Rudolph Steiner - Thoughts?

[Ecclecticmum]

I read through 40 pages of search on Oak Meadow, and kept coming up with people giving odd comments about OM thinking, of course, that it included the sprituality of Anthroposophy (OM as far as I am aware, have pretty much removed all of the Anth. stuff, thus causing the ripples with Waldorf purists since Waldorfs "centre" is based around Anth. and removing it is akin to ripping the heart from the program.

 

Personally I would prefer to do what I'm going to do (I got OM and a locally based waldorf curriculum, I can include as much as I would like, or not, depending upon my research).

 

The comments were stuff like "anything "weird" in Highschool OM?" and "he's creepy and weird" etc.

 

Note - As above OM is really separate from Waldorf curriculum.

 

I just wanted further clarification on the hows/whys you (if you have that view, that is) think the way you do, was it something you read somewhere? Link? If you don't mind me asking, for those of you who think that of him are you strict christian/catholics? Just wondering if it was because of his slant upon the bible?

 

I think its better to find what he was like when he was in his early 20's, look at his accomplishments and personal views, and then look at the stuff before he passed (a few people have known to turn around a go in a completely opposite direction near the end, whilst others fondly point back to what "they" count as their greatest accomplishments and thoughts, which gives more of an overview of the whole person.)

 

I read the Wiki on Steiner, and it seems he dipped his hand into a lot of fields, and seemed to do a whole lot of good, many things we seem to take for granted today originated back from him, and he never went too far IMO (he was a philospher, philosophers are mostly known to have a few quirks or screws loose, it seems to be what makes them more fascinating, or more able to look at the world with a critical eye).

 

I tend to go off on my own interest-led rabbit trails, so this is my new obsession..

 

I think many people who were counted as nuts/loons during their time (and quite a while after) turned out to be misrepresented genius'.

 

To be absolutely honest I don't understand his spiritual teachings fully (I haven't really looked at more than th basics, preferring to look more at his bios and views.

 

The world would be boring if we were all the same, I know I'm a loon :p. I honestly don't know what I believe in regards to religious/spiritual. The bible could all be complete fact, it could be a mixture of older religions, or it could be a meant as a more meterophorical point of view. I have seen many passages that don't quite translate properly into english, therefore could lose something in the translation. I read somewhere that their are several levels of rabbi's, your everyday guidance rabbi who takes a more philosophical view to give you guidance, then three (or more...it was a while ago I read this) levels of "research" rabbi's who are split into groups pouring over the meanings of the torah (literal, meterophorical etc) and they spend their lives pouring over these passages, debating. Others take a more logical approach with translations (whether its a camel or a rope, neithers going to fit through the eye of the needle) (lol!) I think they have a good idea of things. I believe in something bigger than me, and I think religion is a life's quest, I pour over and soak up all sorts of texts (from OBE's to Alien Pyramids to Lost Jesus Papers, Bible Code and Ron Wyatts collection to more spiritual based books (Wiccan, pagan, Buddhist, reincarnation, karma etc) to of course, the bible which I own a few different versions & reproductions of older & ones in other languages)

 

Before anyone brings too much heated battle into the midst GAWM that each person to their own, free will allows us to individually express ourselves and our faiths, and please be respectful & understanding for other religions :)

 

So back to the original Q. ROFL!

 

I'm not ready to approach purchasing a biographical book on Steiner (no money lol!) nor do I want to read through a book thats heavily biased or is too wordy (I spent the better part of the last week staring at steiner philosophy and an old medical journal, so my brains gone broke :( hehe.

 

Thoughts on Mr Steiner himself, his deeds, what you think of the man, and seperately your thoughts on Anthroposophy, and of course any of his other works. (and if the people who made those comments are reading this, or people who have those thoughts, I would love to know what made you think that way).

 

:lurk5: :seeya:

[kewb]

I use Oak Meadow for high school and no weird Steiner stuff. If it did I wouldn't use it because he was an anti-semite and believed in the superioty of the aryan race. Not someone I want to follow. Since I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater I take what I like about his educational philosophy and incorporate it into what we do (the beauty of homeschooling). Oak Meadow is waldorf inspired it is not true Waldorf.

[Ecclecticmum]

Thanks kewb, do you have any links regarding his ties/views on that? (off to do some googling) :) Seems a bit at odds with his thoughts on Christianity considering the basis of it, but maybe thats why the slant towards saying its spiritual rather than factual? (off to google)

 

ETA: I found these which tend to suggest the opposite (would love links from your end!):

 

After the First World War, Steiner was denounced as a traitor to Germany for suggesting Upper Silesia should be granted independence - and the political theorist of the new National Socialist movement (Nazi party) claimed, mistakenly, that he was a Jew. He was the victim of a personal attack by Adolf Hitler, who called on other nationalist extremists to declare a "war against Steiner". His health began to suffer and he died soon afterwards.

http://www.independe...eas-433407.html

 

Steiner died just over a year later, in 1925. The Second World War temporarily hindered the anthroposophical movement in most of Continental Europe, as the Anthroposophical Society and most of its daughter movements (e.g. Steiner/Waldorf education) were banned by the National Socialists (Nazis);^[11] virtually no anthroposophists ever joined the National Socialist Party.^[12]

http://en.wikipedia....i/Anthroposophy

 

 

During the years when Steiner was best known as a literary critic, he published a series of articles attacking various manifestations of antisemitism^[95] and criticizing some of the most prominent anti-Semites of the time as "barbaric" and "enemies of culture".^[96] On a number of occasions, Steiner suggested that Jewish cultural and social life had lost all contemporary relevance^[97] and promoted full assimilation of the Jewish people into the nations in which they lived. This stance has come under severe criticism in recent years.^[90]

http://en.wikipedia..../Rudolf_Steiner

 

Hmm, that last bit "full assimilation of the Jewish people into the nations in which they lived. This stance has come under severe criticism in recent years." might need more researching on that.

 

EATA: I found this: http://www.academia.edu/2306281/Rudolf_Steiner_and_the_Jewish_Question which seems to go into it, looks like he jumped backwards and forwards in his view a lot, a bit late here, I'll probably read over all this again in the morning, my head can't handle any more reading :p

[VeritasMama]

I am a Catholic, but I've always enjoyed studying other religions, and the history of the occult was a rabbit trail I found myself on a few years ago, and I found it fascinating. I am not writing this to condemn Oak Meadow, just to share information. I am just thrilled to have somewhere to unload all this, since no one in my real life wants to hear about the crazy occult. So, forgive me if I ramble, and I hope noone thinks I'm weird or crazy. I apologize in advance if any of this offends anyone.

 

Steiner was a member of the Theosophical society, and was heavily influenced by it's founder Madame Blovatsky. Many of her teachings and writings made their way into his Anthroposophical teachings. Theosophy was highly influential among many occultists, Aleister Crowley was a member as well, and Blovatsky's books and teachings are still considered very important in the modern New Age Movement today.

 

Blovatsky is the one that coined the term Aryan. In one of her books, she described the evolution of man as humans going through a series of "root races". According to Blovatsky, the Aryan root race is the current race of human beings, the fifth one, and there are different subraces, some of which are "spritually higher" than the other subraces. The "root race" before the Aryan race were the Atlanteans (that's right, as in from Atlantis). Steiner himself wrote a book on the Atlantean root race and the lost civilization of Atlantis. Theosophy and Blovatsky's theory and teachings on race were very influential in the Nazi party, Hitler was an occultist. Obviously, Hitler put great weight into the concept of the "Aryan" race and the idea that some "subraces" were superior to others. Theosopy, along with the teachings of Darwin, were also very influential in the Eugenics movement, which of course is the "science" Hitler was promoting through his "final solution" in order to purify the Aryan race.

 

On a tangent here, Margaret Sanger, one of the founders of Planned Parenthood, was also a member of the Theosophical society and a proponet of Eugenics. She even travelled to Germany in the 1930's in order to study their forced sterilization program, and met Hitler. Similiar Eugenics programs were implemented in the states as well, but after WWII Eugenics was rightfully villified and could no longer be practiced as a "science." Thankfully, the forced sterilization and Eugenics programs in the states were eliminated, and Planned Parenthood was forced to remove the Eugenics aspects of it's public mission.

 

Blovatsky, theosophical society members, and others in the spirtualist movement that Steiner was involved in relied on "seances" to gain these insights and the esoteric information they wrote about. That is, they would "commune" with spirits they called "Ascended Masters" who were supposedly the spirits of dead people who no longer had to reincarnate because they had reached "enlightenment." In other words, dead people such as Buddha, Jesus, and other "Masters" would give the mediums, such as Blovatsky, messages that they wanted to pass on to mankind in order to help others "ascend," and if we all try hard to learn the hidden secrets of the universe, we too can become like gods. That is where this idea of the "root races" came from, along with many many other books and writings, from the messages she recieved from these Masters. They also believed in visiting their past lives to gain knowledge, and astral travel, that is leaving their body and travelling to the past or the future to witness human events, and some of Blovatsky's writings on the past were based on her "visions."

 

This is all very creepy, most people don't want to hear anything about it. It is interesting, or depending on how you look at it it could be diabolical, the way all these occult movements are connected. For instance, a follower of Aleister Crowley later became involved with L. Ron Hubbard, and if you look at the high level teachings of Scientology, there is a lot in common with some of these theosophical teachings (reincarnation, astral travel, etc.). Of course, Crowley's teachings went on to influence Anton LeVey, the founder of the Church of Satan. In many rock lyrics you will hear quotes from Crowley's writings and references to the occult. I'm not saying this to condemn rock music, it is just something I started to notice after reading about Crowley after reading about Theosophy. Sorry, another tangent.

 

As a Christian, I tend to avoid anything having any direct contact with the occult, quite frankly just reading about it is dark enough. Steiner is so unsavory to me I avoid using anything labeled Waldorf. But, there is a lot of beauty and truth in the Waldorf method, despite Steiner. I think programs like OM may have been able to take the best of Waldorf and leave the rest behind. But, the positives that I see in the Waldorf approach are by no means exclusive to Waldorf, the methods and ideas that work within Waldorf are used in other curriculum or can easily be adapted by any parent. But, I do find some of their methods, the ones used mostly in Waldorf schools, to be less than sound from a purely educational standpoint, the spiritual aspect aside.

 

The people who embrace the Steiner philosophy wholly, as it is presented in the schools, are getting involved in a type of a cult, by the strict definition of the word. The only people who can really embrace something like that and be open to it are people who don't already have a strong faith or religion. I think that explains why so many faithful Christians are so turned off by Steiner, they see it as a false religion.

 

Thanks again for letting me ramble, and again please don't think I'm nuts :001_unsure:

[Pod's mum]

I am a Catholic, but I've always enjoyed studying other religions, and the history of the occult was a rabbit trail I found myself on a few years ago, and I found it fascinating. I am not writing this to condemn Oak Meadow, just to share information. I am just thrilled to have somewhere to unload all this, since no one in my real life wants to hear about the crazy occult. So, forgive me if I ramble, and I hope noone thinks I'm weird or crazy. I apologize in advance if any of this offends anyone.

 

<snip>

 

Thanks again for letting me ramble, and again please don't think I'm nuts :001_unsure:

 

 

Really really like this post.

I too researched (much too heavily) into Steiner, and there is so much stuff out there that I really can't very well understand those that are draw to the 'gentle, non-religious spiritualism' for their children.

(Honestly. Research first!)

There are a lot of Neo-Nazi websites sharing his teachings and prolific writings. I won't link to them. They aren't very nice, but they were numerous and easy to find.

 

Anyway, this is a topic I regulary step on toes with.

I personally think the way that his quasi-religion is surreptitiously taught is fairly dangerous. It's much harder to pin down and see what values the kid are being given that upfront religious schools.

 

I'm not saying you aren't nuts VeritasMama...its' just that I may be in the same bag.

[PachiSusan]

Very very interesting. I have not heard about this Anthroposophy...and how it's wound into Waldorf. I have heard in other home schooling places (specifically Christian) throw warnings out but I never knew exactly what it was about.

[Deee]

We've successfully used Steiner's methods since 2nd grade, while leaving anthroposophy out. Now, as we move into year 7, this has become harder. I find more religion creeping into the history books and more Goethe creeping into science (Steiner was heavily influenced by Goethe, in particular his theories on colour and science teaching). We are atheists and scientists, so none of this sits well with us. But some of Steiner's ideas do resonate: delayed academics, honouring childhood, rhythm in the home, beauty, and integrating art and story telling across the curriculum. We used Christopherus, which I found to be the least esoteric curriculum. Its also quite rigorous and easy to use. We have steadily become more classical as my son has grown older. He asked to drop the block lesson format mid 6th grade (seems 1.5 hours of one subject every morning for three weeks lead to some serious droning-on on my part....).

 

I have 4th grade of the old black and white Oak Meadow, and the high school World History syllabus. I found absolutely no anthroposophy in either. In fact, back when DS was in 4th and I was more of a purist, I wrote Oak Meadow off as too fragmented and lacking in the beauty and story telling I loved from Steiner. Now, I think Oak Meadow is really solid and well rounded. I don't find its maths hard enough for DS (its very light compared to other Waldorf maths). The only downers are a strong North American bias (a fairly normal problem for we Aussies) and the fact that its bloody expensive!

 

You can pick the best bits out of Steiner and leave the rest. It just takes effort. But Oak Meadow is not Waldorf.

D

[kewb]

Thanks kewb, do you have any links regarding his ties/views on that? (off to do some googling) :) Seems a bit at odds with his thoughts on Christianity considering the basis of it, but maybe thats why the slant towards saying its spiritual rather than factual? (off to google)

 

 

EATA: I found this: http://www.academia....Jewish_Question which seems to go into it, looks like he jumped backwards and forwards in his view a lot, a bit late here, I'll probably read over all this again in the morning, my head can't handle any more reading :p

 

I don't have any links. A quick google search for steiner antisemetic will turn up quite few. I started reading up on Waldorf when my ds was a toddler and was researching educational options. I liked the nature inspired way of Waldorf. But then one of my neighbors enrolled her son in a Waldorf school for pre-k and the stuff she told me set off red flags.

 

For example:

1. The contract she had to sign that she would allow no tv/electronics in her home. They got rid of their televisions and all of his battery operated toys in one fell swoop. (I have no issue with people choosing to go tv free or only provide natural toys, I don't like being told to do it by a school).

2. She had to stop nursing him at night or he could not attend.

3. She had to attend a eurythmy class.

4. Teacher home visit to see the child in his environment and confirm no tv in house.

5. No black crayons allowed (whereas I understand you don't want kids outling and filling in-maybe I want to make black hills) and everyone has to draw the same picture. Exactly the same. No individuality allowed.

 

The reading I had done and watching what my neighbor was doing/going through was enough to turn me away from true waldorf.

[Pod's mum]

5. No black crayons allowed (whereas I understand you don't want kids outling and filling in-maybe I want to make black hills) and everyone has to draw the same picture.

 

This topic came up recently here in Aust where some Govt schools have a state funded Steiner stream within the school. An Indian (Asian) family was distressed that their son could only draw people in good, happy colours of white or pink, not base, banned colours of dark browns or black.

Which of course supports the 'subtle' base races ethic.

 

Too bad that this child belonged to a 'base race'.

[Elizabeth in MN]

My thoughts on Rudolf Steiner are pretty simple - he was a crazy wack-a-doodle with no proven science behind his theories. It's easy to spot if you read any of his full writings.

[Ecclecticmum]

The philosophy, on the other hand, is nuts. We left the preschool when I was getting lectures about breastfeeding my toddler interfering with her spiritual growth. OK then. Another friend was kicked out of a Steiner baby playgroup because her child was an early walker and wouldn't lie on the mat while she crafted :) Although I did feel a Steiner education was attractive - gentle and arts/narrative based - I was very uncomfortable with the dogma around that education.

 

Wow! That's pretty far out. Most waldorf schools actually go as independant, meaning its the individual school that decides things like that. A few of the ones I look at out here actually go into waiting for the child to self wean. The schools have come quite far from the original schools, it would be interesting to see a comparison chart.

 

I don't have any links. A quick google search for steiner antisemetic will turn up quite few.

 

I did look up that, but I was trying to find non-biased links. Like the links I have included are research papers, journalists, and community upkeep pages. Most of the things when googling that and similar are mostly biased as seen by the website titles (waldorfanswers, waldorfcritics etc)

 

My thoughts on Rudolf Steiner are pretty simple - he was a crazy wack-a-doodle with no proven science behind his theories. It's easy to spot if you read any of his full writings.

 

LOL! Straight to the point, I love it! I was thinking about reading one of his original books on anthroposophy, but I'm afraid none of it will makes sense *blush* since its writing from the very early 1900's, I was hoping to find something non biased in a more laymans terms :p Probably doesn't exist though.

[VeritasMama]

I'm not saying you aren't nuts VeritasMama...its' just that I may be in the same bag.

 

 

Oh goody, nuts should stick together :tongue_smilie: .

[Deee]

My son spent three years in a Steiner school. Extended breast feeding was encouraged, and young children were free to develop at their own pace. Parents were encouraged to stop children under 7, and preferably children under 14, watching TV or using electronic games and computers, but this was never enforced, only strongly suggested (about 30% of us had TV-free kids under 7).

 

The black crayon thing comes up a lot. The truth is that no ethic group gets accurately represented using only the 7 rainbow colours (and thats the decider for kids in class 3 and under - skin colours start around class 4 or 5). We are Anglo-Celtic Australians. I have brown hair, brown eyes and white skin. My husband has black hair and blue eyes. My son's eyes are green. In my son's early pictures, all of us have blue or purple hair and yellow skin. Our eyes have varied from purple, through blue and green. Pink is not included in the crayon box either, because it isn't in the rainbow. None of this was ever an issue. Kids are, when left to their own devices, usually blissfully unaware of skin colour until an adult brings it up. MOst of the time they draw characters from stories, not their own families, anyway.

 

I'm not trying to defend Steiner - he was a product of his times. The schools are a mixed bag - we pulled our son out because of bullying and a hopeless class teacher, who, 5 years on with the same kids, is still hopeless. But the curriculum in the younger years, especially from providers like Christopherus, can be rigorous, fun and really lovely.

D

[Deee]

It was an accumulation of little things for us, too, prior to the final incident. DS was also an early reader and I felt almost guilty about that. We were frequently told to make sure he didn't end up too much "in the head". His teacher openly swore when he discovered how well he could read in grade 1. Honestly, like lots of things to do with education, I think Steiner is best in the homeschool, when you can leave the bits that don't suit and keep the bits that do.

 

Telling you to stop breastfeeding is just outrageous. I have heard of it before, but most of the Steiner-ites I knew thought it was very extreme. Its consistent with a feeling I had that the school was slowly pulling our son away from us and trying to be the dominant influence. Nothing I could ever quite put my finger on, but always there, along with a feeling of judgement: we, the Steiner educators, know better than you. Leave it to us, pay the school fees and all will be well. This put us off the school, not the method. These days, we have almost outgrown the method.

D

[Deee]

Just quickly, for the OP, the two Australian Steiner curricula that I know of are vastly different. Eric Fairman's is great and easy to implement. Great reading recommendations and poems included. The maths is pretty advanced, but you have to make up any worksheets or problems. Alan Whitehead's is firmly rooted in anthroposophy and can be very hard to chew through. Some of the science and history gets a bit weird. Alan is a lovely man, and very helpful if you contact him, but I found the curriculum hard to implement. Proper anthropops love it.

D

[Ecclecticmum]

Deee - Thanks so much, I wasn't aware there was more than one Aus based curriculum.

 

I'm actually using OMK&1 as the basis, and using A Little Garden Flower for Inspiration & Extra help for stuff thats a bit hazy. I did purchase a fair amount of Mr Whiteheads stuff, and he does seem quite nice :) I figured using his stuff exclusively wouldn't be for me, it was really a choice between Enki and OM. I found OM to be more understandable (whilst I may spend my spare time researching into things and looking at medical books, I do not want to be trying to understand how to set out stuff for school. Plus Enki had a few too many do's & don'ts and rules regarding purchasing of their curriculum, plus pre-puchasing interrogation. That said, if I managed to come across a homeschool teacher manual from someone I would probably nab it :)

 

I'm using his stuff more as an extra thing, if I feel a certain area requires more depth. The basic ideas of anthroposophy appeal to me, as well as some of steiners quotes on education, but whenever I look closer (I looked into a course on anthroposophy) it looks too weird. I like the "brochure" but not the "manual" for anthroposophy, so to speak. And I like the architecture he produced, beyond that, I think it gets a little hazy & weird.

 

But I just tend to take what I want from a curriculum and ignore bits that are kooky (to me) or don't work.

 

Hopefully I can find some sort of sample for path of discovery, I don't need anything else for the moment, but I always like having guides like that, it inspires me, re-perks me up about school, and helps me find my ground.

 

I decided I will be sticking with Oak Meadow for the long haul. Which means I'm doing a big clearout of stuff I purchased for this year and stuff from last years curriculum as well. I have to go through the storage room and figure out what to keep and what to sell, I keep jumping all over the place on Atelier. Oak Meadow is a pretty much Arts-Centric curriculum, and I want to get the New Child Montessori Art Manual towards the middle/end of 2013 too. If I start Atelier, unless we don't like it, I would want to continue with it through the years, and I'm not sure whether its worth it? I'm definitely keeping my lentil science, but other than that, I probably have tons and tons of stuff to sell. A pity I'm not in the US, yes? WTMers would have a field day with my haul of goods!

 

I like the rhythms & colors of the day (Monday-purple-baking all through to Sunday-White-Mommy Planning (Quiet Day). I think having a colour for the day allows the child to get into a rhythm of knowing what will happen, and hopefully kickstart some new healthy routines (not doing the grains or wearing the colours though) I was thinking of purchase some more face paint markers (I ran out, the kids love me doing up their face), and using them for colours of the day. At the beginning of circle time, they could choose a simple small shape/symbol that they can have in the days color on their face (beside eye or on cheek, middle of forehead etc), I think they would love that. Not doing blackboard drawings either, instead I'll do more cartoony whitboard drawings (we have a huge classroom whiteboard thats in the family kitchen, and I have a whole bunch of whiteboard marker colours, so I'm not spending more than I have to lol.

 

Another reason waldorf-inspired suits us is because its what my children do anyway, and its what I do (i'm always looking for handcrafts to do and new things to try. I used to do personalized 30-40 cm felted 3d sculpture dolls of peoples kids. And I dabbled at doing doll reborns when I was pregnant with DS, before the children I used to paint and sculpt a lot too. Unfortunately my sewing, crochet and knitting skills (I can hand sew fine and I make felt sheet stuff as well) are nil. So I'll be learning alongside the kids with everything (including the penny whistle this year apparently, and the two young 'uns will probably want their own ones, so 4 tin whistles going off.....people in town should be thanking me that I purchased a house out of town ROFL!

 

Hopefully I can find a simple laymans terms of full anthroposophy as relating to education. Even when I went to the course site, it started using spritual sentences that left me wondering which way is up, and not leaving any more knowledgable than when I entered. Maybe I should try reading it of a day instead of at night! Theres some common sense.

 

Yep. I ramble. Specially when I am excited, I get verbal diarrhea. Many apologys :closedeyes:

[nrg]

http://www.waldorflibrary.org/

 

This is a link to a broad collection of Steiner's works and other Waldorf inspired writings.

 

I like the Live Education curriculm best.