judgment passed, disperses the powers
of the soul for the attainment of higher knowledge in the same measure
that all veneration and reverence develops them."
"It is not enough that I show respect only in my outward bearing; I must
have this respect in my thoughts. The student must begin by absorbing
this devotion into this thought-life. He must be wary of thoughts of
disrespect, of adverse criticism, existing in his consciousness, and he
must endeavor straightaway to cultivate thoughts of devotion."
"Veneration, homage, devotion are like nutriment making it healthy and
strong, especially strong for the activity of cognition. Disrespect,
antipathy, underestimation of what deserves recognition, all exert a
paralyzing and withering effect on this faculty of cognition. For the
spiritually experienced this fact is visible in the aura. A soul which
harbors feelings of reverence and devotion produces a change in its
aura. Certain spiritual colorings, as they may be called, yellow-red and
brown-red in tone, vanish and are replaced by blue-red tints. Thereby
the cognitional faculty is ripened; it receives intelligence of facts in
its environment of which it had hitherto no idea. Reverence awakens in
the soul a sympathetic power through which we attract qualities in the
beings around us, which would otherwise remain concealed."
Rudolf Steiner, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. I How Is Knowledge of
the Higher Worlds Attained? Conditions
Downloaded from:
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA010/English/GA010_c01.html
I am afraid this is really not my cup of tea. I prefer critical thinking
to improve intellectually. By the way, how is your ability to see auras?
Did you reach that stage yet? I am asking because Olav Hammer wrote: "In
spite of the detailed instructions no other person has attained the same
level of spiritual clairvoyance as Steiner himself attained" ("[T]rots
de detaljerade anvisningarna har ingen annan m”nniska uppnÂtt samma grad
av andlig klarsyn som Steiner sj”lv". Olav Hammer, "Profeter mot
str–mmen: Ess”er om mystiker, medier och magiker i vÂr tid." Wahlstr–m &
Widstrand, 1999. p. 334). Is it at all possible to attain the same level
of clairvoyance as Steiner attained in your opinion?
Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:52:33 -0400
From: Gary Bonhiver (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Charlie,
Here's an interesting description of what may happen if we follow Steiner's
advice in Knowledge of the Higher Worlds...
) Dr. Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford University psychology professor who
is perhaps
) the foremost American expert on the topic of social manipulation and mind
) control, is not so optimistic; the CIA failed to brainwash people, he claims,
) not because their methods were too "soft," but because they were overt,
) blatant, and obvious. If force is used, people may surrender temporarily but
) they will often fail to "internalize" their newly acquired opinions and
) feelings; when no longer held captive, these subjects no longer do what they
) have been told. It is more effective to be subtle and covert: "you need at
) least an illusion of choice," according to Zimbardo, and the expert
) manipulator leaves people "unaware of [the manipulator's] influence"
) (Cunningham, 1984). In order to influence or brainwash people, the following
) methods work best: isolate them in new surroundings apart from old friends or
) reference-points, provide them with instant acceptance from a
seemingly loving
) group, keep them away from competing or critical ideas, provide an authority
) figure that everyone seems to acknowledge as having some special skill or
) awareness, provide a philosophy that seems logical and appears to answer all
) or the most important questions in life, structure all or most activities so
) that there is little time for privacy or independent action or thought,
) provide a sense of "us" versus "them," promise instant or imminent solutions
) to deep or long-term problems, and employ covert or disguised hypnotic
) techniques. Motivation is an important issue. A subject's
motivation can range
) from loneliness and mild depression to being at a point of
transition in life;
) from searching for spirituality, altruistic relationships or deeper
meaning to
) impatience with or resistance to "conventional" religious or
psychotherapeutic
) routes of discovery (Clark, Langone, Schecter, & Daly, 1981;
Cunningham, 1984;
) Schwartz & Kaslow, 1982). Contrary to the beliefs of many, vulnerability to
) mind control techniques is not a sign of psychological or intellectual
) weakness; there is a vast body of research that clearly demonstrates that
) "average" or "normal" individuals can be highly susceptible to
covert attempts
) to influence them, and that most people are, in general, not
particularly good
) at recognizing when their behavior has been externally manipulated (Festinger
) & Carlsmith, 1968; Freedman, Carlsmith, & Sears, 1974, pp. 341-375). Given
) enough time and the proper environment, the motivated subject is highly
) vulnerable to brainwashing.
By Steve K. Dubrow-Eichel, Building Resistance: Tactics for Counteracting
Manipulation and Unethical Hypnosis in Totalistic Groups. This article
first appeared in Suggestion: The Journal of Professional & Ethical
Hypnosis, 1, (Summer 1985), pp. 34-44.
http://users.snip.net/~drsteve/Articles/Building_Resistance.html
...Gary
on 1/16/02 8:43 PM, Charlie Frey at cffrey mindspring.com wrote:
) Great stuff, eh?!
)
) Respect, reverence, veneration, sympathy....
)
) So much of these is missing from our society.
)
) Sarcasm and cynicism now passes for criticism and skepticism.
)
) Did you know that Steiner wrote a difinitive book on someone with whom he
) disagreed in almost every way? He was aware that one can try on another's
) thoughts for a while without losing one's own. This builds judgement, it
) doesn't impair it. He was mistakenly labelled a follower of this man's
) philosophy, when all he was doing was trying to have sympathy for another's
) philosophy and walk a mile in his shoes. The ability to do this was
one of the
) things that made Steiner a great man.
)
) It seems that on this list, too, people like to walk a mile in
someone's shoes
) before they criticize him......but it's so, when they do criticize him,
) they'll be a mile away, and have his shoes.
)
) xxxooo,
) charlie
)
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:43 PM
) Subject: Veneration, devotion, reverence
)
)
) Dear Charlie,
)
) I looked for the book you mentioned ("Knowledge of the Higher Worlds" GA
) 10, right?) and I read the conditions Steiner mentioned for starting
) with the exercices. His statements to the contrary (it seems he was
) aware of the reaction of most people to his words), these quotes do
) indicate submission and abandoning one's judgement and intelligence:
)
) "[E]very criticism, every adverse judgment passed, disperses the powers
) of the soul for the attainment of higher knowledge in the same measure
) that all veneration and reverence develops them."
)
) "It is not enough that I show respect only in my outward bearing; I must
) have this respect in my thoughts. The student must begin by absorbing
) this devotion into this thought-life. He must be wary of thoughts of
) disrespect, of adverse criticism, existing in his consciousness, and he
) must endeavor straightaway to cultivate thoughts of devotion."
)
) "Veneration, homage, devotion are like nutriment making it healthy and
) strong, especially strong for the activity of cognition. Disrespect,
) antipathy, underestimation of what deserves recognition, all exert a
) paralyzing and withering effect on this faculty of cognition. For the
) spiritually experienced this fact is visible in the aura. A soul which
) harbors feelings of reverence and devotion produces a change in its
) aura. Certain spiritual colorings, as they may be called, yellow-red and
) brown-red in tone, vanish and are replaced by blue-red tints. Thereby
) the cognitional faculty is ripened; it receives intelligence of facts in
) its environment of which it had hitherto no idea. Reverence awakens in
) the soul a sympathetic power through which we attract qualities in the
) beings around us, which would otherwise remain concealed."
)
) Rudolf Steiner, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. I How Is Knowledge of
) the Higher Worlds Attained? Conditions
) Downloaded from:
) http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA010/English/GA010_c01.html
)
) I am afraid this is really not my cup of tea. I prefer critical thinking
) to improve intellectually. By the way, how is your ability to see auras?
) Did you reach that stage yet? I am asking because Olav Hammer wrote: "In
) spite of the detailed instructions no other person has attained the same
) level of spiritual clairvoyance as Steiner himself attained" ("[T]rots
) de detaljerade anvisningarna har ingen annan m”nniska uppnÂtt samma grad
) av andlig klarsyn som Steiner sj”lv". Olav Hammer, "Profeter mot
) str–mmen: Ess”er om mystiker, medier och magiker i vÂr tid." Wahlstr–m &
) Widstrand, 1999. p. 334). Is it at all possible to attain the same level
) of clairvoyance as Steiner attained in your opinion?
)
) Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 21:42:38 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Very interesting!
None of it, though, applies to the exercises in "How to know..." because
they don't tell you *what* to think, they merely strengthen one's *ability*
to think, feel,and will. These exercises, if anything, would ensure that one
couldn't fall prey to mind control. As I have said before, I am convinced
that these exercises will strengthen individuality and resolve--even if
one's resolve is to become the most vehement Waldorf critic---although I
doubt that is possible because of the concentration on open-mindedness and
tolerance.
Again, I'll use the analogy of physical exercise, which seems to often
apply even if it is somewhat materialistic: when one strengthens one's body,
one becomes *more* aware of it's abilities/limitations---not less.
These exercises are like an excellent set of carpentry tools; they neither
dictate what to build nor how to build it, but they make the exercising of
the carpenter's abilities more effective and pleasurable.
xxxooo,
charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Bonhiver" (Gary GoodWinter.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Charlie,
Here's an interesting description of what may happen if we follow Steiner's
advice in Knowledge of the Higher Worlds...
) Dr. Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford University psychology professor who is
perhaps
) the foremost American expert on the topic of social manipulation and mind
) control, is not so optimistic; the CIA failed to brainwash people, he
claims,
) not because their methods were too "soft," but because they were overt,
) blatant, and obvious. If force is used, people may surrender temporarily
but
) they will often fail to "internalize" their newly acquired opinions and
) feelings; when no longer held captive, these subjects no longer do what
they
) have been told. It is more effective to be subtle and covert: "you need at
) least an illusion of choice," according to Zimbardo, and the expert
) manipulator leaves people "unaware of [the manipulator's] influence"
) (Cunningham, 1984). In order to influence or brainwash people, the
following
) methods work best: isolate them in new surroundings apart from old friends
or
) reference-points, provide them with instant acceptance from a seemingly
loving
) group, keep them away from competing or critical ideas, provide an
authority
) figure that everyone seems to acknowledge as having some special skill or
) awareness, provide a philosophy that seems logical and appears to answer
all
) or the most important questions in life, structure all or most activities
so
) that there is little time for privacy or independent action or thought,
) provide a sense of "us" versus "them," promise instant or imminent
solutions
) to deep or long-term problems, and employ covert or disguised hypnotic
) techniques. Motivation is an important issue. A subject's motivation can
range
) from loneliness and mild depression to being at a point of transition in
life;
) from searching for spirituality, altruistic relationships or deeper
meaning to
) impatience with or resistance to "conventional" religious or
psychotherapeutic
) routes of discovery (Clark, Langone, Schecter, & Daly, 1981; Cunningham,
1984;
) Schwartz & Kaslow, 1982). Contrary to the beliefs of many, vulnerability
to
) mind control techniques is not a sign of psychological or intellectual
) weakness; there is a vast body of research that clearly demonstrates that
) "average" or "normal" individuals can be highly susceptible to covert
attempts
) to influence them, and that most people are, in general, not particularly
good
) at recognizing when their behavior has been externally manipulated
(Festinger
) & Carlsmith, 1968; Freedman, Carlsmith, & Sears, 1974, pp. 341-375). Given
) enough time and the proper environment, the motivated subject is highly
) vulnerable to brainwashing.
By Steve K. Dubrow-Eichel, Building Resistance: Tactics for Counteracting
Manipulation and Unethical Hypnosis in Totalistic Groups. This article
first appeared in Suggestion: The Journal of Professional & Ethical
Hypnosis, 1, (Summer 1985), pp. 34-44.
http://users.snip.net/~drsteve/Articles/Building_Resistance.html
...Gary
on 1/16/02 8:43 PM, Charlie Frey at cffrey mindspring.com wrote:
) Great stuff, eh?!
)
) Respect, reverence, veneration, sympathy....
)
) So much of these is missing from our society.
)
) Sarcasm and cynicism now passes for criticism and skepticism.
)
) Did you know that Steiner wrote a difinitive book on someone with whom he
) disagreed in almost every way? He was aware that one can try on another's
) thoughts for a while without losing one's own. This builds judgement, it
) doesn't impair it. He was mistakenly labelled a follower of this man's
) philosophy, when all he was doing was trying to have sympathy for
another's
) philosophy and walk a mile in his shoes. The ability to do this was one of
the
) things that made Steiner a great man.
)
) It seems that on this list, too, people like to walk a mile in someone's
shoes
) before they criticize him......but it's so, when they do criticize him,
) they'll be a mile away, and have his shoes.
)
) xxxooo,
) charlie
)
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:43 PM
) Subject: Veneration, devotion, reverence
)
)
) Dear Charlie,
)
) I looked for the book you mentioned ("Knowledge of the Higher Worlds" GA
) 10, right?) and I read the conditions Steiner mentioned for starting
) with the exercices. His statements to the contrary (it seems he was
) aware of the reaction of most people to his words), these quotes do
) indicate submission and abandoning one's judgement and intelligence:
)
) "[E]very criticism, every adverse judgment passed, disperses the powers
) of the soul for the attainment of higher knowledge in the same measure
) that all veneration and reverence develops them."
)
) "It is not enough that I show respect only in my outward bearing; I must
) have this respect in my thoughts. The student must begin by absorbing
) this devotion into this thought-life. He must be wary of thoughts of
) disrespect, of adverse criticism, existing in his consciousness, and he
) must endeavor straightaway to cultivate thoughts of devotion."
)
) "Veneration, homage, devotion are like nutriment making it healthy and
) strong, especially strong for the activity of cognition. Disrespect,
) antipathy, underestimation of what deserves recognition, all exert a
) paralyzing and withering effect on this faculty of cognition. For the
) spiritually experienced this fact is visible in the aura. A soul which
) harbors feelings of reverence and devotion produces a change in its
) aura. Certain spiritual colorings, as they may be called, yellow-red and
) brown-red in tone, vanish and are replaced by blue-red tints. Thereby
) the cognitional faculty is ripened; it receives intelligence of facts in
) its environment of which it had hitherto no idea. Reverence awakens in
) the soul a sympathetic power through which we attract qualities in the
) beings around us, which would otherwise remain concealed."
)
) Rudolf Steiner, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. I How Is Knowledge of
) the Higher Worlds Attained? Conditions
) Downloaded from:
) http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA010/English/GA010_c01.html
)
) I am afraid this is really not my cup of tea. I prefer critical thinking
) to improve intellectually. By the way, how is your ability to see auras?
) Did you reach that stage yet? I am asking because Olav Hammer wrote: "In
) spite of the detailed instructions no other person has attained the same
) level of spiritual clairvoyance as Steiner himself attained" ("[T]rots
) de detaljerade anvisningarna har ingen annan m”nniska uppnÂtt samma grad
) av andlig klarsyn som Steiner sj”lv". Olav Hammer, "Profeter mot
) str–mmen: Ess”er om mystiker, medier och magiker i vÂr tid." Wahlstr–m &
) Widstrand, 1999. p. 334). Is it at all possible to attain the same level
) of clairvoyance as Steiner attained in your opinion?
)
) Peter Zegers
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 04:51:35 +0000
From: Su (sufrito53 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: more on loose ends
L G Clemens wrote:
)
) I think I've answered your question. Myself, I'm honestly wondering how
)
) so many of you critics managed to "land" in a Waldorf school without any
)
) apparent idea beforehand that it was, well, a Waldorf school.......
Myself, I'm (honestly, as opposed to dishonestly?) wondering how
uniformly *all* the Waldorf supporters have "blamed the victims" of
Waldorf duping. It's an amazing phenomenon, when you read through post
after post with this same comment, and it's a lame attempt to cover up
the essence of Waldorf and Anthroposophy.
It's not over 'til it's over--Yogi Berra
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:08:38 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: deceiving prospective parents (was: more on loose ends)
on 1/16/02 4:02 PM, charlie morrison at charliemorrison btinternet.com
wrote:
)
) "TEACHERS IN A RUDOLF STEINER SCHOOL:
) work out of a holistic view of life arising out of Rudolf Steiner's
) Anthroposophy. Shared by people in many walks of life, Anthroposophy has
) its roots in Christianity
Sharon: Getting better...
) it and offers an approach to education which is becoming
increasingly vital in
our modern age and is sufficiently
) all-embracing to be developed in the most disparate of cultures in the world
) today."
Cough cough...I have a bit of a problem with the last part as well as the
Christianity bit. The last part is just simply a pile of pretentiousness.
The Christianity part bothers me simply because Anthro is closer to a
Hermetic, Gnostic, occult worldview, (some orthodox Christian parents might
choke if they read Steiner .) Still needs some work, more definition needed.
"Roots in Christianity" is a bit tricky, a bit of a cheap trick... But for
my purposes, the ol' atheist woman who just needs to hear the word
Christianity to get the drift...
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:27:05 -0800
From: mysplum (mysplum earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Loose ends
on 1/16/02 3:07 PM, Diana Winters at winters_diana hotmail.com wrote:
)
)) Not the education *their* children are participating in now. Not the early
)) educational philosophers such as Fr–bel, Dewey,
Sharon: I already said that I have read Dewey and Frobel. There's *one*
kindergarten in England that still uses Frobel's "method" if I remember
correctly. The KG is full of icons that one could identify as icons at first
glance. Frobel began his career as an odd little man that liked to play with
children. Very quaint and sweet. When I started to read Steiner after
Waldorf, I thought that he might have drawn heavily from Frobel's work. I
never found any links. Did Steiner?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:52:53 -0800
From: "walden" (awaldenpond home.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Charlie Frey:
Very interesting!
None of it, though, applies to the exercises in "How to know..." because
they don't tell you *what* to think, they merely strengthen one's *ability*
to think, feel,and will. These exercises, if anything, would ensure that one
couldn't fall prey to mind control. As I have said before, I am convinced
that these exercises will strengthen individuality and resolve--even if
one's resolve is to become the most vehement Waldorf critic---although I
doubt that is possible because of the concentration on open-mindedness and
tolerance.
Walden: Tolerance. I had plenty of that whilst trying to be respectful of
the lack of answers and clarity from our old school. Open mind... oh yes,
very open to trust the folks there with our kids and accept that I had to
"take time to live into the answers." Is there a difference between being
naive and having an open mind? Think about it.
My resolve, Charlie, has nothing to do with becoming "the most vehement
Waldorf critic." An open mind should be just that - open. If I have a
resolve, so to speak, it would be to help Waldorf reach it's potential and
mend it's nefarious ways. Seriously. Waldorf has a perception problem and
I would like to help. Waldorf Education is generally promoted with half
truths via religious spin doctors on a mission. This spiritual fervour may
not even be conscious and often seems to leave its practitioners on a
perceived throne, of sorts - ready and willing to do *the work* NO MATTER
WHAT. Trivialities like *stretching* the truth while saying one thing to
parents and doing another while with the children (awake or in a sleep
state) are so much easier to morally justify when *the work* must be done.
If the parents *don't get it* they were not meant to do so.
***Newsflash*** "The Waldorf Movement today has announced that while it's
roots are based on the beliefs of philosopher, doctor, educator, artist,
Rudolph Steiner - they will from this day on use the label "occultist" for
no other reason than that is what Rudolph Steiner called himself."
I have walked in Waldorf shoes and I believed my mind was open. I knew
nothing of Anthroposophy in the beginning - yet actually spoke of *soul
work* often during the latter years. When I was finally *aware* of the
essence of the education I was almost willing to accept the concept of
reincarnation and my children's purpose at the school. So many memories...
A visiting speaker at the beginning of a lecture asked us all if we believed
in reincarnation? Around the circle we went... my turn.... and I asked what
the question had to do with movement therapy (the subject).
No answer.
And then we see Eugene Schwartz and how frustrated he seems to be by the
stonewalling of Waldorf with regards to *telling it like it is.* See,
Charlie - the critics and the pro Waldorf folks are nearly on the same side.
Funny how that works sometimes. I have nothing against Anthroposophy,
Scientology, Mormons, Catholics, New Agers or someone who claims to read
meaning into toenail clippings as they are sucked down the whirlpool in the
bathtub. As long as they are honest with me. Years ago I invited the
Jehovah Witness folks in for tea and we chatted for hours. I learned of
their spiritual path and we all had a good time. As they left I suggested
we not make this a regular thing. Next time they came I said no thanks and
closed the door.
Hard to close the door on Waldorf/Anthroposophy when you don't know what it
is upfront. Parents continue to send their children to these Anthro
seminaries with the best of intentions. Should they simply act out of
reverence and keep an "open mind?"
- Walden
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 11:02:46 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Catch 22?
G'day all,
Some of you may recall that I have posted to the list before some little
time ago. My name is Peter Farrell and I am a physicist with an interest in
optics. I am mailing from this spoonerised email address to keep these
discussions separate from my professional activities. I have been moved to
respond to Charlie Frey's post with the subject line "Catch 22?"
I think Charlie's argument is mistaken and I will try and explain why I
think it is mistaken.
Charlie writes (15 Jan 2002):
...
The exercises outlined therein are very basic, simple exercises that are
quite difficult to maintain. You will NOT become a follower of Steiner by
doing them any more than you will become a follower of Jane Fonda by doing
aerobics. They are no more occult than the idea that you will get better at
math if you do it every day.
These exercises will, over time, improve your thinking, feeling and willing
life in the same way that aerobics will improve your physical life.
They will even make you a more effective Waldorf critic if that is the path
you choose to take.
PLEASE, Peter, DO NOT "just accept what I say at face value", the truth is
never found in this way. You cannot be *told* a truth. Instead, try the
exercises and see how they work. It's no more difficult than, say, quitting
smoking or losing 20lbs. ;-)
xxxooo,
charlie
Peter Farrell responds:
While Charlie may be right that you cannot be told a truth to know that it
is true, it is not necessary to personally experience that truth in order to
know that it is true. It is possible to design and carry out an experimental
protocol which tests, for example, the improvement in thinking ability due
to undertaking the exercises Charlie is proposing, compared to the
improvement obtained by, say, attempting a cryptic crossword every day. In
order to do this, the person controlling the experiment need never examine a
cryptic crossword nor undertake any of the exercises Charlie proposes. He or
she need only examine the statistical outcome of thinking ability tests
agreed to in advance by proponents of the cryptic crossword technique and
the methods of Steiner.
I assert further that it is in fact not possible to determine whether
Steiner's exercises improve thinking by trying them yourself. The reason for
this is simple. Our lives are so complex it is essentially impossible to
determine whether any change in our own thinking ability that we might
detect is due to undertaking these exercises, or alternatively due to some
other change in our lives that has occurred at about the same time. This
defect can be overcome by appropriate application of statistics and
experimental design to samples of individuals undertaking these exercises,
preferably with comparison to some other technique (cryptic crosswords in my
example).
Some time ago I tried to make this point clear in discussions with Joel and
others. Perhaps I can make it clearer this time.
Amazed to see so many of you still here,
Peter Farrell
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 12:14:28 +0100
From: Peter Zegers (peter_zegers runbox.no)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Dear Charlie (Frey),
Although you don't seem to be in the habit of answering questions, could
you make an exception and give at least the title of this "definitive"
book by Steiner?
You wrote: "Did you know that Steiner wrote a difinitive book on someone
with whom he disagreed in almost every way?"
On Haeckel? On Nietzsche? Someone else? Is there a book by Steiner that
is not "definitive"?
You wrote: "He was mistakenly labelled a follower of this man's
philosophy, when all he was doing was trying to have sympathy for
another's philosophy and walk a mile in his shoes."
By whom was Steiner labelled? Why were they wrong?
I am sorry to say but judging from your posts, I certainly don't get the
impression that Steiner's exercises are very effective (although I have
to admit that I don't know what your intellectual abilities were say
twenty years ago).
Peter Zegers
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 598
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
By kateabooth yahoo.com.au
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By peter_zegers runbox.no
RE: No books
By sr_joanna yahoo.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By snell gv.net
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: contrary indications
By awaldenpond home.com
Re: No books
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By cffrey mindspring.com
Steiner on "love"
By peter_zegers runbox.no
Re: Catch 22?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: No books
By snell gv.net
Re: Steiner on "love"
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Anthroposophical medicine distance learning program
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Steiner on "love"
By mysplum earthlink.net
Re: Catch 22?
By peter_zegers runbox.no
Re: Anthroposophical medicine distance learning program
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: Catch 22?
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: contrary indications
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Loose ends
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Catch 22?
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Catch 22?
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Loose ends
By cffrey mindspring.com
Re: Catch 22?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Catch 22?
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Catch 22?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Catch 22?
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 23:03:56 +1100 (EST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Kate=20Booth?= (kateabooth yahoo.com.au)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
In a local Waldorf School brochure it states "Steiner
termed his philosophy Anthroposophy(meaning the wisdom
of humanity) and his methodology Spiritual Science.
I have many others which state the same.
Kate Booth
--- Charlie Frey (cffrey mindspring.com) wrote: )
Thank you for the etymological lesson. You are, in a
) literal sense, correct,
) although you left out the part about the feminine
) qualities in "Sophia" and
) the fact that this Goddess of wisdom was sometimes
) known as "Anthropos".
) I will do my best to avoid comment on your
) assumptions about what Steiner
) said, and let you in on what he *did* say.
) "Anthroposophy" means "awareness of one's humanity",
) which is close to the
) literal, etymological translation, but not exactly
) the same.
) Think of all the institutions that we could do away
) with if people could
) make all of their decisions with full awareness of
) their humanity. We could
) start with the military, police, courts and
) religions.
) xxxooo,
) charlie
)
) ----- Original Message -----
) From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
) To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
) Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:47 AM
) Subject: Anthroposophy = Wisdom of man
)
)
) ) Dear Charlie,
) )
) ) Even if Steiner has said otherwise (which I
) doubt), Anthroposophy does
) ) mean "wisdom of man". It is composed of two Greek
) words: Anthropos (man)
) ) and Sophia (wisdom). What do you think it means?
) )
) ) Peter Zegers
) )
) )
)
)
)
http://my.yahoo.com.au - My Yahoo!
- It's My Yahoo! Get your own!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 10:56:54 -0500
From: "Charlie Frey" (cffrey mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
I'm sorry, the way to get any information from me, is to start by resisting
your inclinations toward puerile, ad homenim jabs at me.
xxxooo,
charlie
It is not every question that deserves an answer.
---Publilius Syrus
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Zegers" (peter_zegers runbox.no)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 6:14 AM
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
) Dear Charlie (Frey),
)
) Although you don't seem to be in the habit of answering questions, could
) you make an exception and give at least the title of this "definitive"
) book by Steiner?
)
) You wrote: "Did you know that Steiner wrote a difinitive book on someone
) with whom he disagreed in almost every way?"
)
) On Haeckel? On Nietzsche? Someone else? Is there a book by Steiner that
) is not "definitive"?
)
) You wrote: "He was mistakenly labelled a follower of this man's
) philosophy, when all he was doing was trying to have sympathy for
) another's philosophy and walk a mile in his shoes."
)
) By whom was Steiner labelled? Why were they wrong?
)
) I am sorry to say but judging from your posts, I certainly don't get the
) impression that Steiner's exercises are very effective (although I have
) to admit that I don't know what your intellectual abilities were say
) twenty years ago).
)
) Peter Zegers
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:36:25 +0100
From: Peter Zegers (peter_zegers runbox.no)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Dear Charlie (Frey),
Why so touchy? Okay, just forget that I asked you something. You simply
are unable to have a discussion with a critical person, who doesn't want
to pretend to be nice all the time.
Peter Zegers
Charlie Frey wrote: "I'm sorry, the way to get any information from me,
is to start by resisting your inclinations toward puerile, ad homenim
jabs at me."
What's this xxxooo? Ooh, sorry, a question again; and since I have
behaved badly you don't want to answer any of my questions; I guess I'll
have to go on without your enlightened answers then.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:37:47 +0000
From: (sr_joanna yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: No books
All I can report is that at my children's school, each class --
including the first grade -- has a bookshelf filled with books the
children can read during quiet time (after lunch) or during indoor
recess. (Children can also bring books from home to read at this time.)
The classroom books are either from the school library or donated by
the parents. Both of my children's teachers requested that parents
donate age-appropriate books or games to the class in lieu of bringing
in cakes or treats on birthdays.
This notion of books being inappropriate for children in the younger
grades is not one I have ever encountered here in the midwest.
Kind regards,
JoAnn
Detroit Waldorf School parent
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:56 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell gv.net)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
At 10:56 AM -0500 1/17/02, Charlie Frey wrote:
)I'm sorry, the way to get any information from me, is to start by resisting
)your inclinations toward puerile, ad homenim jabs at me.
)xxxooo,
)charlie
)
) It is not every question that deserves an answer.
) ---Publilius Syrus
Debra:
Charlie,
Have you ever seen "The Bird Cage" starring Robin Williams and Nathan
Lane? It's been awhile since I thought of that movie, but I really
liked it. Anyway, your response above could have come right out of
Nathan Lane's mouth in that movie! Thanks for the visual. If you
haven't seen the movie, please do so. Lot's of laughs. . .
--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 18:34:06 +0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Veneration, devotion, reverence
Charlie Frey wrote:
)Respect, reverence, veneration, sympathy....
)So much of these is missing from our society.
I agree with you that we could use more of these things in society,
but the danger is, people longing for these things are at risk of
flinging themselves at *anything* somebody suggests they reverence.
I think Waldorf is right that small children's natural state is "reverence"
for the world around them. We don't need to teach this or artificially
reinforce it with ritual. Waldorf teachers think you get "reverence" from
candles and verses, but since this is fake, what you get is kids who are
cynical about candles and verses. So many Waldorf families struggle with
this and don't understand why it doesn't work.
If I had to make a choice, would I rather my son become reverent or actually
irreverent as a result of his education, I would *definitely* pick
irreverent, it seems far healthier to me.
I think the schools actually have an obligation to teach children that many
people, throu