Admin: ad hominem warning (Brad) [Re: [wc] Toddler's are racist. Go get 'em, Pet
- --- In email@example.com, "Brad Martin" <bradmartin@...>
>I actually suspect that there's something wrong with your reading
> Politically correct ideology is a human mindset. Peter S. gives more
> than sufficient evidence of that mindset. My comment is not about his
> personality, it is about his worldview. His obsession with the issue of
> racism goes beyond academic objectivity, but certainly fits with
> ideological extremism in academia today, which has become the bane of
> higher education in the US. However, it feeds into the WC Bash Steiner
> Vendetta, and therefore Peter S. is not only tolerated, but given
comprehension. If anyone here has been trying to discuss racism
without too many moral overtones, it's Peter.
But another point I think you have to understand is that people can be
objective academically, that does not mean they are neutral about a
subject as human beings. People who study genocide rarely, if ever,
think killing is just as good as not killing. If you ask for something
like that, under the pretense that it would be the "neutral"
standpoint, you're arguing for a position that neither academic, nor
non-academic, discourse requires.
>Well, that's odd. Perhaps you should read a bit more Steiner? How
> Steiner, among many over the millenia, speculated on many fields of
> knowledge, including human differences around the globe over time. Are
> there differences among human groupings? Of course. Taking a handful of
> Steiner's speculations, most often misunderstood in the larger context,
> and using them to condemn the whole, is the common tactic here on WC.
would you explain that whole books of his, rather than single
speculations, are remarkably disgusting?
> The broad field of transpersonal psychology, a development onI'm sorry Brad, but mumbo-jumbo like this has nothing to do with
> psychology, without limits, in the 20th century, is about the human
> trait of love. Rudolph Steiner identified anthroposophy as one version
> of that reality.
psychology. Maybe you should read up on some *real* psychology,
psychological thinking founded on research.
> The anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner is one part of the larger whole ofNO!! It is most definately NOT!
> the leading edge of this all encompassing human psychology.
> This listserve has lost credibility, yet the faithful carry on,LOL!!
> ignoring legitimate contextual evidence.
- Well, then, if that's the case, the PUBLIC should be discouraged from choosing a waldorf school at all. That's it. You don't go about lying about anthroposophy's place in the school under the pretext that it's too complicated for parents to understand. Either they understand, or waldorf isn't the choice for them. There are no other options. You don't send your kid to a catholic school without having the first clue about catholicism.
Besides, I really find that whole attitude shockingly arrogant. What makes you think that anthroposophists have such superior intellectual faculties that they can understand what ordinary waldorf parents can't? I think that whole notion is completely mistaken. Waldorf parents are quite often fairly well-educated, and often more capable than the anthroposophists and waldorf teachers. I can assure you that people like my parents are clever enough to understand anthroposophy well enough to know it is not for them--the problem is, parents are told anthroposophy won't be in the school. Many parents of waldorf students are highly qualified to grasp stuff--and if I'm allowed to make a general observation based on my own experience, the kids with very educated parents got out of waldorf with varying speeds, kids with anthro parents or uneducated parents got stuck. Because, even if they aren't told, parents will catch on sooner or later, the more they know about
the world in general, the sooner!
--- On Mon, 4/8/08, taiannah <riversongs@...> wrote:
I doubt that the PUBLIC is truly capable of understanding very much
at all. I would consider the endeavor what ever it was an absolute
waste of time. Which is probably why there is no anthroposophical
discussion here at all.
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]