******* What the "Waldorf critics" online are all about, for those who may not know, is that years ago a man named Dan Dugan heard Waldorf was a 'progressive' school and went to enroll his teenagers in a high school (in California, I believe); the teachers had them visit and decided they wouldn't fit in. He became enraged and sued. The courts couldn't be used to force his kids in, but when he found out our independent schools had an independent philosophy, unique methodology etc. based on something called "spiritual science", he tried to get US courts to declare it a religion and Waldorf schools 'religious' schools, I guess just to make sure they could never get tax money in the future. He just lost the case last year. But the movement he started has attracted lots of anti-spiritual cynics who frequently have no idea what goes on in a Waldorf school and/or are closed- minded to understanding any of it. They just want to portray us as a cult. The funny thing I've noticed is that while they're mostly atheist intellectuals, they have links on their web sites to born-again Christian fundamentalists, whom they also condemn.. As the saying goes, "the enemy of my enemy is my ally.". The cynics hate any and all spirit, and fundamentalists hate anything but their own limited knowledge of spiritual truth, condemning anything that goes beyond it (like, say, knowing the 4 temperaments or the laws of karma) as of the devil. So you have an unholy alliance of clever people misusing their intellect and ignorant people going by pure irrational feelings, like fear of what's different. In other words, the same combination of people that burned down the Goetheanum. Our movement could always use constructive criticism, but if they were honest they'd call it 'Waldorf haters'. If they only knew how much Waldorf teachers criticize and debate everything, they'd soon cease portraying us as a mindless cult blindly following Steiner's every word. -starman
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: juancompostella <juancompostella@...
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:04:44
Subject: [steiner] Re: Introduction
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:steiner%40yahoogroups.com> , "Ondria J. Wasem, Ph.D." <ondria@...> wrote:
> Dear Juan,
> Thank you for looking out for me. After reading two posts, I determined
> that Waldorf_Critics is not the place for me. I sent my question there
> figuring that if the quote were not really from Steiner, they might be
> aware of the fallacy, even happy to expose it, and know of the correct
> source. The tone of the conversation, completely lacking in respect and
> empathy for the other, is so different from what I experience in Waldorf
> circles, that I knew I would not stay long. They did not even ask me to
> introduce myself. That group does not seem motivated to make connection,
> and I am private enough not to introduce myself when I am not asked.
Waldorf_Critics like to bite and chew their opponents, which is you, even as you demonstrate good-will, courtesy, professional ethics, knowledge/experience, ability, and so forth....
Diana was a meager teachers aide when her boy was in kindergarten at the Philadelphia Waldorf School. Then she put him in a quaker school, which means her experience is next to nil. She studies anthroposophy only to refute it in terms of a materialistic apprehension of the world and its beings. Her big passion is eagle watching and birthing ratios.
Peter S. seems to want anthroposophical discussion, but only as a ploy designed to imply that anthro's haven't the acumen for it. Yet, it can be shown that it has been given, offered, and even challenged for!
Yet, and this is important in terms of professional ethics, this guy is the biggest and most clever dissembler out there, who will take and twist words and name-drop to no end in a quest that can only be equated to a kind of "secular jesuitism", which is an old term for someone to watch out for when you're seeking and advocating truth; truth and knowledge towards wisdom.