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

Re: Ludicrous

Expand Messages
  • steveh
    ... Why do you seem so certain that there is no such thing as clairvoyance? I suspect that also means there is no such thing as clairaudience, precognition,
    Message 1 of 193 , Aug 24, 2011
      --- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Rawlings" <downfromfog@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, Peter Staudenmaier <pstaud@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > Diana mentioned Steve Hale's views on the moon. For those unfamiliar with these views, here is his explanation of why the moon landings did not happen and could not happen:>
      > >
      > > "The moon is now a superhardened, vulcanized sphere that exists for the purpose of providing a necessary counterweight for earth evolution. Sun and Moon are the electromagnetic poles for the earth, which lies in the shadow zone; life in the valley of the shadow...."
      >
      > > <and> Steve Hale wrote:
      >
      > >"[I]f Steiner were clairvoyant then his antisemtic remarks are redeemed as actual knowledge of the facts. Well, that just might be then, since he did do this type of research rather consistently for 25 years...."
      >
      >
      > Unlike some other self-appointed champions of Anthroposophy, Steve Hale thinks and writes like a true Anthroposophist. His messages are priceless; I would not change a syllable.
      >
      > I would simply encourage parents to take heed. If you have children in Waldorf schools or if you are considering Waldorf for your kids, consider. Rudolf Steiner's delusions did not die with him. Today, in the 21st century, there are followers of Rudolf Steiner who still inhabit the delusional universe Steiner cobbled together (a universe in which reality, such as the Apollo moon landings, is denied, and fabrications, such as Steiner's "Fifth Gospel", are embraced). Bearing in mind that Waldorf schools base their concepts, methods, and activities on Anthroposophy, please read the words of Anthroposophists such as Steve Hale and ask yourself: Do you find that these words ring a bell for you? Do you say, 'Hm, yes, he makes perfect sense'? Or are you repelled? If the former, then Waldorf may be right for you and you children; if the latter, you may want to run for the hills.
      >
      > Steve is certainly right that, in the end, belief in Anthroposophy (and hence Waldorf) boils down to belief in clairvoyance. Steve thinks Steiner was clairvoyant. Steve may indeed think that he himself is clairvoyant. The small wrinkle in this is that clairvoyance is delusion. It does not exist. And, thus, the clairvoyant "research" Steiner did was, in truth, self-deceptive fantasy or, perhaps, willful, intentional deceit designed to hook eager fantasists. What do you think, parents? Do you want to send your kids to schools run by people who believe in clairvoyance and the occult? If so, there may be a Waldorf school in your kids' future.
      >
      > - Roger


      Why do you seem so certain that there is no such thing as clairvoyance? I suspect that also means there is no such thing as clairaudience, precognition, telepathy, telekinesis, or psychokinesis faculties.

      Yet, it can be shown, and I would trust that Peter S. has an historical handle on this matter, that in the 19th century it was indeed the developing course of the field of psychology that indicated all of these higher faculties as being identified as coming into being.

      But here is what happened. Nominalistic thinking, which worships the material world alone as the highest achievement of knowledge, decided in the second half of the 19th century to subscribe and confine the field of psychology to the idea of man being the highest of the animal forms of that kingdom, and therefore completely subject to behavioral control and measure based on the same type of stimulus-response mechanisms as found in Pavlov's dogs.

      This delimiter still holds sway in academic psychology, which is far removed from recognizing a soul and spirit in man. Even the concept of an astral body and an etheric body is foreign to this domain, and that is truly sad.

      Equally sad is to here, with conviction, that clairvoyance does not exist. Well, it certainly does exist, Roger.

      Steve
    • steveh
      ... I can speak to the point, Dan, but you wouldn t be able to stand it. Steve
      Message 193 of 193 , Sep 6 10:16 PM
        --- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, Dan Dugan <dan@...> wrote:
        >
        > > SH: But belief is not a prerequisite at all.
        > >>
        > >> Perhaps you mean not a prerequisite for yourself; you have stated this week that it is a prerequisite for your fellow correspondents:
        > >>
        > >> "You were never convinced about it. Why? Same as with Pete. Lack of aptitude and interest for Spiritual Science. I said it is not for everybody."
        > >>
        > >>> The results of the spiritual investigator are communicated in the forms in which we can grasp with the intellect and feelings, and then meant to be further investigated on our own through research, study, active contemplation, and so forth. It all forms a process methodology.
        > >>
        > >> Pretentious crap. Steiner said accept what I say, live with it for years, then see how you feel about it. An epistemology that leads to error. Your messages here demonstrate the failure of his method.
        > >>
        > >>> And this is what I like best. The dynamics of my own dialectical investigations. I believe only that I indeed received information, and now I must verify it to the best of my ability.
        > >>
        > >> "Verifying" is 19th-century science. Since Popper, it's understood that it's easy to find support for a hypothesis. The proper test of a hypothesis is to attack it as thoroughly as possible. Ideas that survive that process are worth using.
        > >>
        > >> -Dan
        > >
        > > Well, attacking what you say above won't make it true.
        > >
        > > "Pretentious crap. Steiner said accept what I say, live with it for years, then see how you feel about it. An epistemology that leads to error. Your messages here demonstrate the failure of his method."
        > >
        > > I could attack your idea here and blow it up in your face, but it would be better for you to show some proper Popper attacking. Study spiritual science, and listen to its indications without prejudice.
        > >
        > > You'll soon find what the path was all the time. It was the path of freedom, like that first book on philosophy.
        >
        > It appears from this that you've lost the argument, Steve. You refused to speak to the point.
        >
        > -Dan

        I can speak to the point, Dan, but you wouldn't be able to stand it.

        Steve
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.