Re: Of critics and cynics...


From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 8:56 am
Subject: Re: Of critics and cynics...

On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 01:10, walden wrote:

The other level of criticism and I suppose the *impulse* behind this list is aimed at Waldorf as an institution. While we can dance forever here around the roots of anthroposophy and Steiner and occultism and reincarnation and soul work and whether there is any real "science" in Steiner's "Spiritual Science"... the fact IS that these topics are part and parcel of Waldorf Education in whatever "context" one might feel comfortable taking them. And that part of the equation - a very integral part - i . . . missing from the way in which Waldorf promotes it's movement.

I suspect even the most ardent critic of critics would agree?

Dear Walden,

While I don't consider myself a critic of the critics, but rather someone mostly interested in seeking the true and the good, even from that somewhat different point of view, I must confess to not being able to "agree" with the above.

Since I am just returning to this list for a visit, after a long sabbatical, perhaps I should give a short overview of my understanding, so as to create a context for my seeming "disagreement" with the expression of your point of view.

I don't doubt for a moment Steiner's abilities as a seer, or the wisdom that lives in his work. I don't doubt for a moment the heartfelt striving that drives people connected with anthroposophy to try to make live that toward which Steiner directed our attention.

Nor do I doubt the sincerity of most of those who find something off-putting about Waldorf and anthroposophy. To my thinking, which has for many years now sought to understand the deeper truths about human social existence, such a conflict of beliefs, intentions and understandings appears as a most natural and important social process - one quite healthy in its fundamental dynamics.

Certainly there are excesses everywhere - that too is human nature and it should not surprise us. At the same time, unless there is a true will to learn, and a humble honoring of the right of the Thou to seek its own truth, social existence will remain a place of strife and disharmony.

This list tends to be a place where antagonism and hard positions are frequently taken, as if social truth and goodness (meeting each other as striving moral human beings) was less important then reducing the world view of the Thou to ashes and debris.

When I love my my own ideas self-righteously, and fail to appreciate the inner (spiritual) freedom of the Thou to chart its own course, then the shared social existence becomes a place of war and intellectual bloodletting that harms almost all and serves no one.

So, Walden, I put this question to you:

Is there only one right way to think, and must your view be the only correct one?

warm regards,
joel
Shapes in the Fire http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/index.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
 

December 2003/January 2004

The Uncle Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files

Anthroposophy & Anarchism

Anthroposophy & Scientology

Anthroposophical Morsels

Anthroposophy, Critics, and Controversy

Search this site powered by FreeFind