|
RE: Striving after truth
|
Pete Karaiskos
|
Jul 17, 2005 08:46 PDT
|
baandje wrote:
| |
PK wrote:
“When Steiner says “The teacher must be one who is true in the depths of
his being”, is Steiner really saying “truthful" or have I misunderstood?
Could “true in the depths of his being” mean true to Anthroposophy? True
to the spirit of Anthroposophy that says what is *spiritually* best for
the child/situation takes precedence over what is physically (for lack
of a better term) best.”
“With this second interpretation, that “truth” means Anthroposophical
truth, what Steiner may have been saying is that teachers must remain
true to Anthroposophy - and if that is the case, then here could be a
directive from Steiner that the nature of Anthroposophy MUST be revealed
in Waldorf schools.”
*
Given Steiner believed, just as hardcore anthros believe, that truth IS
anthroposophy, and that anthroposophy IS the truth... You see?
|
Let's not forget that also - no other truth exists.
| | There’s
no difference then between “true in the depths of his being” and “true
to Anthroposophy”. They’re the same thing. Anthroposophy is the New
Truth, PK. It’s the only truthful and appropriate path for modern
spiritual seekers, according to both Steiner and the hardcore followers
of Steiner.
|
Yes, I have noticed this, of course. So, by reasoning, Steiner was
saying in the quote that teachers MUST be Anthroposophists to the core
of their being. Otherwise, how could they know the truth.
| | Would this ‘anthro/truth’ take precedence over the
well-being of a Waldorf student? No. That’s taking it too far IMO.
|
Your opinion doesn't matter in this case <G>. Would it be taking it too
far in Steiner's opinion - or more importantly, in the opinions of the
teachers who are interacting with that Waldorf student? In the opinions
of some of the teachers I've encountered, the well-being of the student
is secondary to Anthroposophical dogma or some Anthroposophical lesson
that must be learned or taught. Waldorf schools aren't exactly famous
for putting students first.
| | Would
it take precedence over open and truthful (real and actual truthful)
social behavior and community interactions? Absolutely, and both of us
have plenty of stories to tell in that regard.
|
Indeed.
| |
Regarding your second quote above: Truth to me means responding to the
immediate situation in as honest and open a manner as one is capable of.
Given the ‘disclosure attacks’ the Steiner-Waldorf movement is
experiencing, it’s indicative of the level of untruth in the movement
when individuals continue, not only to ignore these wake-up calls, but
to loudly deny and even launch their own counter attacks.
|
And there's a whole dynamic behind this in some schools. I happened to
watch 1984 last night and, not that Waldorf schools are like that, but
there definitely was a theme there that could be applied to some Waldorf
school situations. It has been my experience that there is a structure
in place, at least at my particular school, of controlling information
and ultimately people. When untruth is supported by a structured
system, it becomes believable to the people within the system.
| | Steiner-Waldorf schools are Neo-Christian, Steiner-initiation centers.
The curriculum – the very material taught in the classrooms – is a
Neo-Christian, Steiner-initiation curriculum. All this must be clearly
outlined and explained to prospective parents. Anything less is untruth,
plain and simple.
|
And the new way of doing this is apparently the initiation of the
parents (which, I suppose, is better than before). Parents, it seems,
are being exposed in small doses to Steiner's not-so-difficult material
and (I've actually seen this) walk away wondering what all the hoopla is
about.
Pete
|
|
 |
|
