Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

25473Moral Candor

Expand Messages
  • Mike helsher
    May 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle"
      <reefer@...> wrote:
      > Mike H wrote to Theodor:
      > > Well Theodore, I think I can muster up some empathy for your
      > > rather "benign" attitude toward Her Doctor.
      > Theodor's critique of the Doctor doesn't look very benign to me. He
      > regards Steiner's extraordinary faculties, that were acquired with
      > tremendous labor and intense struggle, as a mental illness, a
      > pathology.
      > There is, however, something very important for us to learn from
      > I think. Theodor discards all attacks against Steiner's personal
      > character and gets right to the very heart of the *real* objection
      > against anthroposophy, an objection that has been widespread from
      > beginning but rarely voiced because one tends to be too respectful
      > considerate to say these things. It is the position held by all
      > who cling to the materialistic superstition based upon natural
      > alone. Religions and philosophies in general do not threaten this
      > position because they are based upon blind faith and abstract
      > speculations, but spirituality grounded in true scientific
      > understanding arising from a waterproof epistemology fit for future
      > centuries can make some people nervous if they are not 100 per cent
      > convinced of their own materialistic world view. This is why I find
      > so interesting that Theodor emphasizes his conviction, that he is
      > totally persuaded by the materialistic option. If he had not had
      > conviction, he would not have dared to study anthroposophy at all,
      > read anthroposophical email forums, without buying into those
      > against Steiner's ethics.
      > Those who attack Steiner's personal character use racism and
      > smears as excuses to dismiss his Weltanhschauung. By construing
      > anthroposophy as something immoral and reprehensible, the lure of
      > epistemology itself is reduced and rendered harmless. I believe
      > Theodor mentioned something like this in one of his posts.
      > Cheers,
      > Tarjei

      Thanks Tarjei for the clarification. I often just blurt out stuff on
      this list in between family duties.

      What you write above is exactly where my thoughts were focused, I
      just didn't put any hard thinking into it at the time. Theodor"s
      perspective doesn't seem to be aimed to "harm" a scary and
      uncomfortable epistemology that could potentially uproot dogmatically
      orientated dualistic simplicity. He seems comfortable and confident
      in his materialistic convictions, and openly states what they are,
      and that his conclusions about Steiner being schizo are direct result
      of his personal conviction. I think that "attitude" to be
      somewhat "benign" in comparison to a hidden agenda that seeks to
      damage and destroy Steiner, and all that he brought to the world,
      through passive aggressive intellectually pin-headed propaganda smear
      tactics that associate him with the third Reich and the holocaust.

      For me there seems to be a kind of overarching "Moral candor" in the
      air with Theodor's meanderings. I don't mind much if people think
      that Steiner was loony; I still wonder about that myself. And, the
      most influential people throughout history were always thought to me
      crazy in some way, by a majority of people. I think Theodor has
      inadvertently stumbled across Rudolf Steiner's true Motive and
      intent, which is anything but dangerous unless twisted by a different
      individual with different motives and intent.

      And that's what Steiner so often pointed at in both his philosophical
      writings, and his anthroposophical writings: He challenges us to look
      at our individual Motives, and intent.

      A rational believer that leaves Steiner's Moral stature intact is
      fine by me. I would simply disagree with his diagnosis of Steiner
      being schizo, that's all. Mainly because I had a father that was
      diagnosed with that, and from what I can tell from his writings
      anyway, there is no way that Steiner compares to the schizo that
      raised me.

      Oh shit, now I'm musing: "the apple doesn't fall far from the

    • Show all 29 messages in this topic