You know, I am interested in your "quote" style. It has carrots in it like this - ">". Now, I normally only see that on a mailing list when something has been posted. Are my posts to these boards being forwarded to a group?
No. (Though as I have pointed out, there is nothing sneaky about copying it, as it is all a public record, and by the same token no need to copy it anyway, as anyone can come look for themselves.) I have told people at PLANS that there is presently a discussion here.
This is a strange way to try to make me look bad - I have done nothing unethical. You, on the other hand, have made a false allegation that you have not provided any evidence for, and you don't respond to the Steiner quotes that I posted - the full citations have been provided.
The carets > are there because I've sometimes copied things into my own email program since I find it easier to work with, and sometimes start a reply and can't finish it till later, which it doesn't seem possible to do on this board (and don't really get how message boards work (even though I am an Internet "troll").
I'll leave out the > if they bother you. This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic in response to a challenge to BACK UP WHAT YOU HAVE SAID HERE - complaining about carets in my post?
I don't "need" to do anything for you DianaW. If you look at the archives on Waldorf on this site you will find the post that was taken from a Waldorf mailing list, posted to the Waldorf Critics list and then reposted here.http://mothering.com/discussions/sh...40&pagenumber=4
It's the post by Mamamer.
Not going to go back over that - I've already responded and you haven't said anything new on that topic.
No, you don't "need" to do anything because I think you should. It's your conscience. You made a charge which you cannot back up and you don't care. You can expect to be challenged on that in a public forum, because it is slander.
I also find it interesting that there were posts by someone with the user name of "Winter_Diana". The posting style seems oddly similar.
I'm Diana Winters. This is goofy, Elizabeth. I was last on these boards months ago, as Winters_Diana. This time when I tried to log on, it told me "Winters_Diana" was taken. I couldn't figure out how to sort this out and didn't care to waste the time, so I just tried Diana W, and it let me on. (So I guess there's two of me here, technically, but the other "me" is quiet.)
The Swedish site has all the information about the false quotes.
It has false information. It is way too confusing to explain the whole story here, but Sune Nordwall made this accusation against Peter Staudenmaier, who is a historian who knows more about anthroposophy than many anthroposophists. Many people think anthroposophy is just about being spiritual, and don't care to learn more about the history of their own movement. Historically this sort of naivete has had very bad consequences. Peter Staudenmaier has studied the history of right-wing political involvement among anthroposophists. Sune Nordwall accused him of inventing an entire lecture, because Sune didn't know the lecture. For some time he referred to it as Peter's "forgery." Sune later realized his own mistake. That is why he took down the link to the lecture in question. He did not, however, retract his accusation. He may plan to update this on his site at some point, I don't know. I notice he's in no hurry. Elib took the lecture down at around the same time.
It is obvious you have no idea at all what any of this is about, Elizabeth. Posting the link to Sune's site, where this charge is made, does not show there are fabricated quotes anywhere; you'd need to show it *yourself*. You obviously have no idea what the lecture or quotes were even about (the soul missions of various racial groups). You, yourself, need to post here the quotes that you believe are not real quotes. I'm sure we can all see now that you will not be doing this, because there aren't any such quotes. You post a so-called fabricated quote, okay? and I will find you the source in Steiner.www.m-w.com
defines a cult as -
Main Entry: cult
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate -- more at WHEEL
1 : formal religious veneration : WORSHIP
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion
DianaW, didn't you say your post before this one was your last one?
That's a great definition of cult. Anthroposophy fits every one of those definitions. Cults aren't all bad. You just need to know what you are getting into - that there is a dogma behind what appears simple and lovely on the surface. Again I advise everyone to learn all they can, from visiting the schools and (insisting on) observing classes at length. That will say far more than I ever can, and some people will like what they find. Yes, good things happen in Waldorf schools too; it's important not to go on superficial impressions, however, like pretty classrooms, the wonderful smell of bread baking, silk puppets. These things mask an ideology that is very questionable, and I advise parents that there is *no* enchanted fairy garden for your children, it is the real world and there are people with an agenda running the fairy garden. No one wants to believe it because it's very depressing. I go on "trolling" about it if you like that term, because of the children I know who are still getting over the damage that was inflicted, and I hope a few who read this will see that something serious is going on, that they need to research and ask their own hard questions and not content themselves that this is just about bread baking, and not be deflected from learning what Steiner was all about and why Waldorf teachers are like a dog with a bone when it comes to Steiner.