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

49375Opposition to Anthropsophy

Expand Messages
  • ted.wrinch
    Feb 7, 2012
      Over on WC, Der Staudi has claimed:

      "Though many anthroposophists are, tellingly, convinced otherwise, Peter doesn't oppose anthroposophy.
      ...
      I am not an opponent of anthroposophy as such, I am a critic of several of its constituent elements."

      But is it true? Well, he opposes:

      3-folding: which he deems anti-democratic, nationalist, militarist, elitist, reactionary, authoritarian, regressive, right-wing, organicist, corporatist, elitist, fascist....

      Steiner's epistemology: which he deems personalist, regressive and incoherent.

      Waldorf education: it's notion of stages of childhood (which he deems anti-democratic); it's  curriculum ( which he deems 'orientalist'); it's organisation ( also anti-democratic); it's pedagogy (anti-intellectual)

      Bio-dynamics: which he deems 'Eco-fascist', or course, and unscientific.

      Spiritual science and anthroposophy: which he deems unscientific, authoritarian, unhistoric, racist, anti-Semitic, fascist, intolerant, unenlightened, illogical, irrational, anti-cosmopolitan, reactionary, anti-modernist, elitist and para-Nazi...

      The evolution of consciousness: which he deems 'orientalist', white supremacist, and racist.

      Anthroposophists: who he deems anti-intellectual, and dismissive of reading, reason and argument.

      Christology: which he deems supernaturalist, 'biblist' (believing the bible is true), anti-Semitic, and white supremacist

      Self-development: which he deems entho-centric

      Historiography: wrong, anti rational, and anti-intellectual

      And too many more others to mention. See http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/rudolf-steiner%E2%80%99s-threefold-commonwealth-and-alternative-economic-thought/, http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/anthroposophy-and-ecofascism-2/, and his postings to the WC list for examples.

      So, not much opposition there, then. The most likely reason he regularly tries to claim he 'doesn't oppose anthroposophy' is for political reasons: he wants to maintain the fiction that he's an objective, professional scholar. Such people are not supposed to let their personal biases and dislikes, and political opposition (far left, neo-Marxist) motivate and determine their scholarship and it would look bad for him if his institution suspected him of it.

      T.

      Ted Wrinch
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic