25438RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: "On the 'anthroposophy and racism' hoax"
- Apr 30, 2006You say you have been here for two years. Now you would have been witness
many a time refuting the type of statements you have made here in your post;
so now what motive have you all of a sudden to begin the whole denigration
of Steiner again? And attempting to relate in some way John Nash to a Seiner
is just such a denigration. Albert Sweitzer and Jung ofcourse were admirers
/ students of Steiners work. They would be the first to bow gracefully
before a Steiner and admit of his abilities that far succeeded their own.
But you, you are no friend to Steiner and I would say rather beneath
contempt. Your methodolgy is well known - a wolf in sheeps clothing.
One name you did not put on your scholars list is your own. Yet you see your
self fit to judge when you do not come close to having the credentials to do
You are beneath contempt.
>From: "grekenquist" <grekenquist@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: "On the 'anthroposophy and racism'
>Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 02:07:56 -0000
>--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Mike T"
> > Oh Theodor Grekenquist,
> > It amazes me when I read rubbish such as you have written. Those
> > attempt to pull Steiner down look empty and ridiculous in their
> > little worlds in comparison to the magnificient splendid far
> > encompassing legacy that was left to mankind by Steiner. Until one
> > accomplished anything near to what Steiner has, one should really
> > silly mouth from rattling out such stupid thoughts.
>Dear Mike T,
>I am terribly sorry that you think I have attempted to pull Steiner
>down by writing rubbish. It was not my intention. As I pointed out
>in my latest post, I admire Rudolf Steiner just like I admire John
>Nash. They both accomplished remarkable things in spite of their
>schizophrenia, and Steiner's accomplishment in avoiding a Nash-like
>collision between illusion and reality through a lifetime is
> > Name just one 20th
> > Century scholar who has achieved anything close to as much as
>Carl Jung, John Nash, and Albert Schweitzer perhaps?
> > - then
> > when one cannot, one may just, maybe see how ridiculous the
> > by you below appear.
>Would you consider granting me the courtesy of revealing what
>specific rational arguments you have for reaching such a conclusion,
>that my assertions are ridiculous?
> > And even in John the Baptisits days, they beheaded him for bearing
>Excuse me, but who has been talking about beheading anyone for
>exercising free speech? That is what "bearing witness" is about, is
>it not? Free speech?
1000s of Sexy Singles online now at Lavalife - Click here
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>