to a Spiritual Social Science

a possible Facebook conversation in 12 Parts

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part One)

Three decades ago, around 1984, I wrote my first attempt to express the basics of the work I was trying then to do.  I called that little essay: Listening to the World Song.  That’s what I have done for a long time now.  The World is what it is, and through that It speaks.  And I ... I listen.  The world even includes the books I read ...

I was recently re-reading my favorite book: Ursula K. Le Guin’s The Dispossessed.  While doing so I realized part of why I so identified with the main character: Shevek.   His lament, expressed to himself inwardly at one point, was his sadness and grief at having gone so far beyond his contemporaries in thinking about physics, that he had no one to talk to.  He actually had to travel to, what to him, was an alien planet, in order to find minds with which he could converse about his passions.

I feel that way about my decades of research developing a Spiritual Social Science.  I have no peers, and feel in this regard the soul-pain of being quite alone.  Shevek, in the novel, did find some on the alien planet that were able to converse, but still he was beyond them in many different ways.  All the same, he at one point offered some University level courses to this alien culture about his discoveries.  Even there, he found difficulties, because while many minds were sharp and thoughtful, they all brought with them the mental debris of their cultural background, and were not willing to let go their attachments, so as be truly able to wander into the new territory concerning which he offered to be a guide.

Nonetheless he discovered a certain joy in being able to express himself as to the depths of the work on which he had spent his life.

[An aside: there has been some discussion here and elsewhere about “spiritual teachers” and others that are called “masters” or “gurus”.  I have never asserted that I am one of “those”.  At the same time, in order to do my studies of the “social”, I had to not only have a method, but a method that could be taught.  It is part of the Age of Science that when one offers “knowledge”, that we also at the same time, explain how we acquired it in the first place.]

What is going to happen then is that I will be posting here and there the various “Parts” of an Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science.  I welcome comments and questions, and will even read critical remarks, but if you want me to take your critical remarks seriously, you have go much further than just saying you disagree.  I do science, and in science we get to require an in depth explanation of why someone believes we are wrong.

I will also make a web page of these “Parts”, so that if someone wants to go back and see what has gone on before, that can be found.  I will not post the comments or questions of others, without first asking the person, who made that contribution, if that was okay with them.

Keep in mind that this is an “introduction” - it would be impossible to lay out the details of over 30 years work in this kind of venue.  Picture what we are doing here as a kind of classroom, and the Parts (there are twelve) will be offered at a rate of only one a week.  They are already written, but will be adjusted as necessary according to whether the readers want to offer a contribution, or to ask something.

Stay tuned ... at the bottom of each Part there will be a link to the website, where the current Parts are all recorded, as well as anything others may wish to offer.

Part One - author's comment one (or 1.1): Peers, what are those?  If we do comparative thinking, one might assume that peer in this sense means someone who is at our level.  So if I say I have no peers, someone might think I mean I am way better than anyone.  If I said had no peers in the sense of my skills as a poet, that would be the case - a kind of lack of humility.  But I did not mean to use the term "peers" in that sense.  What I meant was that I am so far out on the fringes of thinking about social science, that there is no one there with me, so I have no one to talk to about the related ideas, which will be exposed to the readers in the following on Parts. 

Author’s comments, Introduction: 1.1.1:  some hints for those who might want to be “peers”. I’ve read a lot of books.  A lot.  Someone wanting to be a peer of mine, maybe should read, for starters: Steiner’s “Spiritual Science and Medicine” (20 plus lectures).  I read it twice.  Also Schad’s “Man and Mammals: toward a biology of form” - Goethean science  - read that three times.  “Olive Whicher’s Projective Geometry: creative polarities in space and time”. Need to make some drawings there.  Also the novel: “The Memory of Whiteness”, by Robinson.  Its about physics and music, and the Ten Forms of Change: retrogradation; inversion; retrograde inversion;  augmentation; dimunition; inclusion; textural; partition; interversion; and exclusion.

Spiritual Science and Medicine, and Man and Mammals, gets you thinking about polarities, and the human form as a kind of phenomenal expression of certain living laws, while Projective Geometry trains the imagination in its capacity to recreate the complexities of living form in movement over time, and through space, in a very precise and exact fashion.  The Ten Forms of Change helps with appreciating the musical nature of the movements in the astral body as they effect the ethereal or life body and from there changes in living form. 

The “I” inserts its moral ideas into the astral body, and those come to expression in various kinds of “lawful” ways.  In a way, thinking becomes kind of sensitive to the ongoing processes of transformations that appears in the “social”, and how the laws of the astral body, which we all share, can be discovered to be expressed in something like the way a family or a small community, generates and shares certain language conventions, which conventions in turn express the common meanings of existence.

For example, one can learn to see that in the “tension” between the “centers” in the anthroposophical society, and the “periphery”, an involution (from Projective Geometry) wants to take place, with the center and the periphery turning “inside/out”, or changing places, as it were.  By holding rigidly to the traditional, the more and more sclerotic center weakens the whole, and while this is basically a micro-threefolding issue, it begins to explain how the different cults of personality (Prokofieff, Ben-Aharon, von-Halle etc.)  weaken the whole that the Society wants to be, leading to either death, or, a rather cancer-like metamorphosis.  As long as we have no language for these living social tensions, they will thrive in the unconscious, drifting over into law suits and such, because no one really knows how to resolve the situation unless one side is favored over the other, when the healthy thing is to let the desired differentiation take its course.  Were we to trust the situation, and appreciate that the social form strives naturally for health - for balance and harmony, we would treat social conditions in the same way a healthy immune system in the individual human being needs certain types of “nutrition” for support.

At some point we need to notice that Social processes can be understood better in we use health and disease metaphors, from Medicine, rather than frame the situation as if this one has the right ideas, and that one has the wrong ideas.  In the latter case, the double makes trouble, and we remain asleep.  Holders of power love holding power.  Those given the frequent flyer miles to lecture all over the world, start to think they are smarter than the poor sod who had to stay home, and learns his understanding of the social from what happens in his garden, or school classroom.

Just some hints ...

Introduction ... 1.1.2  Some quotes from Robinson’s “The Memory of Whiteness”,  where the poetic imagination of a science “fiction” writer is given free play:

[extracts from the same two pages, in the order written]

“... the structure of thinking and the structure of reality have an actual correspondence ...”

“...the shortest events were all the same - he called them glints, ... basic forms of change described in symbolic logic."

“ occurred chiefly in the sixth through tenth dimensions - where particles per se had disappeared entirely.”

“So with quantum mechanics fitting inside Holywelkins’[*] more comprehensive physics, what do the equations describe?  Very short-lived events, in waves with certain characteristics of form, amplitude, and frequency, changing by inversion, retrogradiation, et cetera ...” [*substitute the author ‘s name, Robinson, for Holywelkins here]

“Like music!”

“Exactly.  We exist in the middle world.  The universe is about ten to the fortieth times bigger than us, and glints are about ten to the fortieth times smaller than us.  That strikes me as suspicious and I suspect it may be an artifact of our perceptual limits.”

[about 12 pages later, at the end of the relevant chapter]

“A music leads the mind through the starry night
And the brain must expand to contain the flight
Like a tree growing branches at the speed of light”

Introduction ... 1.1.3  the Idea of a Social Form: an example  (from about the middle of my article on the Culmination (

It will be helpful here then to appreciate what the living thinking - the Rising of the Sun in the Mind - can make of the social form: the Corporation.   That story reveals much, and is an archetype of the whole.  To do this we follow Goethe, and simply describe the changes in form (the leaves of the plant for Goethe) over time.  What is below, however, has to be mostly conclusions, for the actual details would be far too many.

All social forms are living in one sense or another, their essential parts in all cases being living human beings. These forms are born and then die - perhaps even reproduce or undergo metamorphosis.  Many modern social forms are remnants of Third Cultural Epoch hierarchical social forms, where decisions are made at the top, which the bottom carries out.  Those forms were “normal” at the time of Ancient Egypt, for example.  The knowledge in the Mysteries practiced within the Third Epoch hierarchical social forms enabled a kind of divine order to inhabit ancient cultures from top to bottom.

In the Fourth Epoch these forms matured, and then aged, in such institutions as the Roman Church, and still had a more or less pragmatically useful and good social purpose for a while.  But everything after a time outlives its utility, and so with the dawn of the Fifth Cultural Epoch, the needs of the Evolution of Consciousness could no longer be easily satisfied by strictly hierarchical social forms, witness the failure of such efforts to rule the Russian People through Stalinist communism, or to rule the German People through the Third Reich, or even the deterioration of the great Universities and their eventual domination by money and politics in recent times. 

The early stages of the  Epoch of the Consciousness or Spiritual Soul saw the end of the aristocracies of blood, to be replaced, at  least outwardly, by Western style democratically ruled Nation States, although behind the scenes the aristocracies of blood were often succeeded by, and incorporated into, aristocracies of wealth.  Even the very ancient Third Epoch rooted theocracy of Tibet was not to continue, and was unseated by the Chinese in 1949, scattering that culture all over the world.  The needs of the Epoch of the Consciousness Soul were not to be denied. and such events as the Chinese invasion of Tibet merely a tool to pry loose from its mountain vastnesses a well simmered stew pot of wisdom that the world’s cultures needed to be able to imbibe.

Likewise with the business Corporation.  It is one "type" of a natural organism in our social ecology, and it serves many purposes, for Christ and His aides multi-task on a level we can hardly imagine.  There are other "types", such as institutional religions, educational institutions, political parties and so forth.  The general social phenomenology of the business Corporation is repeated elsewhere.

Originally a corporation was a social form for doing business.  The needs of the blossoming so-called market forces, as the embryonic Economic Life emerged more strongly in the 17th and 18th Centuries, invented stock companies, which were in the beginning strictly regulated by the instinctive Rights Sphere.  But as wealth accumulated in corporations and in the families that sought to rule them (think of the Rothschilds in banking, the Rockefellers in oil and banking and so forth), the influence of wealth on this instinctive Rights Life led to the corporation becoming more and more unregulated.

Corporations (again as a living social form) then became multinational ... that is they became more and more emancipated from any restraints by the Nation States.  All this driven from within by the cold and calculating use of the abstract cause and effect thinking of the intellect, led by the influence in the soul of the ahrimanic aspect of the Double.  Whereas in the early years, the individual ego forces of the heads of most corporate hierarchies were able to guide the corporation, the inward nature of this social form began to develop an amorphous and ego-less independent of leadership corporate culture.  If you entered into this hierarchical form, the inner social forces began to drive the individual toward conformance and obedience to the emerging dominance of particular corporate cultures (Ways).  These social forces sought to separate the individual ego from being able to apply the influence of the conscience to all significant business decisions (see the movies: Margin Call and Too Big to Fail).

At the same time, smaller more intimate corporations do not succumb so easily to this loss of an ego presence at the tops of their inner hierarchy.  This change in the corporation we are describing comes most often as an effect of scale, or a kind of excess of growth - a kind of inner social cancer as the corporate culture (Way) outgrows its principle leaders' ability to control. 

As this tendency develops, the individual members of the upper hierarchies of the large institutional corporate world also become easily replaceable and interchangeable, and the “culture” itself begins to rule free of any human interference.  Imagine, for example, a Zen Temple with no living teachers, only the doctrine and the perpetuation of the doctrine starts to matter.  This is also true of many institutional religions - as social forms dominated by their Way in the absence of living teachers.  Like a cancer, this growing independent corporate culture frees itself of the human forces of warmth - it is a cold social disease.  This culture is a social environment which values the cold and calculated intellect above all else, and also becomes a kind of social growth medium in which sociopathic and certain aspergers personality types easily succeed, because of the absence of conscience and empathy in their soul life.  This then eventually produces types of corporate cultures (Ways) as lives in and dominates such as Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, and Halliburton.  The individual no longer truly decides, ... only the conscienceless ego-less corporate “culture” rules.

We might go so far as to suggest that while these cancerous corporate cultures, individually exclude human ego forces, collectively their ego is to be Ahriman, the Father of Lies, who is presently incarnate (see my book American Anthroposophy for details).

Everywhere we see the dark empty soul of these ego-free spirit-free corporate cultures, which Eisenhower observed in his farewell address in 1960, and called collectively, because of the ease of their cooperation and similar goals: the military-industrial complex.  Eisenhower, also in the same speech, noticed the loss of moral sanity in the Universities as well, due to his observations of their succumbing to the influence of money over ideas.

The influence of the Ahrimanic Enchantment on social life is seeking to leave behind a social-form “body” without a heart - a body that can survive the social chaos which is falling upon us even now, during the birth of the Third Millennium.  Nation States are simultaneously losing any power and social control, they may previously have held, over these multinational more and more half-dead social forms of distinct corporate cultural entities - purely ahrimanic in outlook and influence, and capable of surviving well into the Third Millennium, by acquiring private armies, and creating their own intelligence networks and individual versions of “foreign policy”. 

Simultaneously there emerges socially the NGO, the non-governmental organization.  What Ahriman wants to leave behind in the Third Millennium has a counter-pole where the “not I but Christ in me” in the NGO creates an alternative and warmer social order.  At the level of the social commons vast changes are also in play.

That this slow moving social-spasm of dynamic historical changes occurs at the same time as what we are calling Climate Change, is not an accident.  Weather and moral life are linked, in part because the separation that we fancy exists, between any discrete object of perception and another, is not real.  Everything is interconnected - everything.

Introduction 1.1.4 (written, but not published, to Facebook)

It is a poor workman that doesn’t appreciate his own skills.  Who would want car mechanic who pretended, out of false humility, that he probably wasn’t going to do a good job?  Or a neurosurgeon, for that matter. 

Now I could say Jeff says “that” and ECC says “this”, and both (from my point of view) haven’t said anything useful in relationship to that about which I was writing - yet, who knows maybe they were not writing to me, but to some imagined me, or some imagined person.

The main flaw (which is not a flaw) is that I was writing about a subject neither of these two are qualified to comment upon, but for sure they needed to have reasons to comment anyway.  So, it was important that they find a reason, otherwise what is the point of them commenting.  As a result I am commenting on the fact of their commenting, while not commenting on what they actually said, given that they really weren’t commenting on what I actually said (or so it appeared to me).  This is the silly part.

I write the above NOW, because for sure Jeff and ECC will find further reasons to comment on my materials concerning: Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (we’ve only seen the first of twelve - so sorry to clog up your browser space folks, but you don’t have to read what I write, or make silly and/or goofy (illogical) comments, just to comment.  Its sort of like going uninvited into a class room where other people are perhaps receiving a poorly given lecture, from a not very good lecturer, in a field in which he is ill equipped to teach anyway. 

That being the case, then who can blame them (Jeff and ECC_ for the bad “lecture” was being given within eye-shot, and as we all know the whole purpose of this Facebook vector-noise accumulator is to provide empty spaces for bored people to add their two-bits.  This is especially crucial if those commenting have issues already with the subject whose “lecture” they wish to interrupt and re-interpret.

As a consequence, I will be ignoring further comments from either of them, or any others, when they refuse to approach the ground (or territory) that I writing concerning.  Not all are doing this, and those who are doing this - have fun folks but you are wasting your breath.  Sticks and stones etc.  Anyone is certainly welcome to comment on the social science aspects, or the spiritual aspects as related to acquiring socially scientific knowledge, but commenting on “me” instead of the subject matter, however cleverly done, remains ad hominem

Introduction 1.1.5

The individual biography includes a complex of spiritually intimate relationships.  These are six-fold in nature (to simplify).  There is a lower threefoldness: ahrimanic double or prosecutor; luciferic double of tempter; and the human double (or the community of egregores -  psychic parasites, residing in the astral body).  The upper level threefoldness is the higher ego or conscience; the individual guardian angel; and the inspiration from the holy spirit.

Disciplined self-observation can distinguish these influences, through their effects on the I.  For naive consciousness this is all very normal and is usually experienced as movements of inner conflict or inner support, as the astral body reacts the intimate spiritual content mediated by this six “sources”.

In addition, because four of these sources are parts of communities, they can operate in concert.  For example, when our angel is unable to get our attention, the angel of someone near to us may inspire them to provide us what is needed.  Sometimes, when there needs to be opposition to some activity in which we are to engage, or are engaged, the ahrimanic community cooperates such that our internal doubt can be on occasion supported by external doubt.

When this happens another person will, by giving into the own unconscious relationship with their ahrimanic double, feel a need to pass on to us doubts which they have, but which they feel they want to share.  We can be a community of people who have shared biographies, and among whom circulate common doubts, fears, temptations and so forth, including gestures of positive spiritual reinforcement.  Couples will find themselves having an experience that seems as if they are having the same thoughts.

A riot is a kind of mass overpowering of the influence of the higher I of each individual member, by the shared passions of an inflamed social moment.  A guru, or other kind of leader, (because of this phenomena) can create a kind of mass hypnosis, that then results in the formation of numerous psychic parasites or egregores.  The theory of memes is an effort to notice the related phenomena, without appreciating the spiritual dimension, and thus falsely assuming all the transfered feelings, thoughts and emotions are being transmitted in the social only.

Even in this venue, the ahrimanic aspect of one participant may overflow into the situation of another participant in the form of actions which create self doubt.  That particular tendency is increased by our false assumption that “conversations” take place here.  Yet, in a real time face to face conversation, none of the style of dialogue that take place here would, arise, because in the physical/social all are present and have the effect of a mutual awakening.   “Mouth to ear” was the way the ancient teachers gave out spiritual knowledge.  Reducing spiritual knowledge to words on a page, even here, is a kind of weakness, because the necessary social feedback loops are not available.

This is why, for a genuine spiritual social science, large scale social processes cannot be understood without tracing the “history” or development of Media resources over time.  A brief peek at a long discussion, from my: Waking the Sleeping Giant: the mission of Anthroposophy in America:  It was written in 1995, so is 20 years out of date, but the reader should be able to fill in blanks of the rapid changes now producing social media, and the relationship of all this to such events as the Arab Spring.

“This is how then the dynamics of the polarity, State-People, come to form the needed middle element. Now Media, in the sense conceived here, is not a static thing, but rather an evolving and developing process. The technological achievement of the printing press is just the beginning of a whole series of inventions which ultimately produce radio, television, cable, VCR’s, fax machines, computers and so forth. The series is not finished. The interconnecting of home computers via the Internet reveals that the knowledge commons is about to become an electronic commons (Illich’s initial formulation).

“Consider this picture. The coming into being of print media constitutes a kind of rigidification of the dynamic qualities of the word as those facilitate mutual understanding. As Media further develops, it passes from print form to image form, i.e. television. Television, in that it provides our consciousness with images, puts to sleep that part of our cognitive processes which fills out the word with our own imaginations. This further weakens political life (continuing the social dynamics leading to the death of Western civilization), by disabling our thinking faculty at the moment it is most needed to be awake in order to “render” its civic responsibilities.

“But the technical evolution of Media is not over. Close observation reveals that advertising dominated television is losing its grip, and being replaced with cable services and the possibility of self chosen viewing, the VCR. Parallel to this is the weaving of the Web, the interconnecting of individuals via the computer networks. Electronic media is being less image oriented, and is now interactive; i.e. the word is again becoming significant.”

Introduction 1.1.6 (written but not posted)

“All phenomena are a kind of infinite madness. ‘Experience’ itself is utterly unfathomable. This is not the confession of a bewildered, conventionally ignorant and separative daily awareness — it is livingly penetrated cognition, which expresses Itself in terms of paradoxes and living ignorance, in terms of no-‘knowledge’, no fixed ‘self’, no fixations of presumption based on ‘experience’ or the ‘lie of illusion’. Curiously, from this living cognition, all phenomena continue to arise, evolve and fade away. In fact, great energy is released in that cognition, so that more phenomena than you might previously have been capable of tolerating may begin to arise. All kinds of appearances, strange coincidences, mysterious happenings, visions, dreams, psychisms — all kinds of things begin to arise. But, if you persist in the Philosophy of Freedom, the things that arise do not support the conventional ‘point of view’ of the first 42 years of life. They are transcended as they arise. Thus, ‘experiences’ in themselves do not amount to a description of reality. They are nothing but possibility, nothing but a moment of infinite flowing that has neither center nor bounds. Real cognition is ‘Craziness’. The Truth is ‘Craziness’, ‘Madness’ — not the psychosis of the fearful, ‘self’-bound lower ego but the ‘Madness’ of the creative Logos. In that sphere, all the dogmas of human existence — waking, dreaming, and sleeping — are penetrated fully. Truly, there is nothing to say in that case.”

Attributed to Rudolf Steiner by Jeff Falzone, no source yet given.  Thus no context.  Why Jeff posted it is uncertain - he did not offer any connection to anything else, even when asked. I asked a friend about this and he said: “If this is Steiner it sounds very informal, like a private conversation or a liberal translation. Maybe it isn’t published in English.”

The key phrase is probably this: “ ‘experiences’ in themselves “  Has anyone ever had one of these?  Experience without cognition?  Yet, the word “experience” exists in our languages and Steiner made a very big deal of this in his A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception.  He even went so far as to title one section: “Thinking as a Higher Experience within Experience”

Owen Barfield, someone who seems to have understood Steiner in this realm very well, called that work: “The least read, most important book, Steiner ever wrote.”.

Jeff points to something which he labels (apparently after Steiner): the pure percept.  Odd, however, given that the term percept seems to refer to something independent of us that we perceive.  Is there a content to “experience”?  I’m looking at my computer monitor as I write this, and my act of typing magically makes these codes we call letters march across the page.  Is there a there there that my “eye” experiences?  Will the reader of this have an experience?  Or is the only there there the consciousness that reads this?

A poem: the gift of the word

Speech, / Words, letters, sounds, / heard by both the inner ear and the outer.
Letters, sounds, words, / linked invisibly to ideas and thoughts.
Ideas, thoughts, letters, sounds, words, / a woven tapestry of meaning,
carried by Speech, / sometimes with grace, / but most often just carelessly.
Meaning, / a weaving of thoughts, sounds, words, letters and ideas,
spoken into the air and left there, / abandoned.
Words, spoken and heard. / Meaning intended. / But what is heard?
That which is heard is also intended. / Two intentions, two purposes, two meanings.
How difficult then communication, / suffering as it does the contrary pulls of multiple intentions, purposes and meanings.
I speak, you listen. / I mean, you grasp. / Somewhere in this delicate dance of words, sounds, letters, thoughts, ideas and purposes; / understanding is sought after.
Perhaps. / Sometimes.
Voice. / Speech reveals the unspoken. / Anger, fear, pride, arrogance, true humility.
The ear of the heart hears what is hidden in voice.
Posture, gesture. / Speech is more than sound. / The eye hears things the ear cannot, just as the ear sees things the eye cannot.
One mind. / Two minds. / Speech a bridge of woven light between two minds, and sometimes, although rarely, / between two hearts.
Speech, rich and full of flavor, / a light bridge, / joining two separate beings.
Speech denatured, / No sound, no gesture, no posture, no voice.
Speech reduced to lines of dark on light. / Written. / A treasure map in code spilled across a page
Words, letters, ideas, thoughts, sounds, / reduced to marks upon a parchment. / Speech dying.
Yet, / even in death, murdered by pen or pencil mark, / some essence of Speech still.
Meaning embalmed. Understanding buried. / Until read.
Reading. / Words, sounds, letters, thoughts, ideas, meaning, purposes, intentions,
Speech resurrected in the silence of another mind.
Speech. / Light bridge dying into print, / reborn when read in the inner quiet of another soul.
Speech, / The Spoken Word. / Writing, / The Word entombed. / Writing read, / The Word resurrected.
That this is so, / that human beings live in such an exalted state having Speech, this is Grace.
The spoken word, the written word. / Things so ordinary, so taken for granted, so pregnant with possibility.
The emptiness between two souls is always / chaste, virgin, pure, / waiting for Grace, for the bridge of light, / for Speech.

The Gift of the Word, originally called Speech, was written on
Epiphany, Jan. 6, 1997, in the evening, in about a third of an hour.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Two)

It may, to some, appear to be an odd place to start, ... in the middle of my Path, so to speak.  For what I write of next I didn’t at the beginning understand:

The central importance of Love to any act of Knowledge. 

In order for the idea living in the object of  knowledge to draw near enough to be perceived by the act of cognition, which is a creative act, we must love that object which we seek to know.  We can have an interesting discussion of the act of cognition, or of what and how “ideas” arise, but in spite of our epistemological beliefs/philosophy, the fact remains that for there to be a “generative” act in cognition, its root must be the intention to the love the object of thought.

This is true in all fields of knowledge, even Art, and the failure to practice this is what hobbles and lames most thinking that tries to take hold of the social-political life of humanity.  Love in this instance is neither antipathetic or sympathetic.  Liking or not-liking the object of knowledge only leads to confusion.

This is so because the liking or not-liking is an instinctive feeling that arises in the own soul.  Following their lead we arrive at conceptions and ideas that are ghosts, standing in between our acts of cognition and the object concerning which we seek knowledge.  In surrendering to feelings of liking or not-liking we end up only seeing ourselves - our own souls, not the object of knowledge.

Again, if we take a kind of interesting side-road into the region of whether or not the object of knowledge is something separate from ourselves, we begin by being in denial of our own experience in this Age.  Separateness is built into the modern human consciousness, and to have a theory that it can be otherwise is just another way to blind the act of knowledge.  Learning to Love the object of knowledge is part of the Path by which that separation is to be overcome.

In point of fact, to practice this art - this love of the object of knowledge - is to discover a special kind of freedom.  While there is more that could be said, much of it playing in sterile fields of philosophical speculation, this naked fact can be confirmed by anyone: If I authentically love the object of knowledge, it will withhold none of its secrets.

That said, we have yet to understand what it does mean to love, especially when the object of knowledge is the social-political world of humanity - a world where most of us are certain there is expressed a great deal of evil.

Looking back over my own practice of at least three decades, I could see that my thinking, in its qualitative nature had developed along this line: thinking-about; thinking-with; thinking-within; and thinking-as.  I could see here how the “gap” between the object of thinking, and my own I, narrowed over time.  The whole adventure could only be practiced in the natural sequence of moments and becomes then a learned skill, craft and the art.  My first essay reflecting on this process, is the second essay in Living Thinking in Action (  “In Joyous Celebration of the Soul Art and Music of Discipleship.”

To make this a bit concrete, consider the term “America” which is used in all kinds of contexts and with many different (often conflicting) meanings.  How do we “think” America?  Most ordinary thinking is “about”, which deals with America as a construct of an ideology.  If you are Muslim, you might well “think” America is the Great Satan.  If we wish to go beyond that type of antipathetic judgment, we can try to think-with America, by telling her “story”.  We set aside the judgment, even a sympathetic one - we sacrifice the instinctive feeling. When was She born?  Under what circumstances?  How does this social-form/nation-state do today? Has it changed?

If we want to think-within, we have to ask whether there is anything transcendent here.  Has the Genius of History created something, and for what purpose?  We don’t just think-with, and tell the story from Her point of view, but we also include the context - that what others have done and are doing, for in their actions and thoughts there is a viable “in"sight into who and what America is.  To think-within, we sacrifice (renounce) pre-conceptions - the mind must empty out.

So I write this way: We are the People of Peoples.  We are the errant adolescent child of the world, bearing all the worlds weakness, and virtues in one (Out of many, one; E Pluribus Unum).  The world is our Father and Mother.  The world is also a scene of great social chaos and change, and as the World Economy came to be, given the already existing differences among various peoples, it seems quite predictable that at a certain point in time one would dominate.  Not because it ought to dominate, but simple because of the soul forces driving the evolution of consciousness, social wealth and power aggregates and concentrates in “centers”.

To think-as, we have to sacrifice our “self”.  We aren’t there, and it comes to think in me (as Steiner puts it), or we practice “thinking on our knees” as Tomberg put it.  Then we find America poised between Heaven and Earth, - a region of spiritual existence with Christ Above and the Holy Mother Below.  America is a Being.

What then are Americans?

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part 2.1.1) Love and thinking-with and thinking-within ....

Sometimes when I think of what it might be like to be someone else, I am surprised by the thoughts. Recently I saw a bit of a quote from a Steiner lecture where he warned about the future dangers of an excess of intellectualism. This is what I wrote:

I sometimes picture Steiner, at a lecturn, or just free standing (maybe he sat in chairs too), ... the audience is quiet, their attention rapt.

Does he have visions of spirits floating over the audience? Does he see elemental beings, or auras? Is the room full of colors none of the rest of us see?

Here people sit, who are already experiencing the darkening of souls. Lost already in the intellect. Maybe a few are even fully awake, their crown chakra open to inspiration. Some frown in concentration unable to follow him, others sleep, not really interested, but only there because for social reasons they want time with the great master.

He starts as he always does, with simple statements rooted in the basic books, linking one thought to another, laying the ground work for the themes that live in him just that day from his own meditation. Perhaps he has sees the fires of spirit shift, and move, first for this one and then that. Their attention grows, or dies. He shifts his words, perhaps his tone of voice, or his gestures.

The colors move, and like a kind and loving teacher that he is, he conducts the colors he sees, knowing that they must above all be free. The colors and forms hover, move forward, retreat, rise, fall, change, glow, darken, ... he is a conductor at a symphony, where each player of their own instrument deserves their fates, and he can do little to change the courses of life to which they cling.

But, he must try. He has been given a gift and he must try.

So, he tried to stop the keeping of the records of his lectures, knowing few would understand them. Knowing we - his future karmic brothers and sisters would wound ourselves by making rigid rules of the most inadequate comments. The intellect he tried to keep at bay was in the room with him, and he was a friend of the Sun trying to hold back an avalanche of Ahriman’s influence covering over the German Spirit and drowning It in the ashes of dead and dying thoughts.

And, in spite of the Burning of the Goetheanum, of the ongoing and coming betrayals, of the failures everywhere, including his own, he never ever gave up. Nor has he yet.

Introduction: 2.1.2:  Clair-thinking, or the Rising of the Sun in the Mind:

This isn’t like going to a grocery store or a library, and wandering around picking and choosing what-evers.  The chief feature is moral in nature: the Good.  As a consequence, what we might or might not get to know is governed by a kind of Art.  Just because you believe you want to know who the current incarnation of the Future Maitreya Buddha is, doesn’t mean you get to know it.

A central element of this Art is need.  Not our need, but what I call “other-need”.   That’s were love fits it.  Love isn’t about us, ... its about others.  The mother needing to know something important for the immediate care of her child is not denied that knowledge, whether or not they are a certain religion, or even if they are fallen and fighting with drug addiction.  The core of it Christ called: Ask, seek and knock. 

As in a lot of form-structures that come into existence, there is a kind of threefoldness.  Tomberg wrote of the Lover, the Beloved, and the Love that arises between them.  So we are the Lover, and then there is the object of knowledge - or the Beloved “other” we seek to care for and know, and these two are joined by Him (or a representative) - that is, Love joins the Lover and the Beloved into a unity.  “Wherever two or more ... “.

This “love in between”, I first became mostly aware of in my spiritual social science research work.  Through 1988 to and including 1996, about ten years altogether, I worked on the grave-yard shift of a for-profit psychiatric facility.  When I had moments or opportunities to have questions, and to think about the social-political world, I did.  I acquired certain habits.  I always carried with me 3x5 ruled note-cards and a pen, a copy of the U.S. Constitution (which included the Declaration etc.), and a small pocket Bible: the Psalms and the New Testament.

So I might be “thinking” about something in the mysteries of the social, and there would be this “feeling”, - which I later started calling: “other-presence”.  As I grew into this (over more than a decade) I called it: “the delicate and subtle presence of Fullness and fullness of Presence”. When my asking, seeking and knocking then led to the potential for deeper thoughts (understandings or knowledge) about the social-political, I would have this “feeling” of not being alone in my mind.  Even if I was driving, I would pull over and make notes on the cards I always had with me, of the then present thought-stream.

The same phenomena was available in the social - the person to person moral life, but this involved other nuances I will not go into here.  Occasionally I would look back (review) my inner biography, and became, through reflection, more awake (and write about) those inner skills and crafts I was learning to use.  Details are in the collection of essays: Sacramental Thinking.

Eventually I had to confront my Double, and my own version of the abstract intellect, which I must sadly report does not go away.  These are features of the boundary condition (the threshold) between my own I (spirit) and the world of the invisible beings - some presentments of which we might call: Ideas.  The surest guidance comes from the feeling-in-thinking element described above (the participation of other-presence), while at the same time it is crucial, through practice and experience, to appreciate the role of the intention (or the why) and the attention (or the what) - that is, of my own self-conscious willing-in-thinking.  The self-conscious choices of why and what are the How or method.  Then arises the Content - the “what”, being Being, opens itself to us, and begins to reveal its secrets.

The core element of the feeling-in-thinking aspect is our own will to surrender, or sacrifice, or practice renunciation, as the situation facing the thinking requires.  That’s when the Sun rises in the Mind - that is, when thinking becomes perception (clair-thinking) because it shines a light into and through the darkness of the threshold.  At this point - the arising of the own Sun in the Mind, the darkness (the double and the unbound intellect) is no longer able to take hold of it.  Then we experience true spiritual freedom.

Picture Steiner in his room with his notebooks, sitting in a chair.  No outer-world doing is demanding his attention.  He explores a subject that he cares about, and records the thought-content, that falls out of his inner encounters, into words on the pages of the note books.  In a poetic manner he composes this content, stretching the natural elasticity of the German language.  I suspect, like Mozart, there are no strike-overs, no erasures.  In that quiet room, Steiner and the Michaelic Cosmic Wisdom are united.

Yet, he has to write books and give lectures.  Mouth to ear - the true standard for the teachings of the spirit - is only available in private conversations.  For his public life he has to murder, even crucify, what the Sun in his Mind perceived, by entombing it in words, a subject he spoke of often - noting how weak language was for the conveying of what he experienced in the spirit.

We don’t get what Mozart brought by reading the notes on the sheets of music.  Those near-mathematical formulas are only realized when the Opera is performed.  The same with Steiner.  Anthroposophy is not on the pages of a book, even in the German, and certainly not in the words moved from German into some other language.  Anthroposophy must be “performed”, and we are to be the performers.

Outside my window, as I write these words, the first true snow of the coming Winter is falling.  A half-foot is predicted.  The snow began as a kind of lazy dance, just a few little ice angels floating earthward in spirals.  The trees and ground are receiving this gift, and in a slowly accelerating passion, a coating of falling whiteness changes the whole color of the air. 

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving.  In the living room are my lady and her two daughters.  The 96 year old grandmother watches TV in her day-room with a respite care giver, who has been with the family for years.  The laughter of women resounds through the house.  A birthday is to be celebrated today.  A chocolate cake sits on the kitchen table.

On my TV, the apologists of the recent and ongoing Brown-Wilson Ferguson riots argue the good and the true.  They are all of them right and they are all of them wrong - the truth is not to be had, and each believes they do the good.  I have the sound off, and listen to the snow.  The silences of Nature are such a grace.  For that gift, I am very grateful.

Introduction: 2.1.3  The difference between “political correctness” and the “social conscience”, in the light of the wide scale events related to recent happenings in Ferguson Missouri:

On the macro-scale of social phenomena, we can find active processes that suggest that there is a kind of wise intelligence in the living social body which is characteristic of large groups of people.  Even the Catholic Church recognizes that a source of moral “authority” can be found in the Body of Christ - the people of the Church.  See 1 Corinthians 12-31.

Here is something I wrote in Uncommon Sense: the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political Life in America:

“Now within these natural divisions there were certain tensions that went all the way back to the original framers of the Constitution.  One significant question was: Do we have a strong federal government, or do we have a weak central government, with most of the true power in the States.  For a long time there was a lot of well reasoned virtue in the idea of State’s Rights, of which the beginning considerations of Barry Goldwater’s “Conscience of a Conservative” gives a decent explication (the later chapters are falsified by his ideological tendencies).  The problem was that social progress was being held back within the States by this assertion of weak powers for the central government.    So for example, first slavery, and then segregation was justified as a matter for the States alone.

“There then came a time when the majority of Americans could not any longer tolerate this intolerance, and while State’s Rights were valid in the sense of the original ideas of the framers, the whole Society needed a more cogent moral center, and the only way for this to happen was for Federal powers to be expanded.  In a similar way, during the first half of the 20th Century, the use of police powers was often excessive with regard to the poor and weak, so that the same social conscience appeared for a time in the Warren Court  (e.g. Brown v. Board of Education, and Miranda v. Arizona).

“In these examples we can see an important general underlying social law (not an ideological principle, but how societies actually work).  Societies will progress in spite of the rules and ideals which were honored in the past.  While there is law and order on one hand, there is also the will of the People and their interest in social justice on the other; and, this will for social justice is stronger than law and tradition.  Law and tradition would have made the colonies remain allied to England, but social justice - the conscience of the People - required something else.  And, when the resistance to social justice by those in power is too strong, violent revolutionary change becomes necessary.

“Even today, where the Lords of Finance work behind the scenes in all manner of ways to exert social control and manage large populations of people, the force of conscience for social justice is stronger.  In a great sense, violence in a society on any large scale connected to social justice is always the fault of those in power, who prefer to cling to their privileges rather than admit to the wiser will of the social conscience.

“What does this mean for the future?

“Well for one thing it means we are on the cusp of considerable danger.  The more the central authority tightens the screws of social control, the more injustice they will create.  The more injustice is created, the stronger will have to be the response of the social conscience.”

We see the operation of the social conscience today in the events spreading out after the decision in Ferguson to keep the power centralized in the authority of the local prosecutor, and in the governor of Missouri. 

This “collective” social judgment - the social conscience - can be distinguished from “political correctness” which appears in the Paula Dean case, where the TV performer was socially chastised for comments she said about members of a certain race.  This political correctness process is akin to something that we observe on a smaller scale, where gossips in a community pick on a single individual, while at the same time these gossips put nothing at risk.  They do not riot, or destroy property in their own community, nor does their activity lead to an advancement of social justice.  “Political correctness” is a kind of abstract intellectual judgment, done at a distance, in which the ones judging are often not even clearly identified.

The crucial aspect is “personal risk”.  Individuals risk life, limb and prison, while property rights become secondary to individual social needs.  In the fact that rioters seem very self-serving in their thefts of property, we are seeing something that is not unlike the release of excess “steam-pressure” from a release valve in a steam engine.   The “passion” for social justice has to go someplace, so tables are over-turned and the “money changers” effects are bodily removed.

Another historical example of the “social conscience” in America is the labor struggles at the beginning of the 20th Century, which then led to changes in the law regarding child labor, working hours, and other considerations of the “right”, or the good way that workers should be treated.  The traditional authorities had not kept up with the views of the social body as regards what is “right” to do.

Rudolf Steiner pointed out how, among English speaking peoples, the Consciousness Soul (the pursuit of the good and the true) appears instinctively in the Life of Rights (see: The Challenge of the Times).  While explosions of anger are often criticized, we are reminded of Christ throwing the money changers out of the Temple.

The underlying social “source" is the evolution of consciousness, which the Steiner lectures collected under the title: From Symptom to Reality in Modern History, explicate in detail.  A soul-spiritual current from beneath the surface of events rises up and moves through events for a time, conforming the shape of  history to met its needs.  In the Ferguson related events we are seeing this process in action.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Three) Love.  Many qualities and characteristics.  What lies at its heart?

Forgiveness.  Just conceive of how things would be if Christ and the Holy Mother actually were the angry Gods of yore, and did not Daily Forgive us.  So Christ teaches: Forgive us our trespasses ...

Everyone mostly gets what it can mean to love oneself.  Even to love another.  Yet, conflict is everywhere.  Antipathy and sympathy are everywhere.  Experience teaches that loving others is best nurtured by our learning to forgive ourselves.  Its easy to love someone who is nice and kind and does what we expect, but there are those who vex us, and these are the ones most important to love.

We know ourselves most intimately - more intimately than the “other” - the seemingly separate.  We know the evil that we do.  The harm we have caused.  The evil and harm we may yet do.  Can we forgive ourselves?  Christ, in the Sermon on the Mount, said: Judge not.  Again, ... judging seems the most natural thing we do.  It is almost as inherent in who we are as are the rhythms of the blood and of the respiration.

Do we judge the hurricane, or the tornado, or the tiger or even the Ebola virus?  We know they have an essential nature, but other human beings?  Do they have an essential nature for which they should not be judged? 

At the same time, to disavow our tendency to judge seems - perhaps - to be going too far.  What is lost if that aspect of who we are, which is so natural, is forgone?  Be true to yourself, say many sages.  But, ... we can justly counter, ... I am also that which does evil.  How can I be true to myself, and yet permit myself to be or do evil?

Rudolf Steiner tried to point out that existence contained many paradoxes - many contradictions that seem incompatible with each other.  “I am multitudes” wrote Walt Whitman in Song of Myself.

If we believe, as many do, that something Divine created the World, and ourselves, and all the various details, there is probably no greater paradox to existence than the co-existence of God, along side the presence of evil.   Convoluted logics have flourished in many places in order to try to smooth out this contradiction.

Sometimes paradoxes can be understood by appreciating that not everything exists within the same context.  You can’t grow a sea horse in a jar of peanut butter, can you?  Perhaps, that which to name or we decide is evil, only has that quality because of something we do, which quality is not inherent it its own being.  It is our judgment that sees evil.

What is the world?  What is the social-political world?  What does life and death have to do with all of this?  To create a Spiritual Social Science we first need good questions.  And an essential beginning question is what do we, with our capacity to label and judge the actions of others to be evil ... what do we as perceives of the darkness in the world contribute to our knowledge by perhaps not seeing the social-political world at all ... by perhaps only seeing our judgment, ... something we create and which does not exist in what we observe.

Again: "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us".  And, "Judge not, that ye be not judged.  For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.  And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?  Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?   Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye."

How do we see clearly the social-political world?

Introduction 3.1.1  A question that cannot, at this point, be any longer ignored is: Of what use is a Spiritual Social Science?  What do we do with it?   Knowledge of physics changes the world in which we live.  Should a Spiritual Social Science change the world?  How?  Why?

A key word above is “knowledge”.  Is there just one kind of knowledge?  Owen Barfield points to this problem in his book, Worlds Apart, where he has a character say:

“Every kind of knowledge, including science, is valuable. But all kinds of knowledge are not valuable in the same way, or for the same reason. There are many different kinds of knowledge, and one kind is the kind which we require to enable us to control our material environment and make it serve our purposes. You can call it knowledge of things if you like. But there is also another kind of knowledge - knowledge about man and about the values which make him man and the best way of preserving them; knowledge about his relationship to God and God’s creatures. The mistake you make - the mistake nearly everyone makes - is to assume that the first kind necessarily includes the second.”

So, is a Spiritual Social Science a science like physics?  What do we do with such a science?

In order to deal with this as we go forward in this Introduction to this kind of Science, I am going to try to deal with the situation using two concrete kinds of “social” problems.  We will take as a given that a “social” riddle is something quite different from a riddle in physics, although in passing we need to confess that a great many people can’t yet make this kind of distinction.  The two kinds of problems I am going to be working with are: 1) the political life of America; and, 2) the social developmental life of the Anthroposophical Society.  Most of those reading this will have some familiarity with these situations. 

I have written (and thought) extensively about both of these problems, for major aspects of my website are devoted to their discussion.  The titles I gave are not inconsequential:

Freely Thought America Politics  and Freely Thought Anthroposophy

What did I mean by the terms: “Freely Thought”?  I meant the kinds of thoughts and thinking that result from being able to see through (penetrate) the mythological confusion that surrounds the subject under discussion.  The terms from 2.1.2 above: The Rising of the Sun in the Mind, or clair-thinking, are an adequate way of describing what Freely Thought means.  As pointed out above, the central will-in-thinking aspect is to “love” the object of thought, which in this case is America on the one hand, and the Anthroposophical Society on the other.  Only love can lead to the revealing of the secrets of what lives within those social forms.

Here in this section 3. etc, we began by dealing with forgiveness and judging, or what otherwise arises in the own soul, which we recognize as sympathy and antipathy, or liking and disliking.  Recall Christ: Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

We are not, by the way, going throw out these instinctive feelings of liking and not-liking.  We have them because we need them.  Rather we are going to “refine” them.  It is an alchemical-like process, where we remove the lead in order to find the gold.  Since these feelings are ours, then the lead (the beam) is first discerned in ourselves.  Both instinctive liking and disliking contain lead, beneath which lives gold.

The first essential and required step is to learn to see the own “beam”.  That is not easy.  Not easy at all.

If, for example, we think of the government in Washington D.C. as “America”, then we might have arise within us an antipathy - we don’t like what that “America” does.  If we think of the Anthroposophical Society as a carrier of the work of Rudolf Steiner, who we admire, we might have then a lot of sympathy - we like what the Society does.

Sympathy and antipathy tend to live in two related “modes” of thinking: associative thinking, and comparative thinking.  So we “associate” Steiner with the Society, led by our instinctive feeling of sympathy; and, we compare what the government does with what we think it should do, and led then by our instinctive feeling of antipathy made a “judgment”.

The reader needs to “sit” with these comments, and intentionally work with them.  To look within, ... otherwise the real meaning will not be found.  The real meaning is not on these pages, but rather only in the Book of your own Soul.  Let me end this with a story from my own developmental experience.

My first intense encounters with the A. Society, happened when I moved to the Fair Oaks area of California, to get my eldest daughter into the Waldorf School there.  Rudolf Steiner College was also there, as was the Emerson Study Group, fostered by Carl Stegmann.  While I had to work and be a family man, as much as possible I immersed myself in the local “anthroposophical” social life.  Without going into details, I met a great deal I did not like.

After about three years I had to move away, further North, to the area around Mt. Shasta in California.  This area was a place of serious economic dysfunction, and I had after a while - just to have any kind of work at all - to work away (its a six hour drive) from my home and family there, and returned to Fair Oaks, to find employment as a gypsy house painter with a friend.

One day, about a month or so into my return, I felt the “urge” to go to the Steiner college campus, where I stumbled “accidentally” into a memorial celebration of a member of the A. Society that had recently died.  I had not known this person, but the main meeting room at the College (Philadelphia Hall) was filled with several dozen of folks who with which I had previously become acquainted.

Because of my “antipathies” and “sympathies”, I was experiencing a lot of “feelings”, while in that room, listening to people tell their tales of the life and meaning of this recently crossed-over person, and her relationship to the A. Society and the College.  I made a kind of prayer asking for understanding of these feelings, and was then immediately touched by an “other-presence”, which rightly or wrongly I assumed was this woman who had just died, and who had been drawn to our activities by the remembering memorial process.

With this “touch” I saw.  By the way, I don’t conceive of what she did as containing the images seen, but rather she felt my pain, touched me, and in this way became a kind of conduit to higher Beings.  Next is what I “saw”.

The A. Society was a collection of people who had two basically distinct relationships to that Society.  The majority of members and friends (perhaps four out of five), had a “sympathetic” relationship, which induced them to view the Society through a kind of golden haze, which haze was largely related to their somewhat mythological conceptions of the formative years of the Society in Central Europe, when Steiner was alive.  These folks did not see the present-day Society, except through the romantic/sympathetic mythological golden haze - their conceptions of the Society were derived from golden-past that they “associated” with the Society and its meaning.

The second group (one out of five), tended to look at the Society and felt antipathies - “felt” something was wrong.  They had formed conceptions in their souls, not of what they imagined the Society was, but rather of what they imagined the Society could be.  They compared the present day Society with that imagined conception of what it could be, and found the Society wanting.  Their thinking was “comparative”, and compared what they saw as the present-day “what-is” of the Society, with the future “what-it-might-be”.

This “impression” lived strongly in me, and when I wrote my book American Anthroposophy [] twenty years later, I devoted a Chapter to what I then had learned to call: the Martha Impulse and the Mary Impulse in the Society.  The Martha Impulse is to preserve, and the Mary Impulse is to innovate (this is an over- simplification - one should read the original text for details).  The title to that Chapter is: The Natural Transformation of the Anthroposophical Society in America, and it was written in the Season of Michaelmas 2007.

Introduction 3.1.3  Regarding “modesty” of intention:

It has been my experience that “support”, from higher worlds as regards ones research work, is enhanced by the cultivation of “modesty” of intention.  What do I seek to know?  How far do I expect my spiritual “reach” to be able to go?  Am I willing to “receive” what is offered and be content with that?

Intercourse with higher Beings has some qualities that are similar to a love affair.  We don’t seduce, and are not seduced.  If we are seduced, then that is the opponents.  We are cautious and straightforward.  Circumspect.  Patient.

Do we bring gifts?  Are we to be “romantic”?  What makes us worthy?

Discipline.  Doing the preparatory work.  We pay attention to the requirements of our ordinary life, and do not shun what that life needs.  We learn.

When this “attitude” has been applied to my main subjects of spiritual social research: America and the A. Society, some respect as regards those subjects was essential, for what is there (in America and the Society) is already “filled from within” by spiritual qualities related to various Beings.  This thought returns us to the need to love the object of knowledge, although love can encompass pain as well, for our beloved may have troubles and be in need.

Most of us “treat” these matters in our lives this way, already.  We care for our families.  We seek to do a good job.  It matters to us to be a good son, or father, or brother, or parent, or co-worker, or boss.  We serve, and perhaps come to understand that the basic gesture (captured in total in the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ) is “washing the feet”.

Why is this “service” important?  Because this quality is everywhere in higher Beings.  Steiner spoke of this in a beautiful way when he described: “mankind is the religion of the Gods.”  Our lover serves us and is devoted to us, and that “relationship” needs to be reciprocated.  

Oddly, the First of the Four Noble Truths of the Buddha is: “Life is suffering”.  Do the Gods serve us by making us suffer?

Or, do they serve us by loving and forgiving us, in spite of the suffering we inflict on each other and on ourselves.  The infamous inhumanity of man to man.

Are we honest with ourselves about who we are, and what we really do in this world?

A dozen years ago, I was in a mood of despair.  I was well aware of my failings.  Years of hopes and dreams unfulfilled.  Of course, that wasn’t all that I was, but it was a big part of what I was.  I was at the time in meditation and surrendered to this “feeling”.  Rather than run from it, I entered it.  My anguish deepened.  I was more and more acutely aware of all of us, of all of humanity, creating an endless stream of horror and troubles for ourselves and for each other. 

I was not playing a game, by the way.  This is not an “exercise”, but something quite real - this confession to being a cause of harm.

During my “descent”, as it were, I knew that all that we human beings did was also known to them - to Christ and the Holy Mother.  We had no secrets from our most profound lovers.  They knew us, and knew our deeds, and this intimately.  They were that much “with” us, that all that we did, all the horror of it, was open to Them, for that is how They were - They received into themselves all the terrible that there was.  Whether it was us suffering through the doing the of the awful deeds; and/or, the suffering of those who received the effects of our deeds - They knew it all.

In shame I cried out with my whole soul to Them: “How do it deal with this?  How do you receive and live in all this endless horror manifested by human beings?”

Then She spoke, in a voice like the most sublime Bell in tone - a pure resonating and all penetrating alto.  This is what She said: “We turn it into love”.   I was shattered by the power and depth of this Act.  It wasn’t just the words, for the words made me “see” as well.  At the same time I was comforted.  We were Loved.  All of us.  In spite of all the worst that we could do They transform our evil and suffering into Love.

Much later I wrote some lines in a poem:

“through the wounds of giving
went the evil, and inside
it lost its nature, for there a great
and holy power transformed
our darkest acts, until

“from out the eyes and mouth
of Feminine Mystery
came tears and words of love”

This is from a poem written on the anniversary of 9/11, in 2004, called: “a gift from another’s eyes”, which is collected in a little work of poems called: “the America Quartet”:

Introduction 3.1.4  The perceptive nature of the life of “feeling”:

Steiner describes the soul qualities this way: thinking is more conscious, feeling is less conscious - kind of like dreaming, and then willing is hardly conscious at all.  By “conscious” I believe he means: How intentional and awake to that soul activity can our spirit be.  Some of these differences may have to do with how our “soul” “reacts” to outer events.

For example, yesterday I watched a movie, Monsignor, that is about a man who is a priest during World War Two, and who has a compromised conscience.  He is used by someone in the Vatican to do certain tasks, and ends up running the Vatican Bank.

There was a scene at the end where the camera draws back, and we have a long shot of St. Peter’s Square, after knowing of the inner power struggles that the movie had portrayed.  I looked at the Stones of the Buildings, and “felt” them as being there while all the difficult moral trials of that place went on, somehow absorbing some characteristic or quality of these events.

This line then arose in mind: “And the Stones Wept”.  This small “idea” about the consciousness (or not) of the material reality, such as stones and rocks, and concrete buildings then unfolded in my thinking/dreaming soul over the next hours.  Do places remember? 

The Earth is old, ancient beyond number.  It comes into existence as part of the very first acts of the Creation, even if, as according to Steiner, the Saturn-Earth stage was just a body of warmth.  Of what was the Body really made?  The acts of cosmic Beings?  Do these “acts” linger and  have consciousness?  Do they remember?

In the Class Lessons, Steiner speaks of “fields” of thinking and feeling and willing - of our life on the Earth as existing in these “fields”  “Fields”, I used to suppose, like a magnetic or electrical “field”.  Or, today, are these “fields” of thinking, feeling, and willing something that arises because the Farmer has tilled the soil and planted there seeds.  Which metaphor do you, dear Reader, prefer.

When we go to sleep, again according to Steiner, the ego (or warmth body) and the astral (or desire body) separate from the life body and the physical body, and leave these latter two aspects of our organism in bed.  When we die, something similar is said to happen.  Ego, astral, and life bodies separate from the physical body, which goes on to decay - dust to dust.  But the life body has our memories and so our life passes before our eyes, as this life body dissolves into the general life “field” of the cosmos, planting the “memories” into the astral body, so that in the after-life we can work on what happened in that just lived life.

Our knowledge of natural science suggests that not only is matter and energy conserved, but consciousness may be “conserved” as well. 

I look out the window of my study, and the naked trees stand there silent.  The air is colder this time of year, and a bit of snow still remains on the ground.  Does this place remember the Spring and Summer and Fall just past?  Does it remember the tread of the bear the visited our yard one night, or the flight of birds, or the dancing of squirrels, or the elegant passage of two deer a few days ago, as they delicately and regally walked past my study window to the delight of my lady’s eye and heart.

The Ancient Earth is stone, ... stone that was once living, the way our bones are the end process of something that began as an aspect of life.  Underneath in catacombs, all over the world, are piles of human bones.  Do these bones remember?  Do they weep?

As anthroposophists we use such strange abstractions, as “cosmic memory” or the “akashic record.”  These terms fill a need of the intellect, but do they fill the needs of the heart?

In Dornach sits a concrete building on a hill.  A lot has happened there since Steiner went there and wandered in the local caves before accepting that “place” as where to build the original Goetheanum.  The perceptive nature of “feelings” gives a qualitative aspect to our experience that is free of the savage cold of the intellect by itself.  Even the term “heart thinking” is a horribly empty abstraction.  This is why poets write poetry - to leave behind abstraction for the “heart” of “things”.  Years ago, I wrote:

It matters to me,
for Matter to be,
and that I, to Matter
do matter.

And the Stones wept.

“the Anthroposophical Society, Money, and a very necessary spiritual Revolution"  An essay in applied Spiritual Social Science on the future of the A. Society

Introduction 3.1.5: the loving opposition

One of the more curious experiences of my life has involved becoming aware of “opposition” to my work - to my spiritual research and writing.  It might be possible to describe these as “attacks”, which from a certain point of view they are, but my view has become over time that these “attacks” are basically aspects of “resistance”.  Our will is, in fact must be, resisted.  Life cannot be easy.  Not only that, but because of our egoistic tendencies, we also need a kind of “weight”, something that holds us down, when the luciferic (the prideful etc.) might want to take flight and jump off the rails.

Everyone will feel resistance and weight in their lives.  Each will have to become awake to their own.  The most usual way we describe some of these is as “bad habits”.  If we want to use a more spiritual jargon, we might think of karma, or of the Native American story of the two wolves.  For those new to that: “A young man spoke to his grandfather.  The young man was concerned about the ‘bad’ things he seemed to do in the company of his friends, and sought understanding from his grandfather.  His grandfather told him that inside of us are two wolves.  One is hungry to be good, and kind and prudent and all that is otherwise virtuous.  The other is hungry to satisfy appetites, or indulge in anger or jealousy.  Then the grandfather paused, and the young man thought for a moment, before asking: ‘what was one to do about these two wolves?  How do we tame them?’  The grandfather said: ‘It all depends on which wolf you feed’. “

In anthroposophical jargon we speak of the double, which my research discovers is threefold in nature (no surprise there).  There is the tempter - the luciferic double; the prosecutor - the ahrimanic double; and, the human double which is our untamed appetites and so forth.  It would be possible to write at length on this, which I have.  [ The Mystery of Evil in the Light of the Sermon on the Mount: ]

In a more “Christian” mode, we might speak of the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ: washing the feet; the scourging; the crowing with thorns; the carrying of the Cross; the crucifixion; the death; and, the resurrection.  In this beautiful imagery we might discover some very remarkable ways of describing resistance and weight, and other qualitative aspects of our developmental trials in life.

For most human beings, whether or not their belief system is “Christian”, the biography has both inner (of the soul and spirit) and outer (of the social interactions) “resistance” phenomena.  The double is part of the inner (only part), and the outer biographical is described by the Seven Stages.  Inwardly, the good wolf is supported by the higher ego (the conscience), the guardian angel, and the Holy Spirit, while the bad wolf is “helped” by the threefold double complex.  In order to experience karma and fate and destiny, we have to be helped by the relevant aspects of the Divine Mystery.

In my biography, as a kind of detail and not the whole or all of it, when I am on the right track in the pursuit of some aspect of spiritual research, and the related writing/sharing of that work, I have found that an indicator of the importance of that work is in the resistance offered by/within  the biography.  Temptations are easy, for we are fallen and falling.  Rising up is harder, and the chief way this rising up is opposed, or resisted, is from and through others - visible or invisible.  So we are scourged, or crowned with thorns.

That is, people move toward us or around us that have powerful antipathies towards us, and act out those antipathies by the saying of unkind things (scourging), or the assertion that our thoughts and points of view are radically in error (crowning with thorns).  More details can be found here: Cowboy Bebop and the physics of thought as moral art:

That our biographies have such realities, and qualities of experience, reveals the perfect organism of vast spiritual communities (within and under the aegis of the Cosmic Christ) that surrounds us, and which is subtle and delicate, and complex beyond our ability to imagine.  “You can’t always get what you want, But if you try sometimes, well you just might find, You get what you need”

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Four)  Social Science only serves a purpose to the extent that it helps us understand our shared earthly existence.  There is no other point to it, a matter which is true for all the sciences.  Sciences come into being because humans desire to understand.  Understanding, however, and acting on that understanding, are two different tasks.

There might be a question as to the source of the “understanding”, and some might think that we get that from other, or higher, Beings.  In my experience we create the understanding ourselves.  It is our human nature to form the conceptual according to our human needs.  This is true for even the efforts at objective sciences, such as something seemingly so basic as chemistry.  We’ve acted as if the world of experience was this objective and permanent structure, although given the developments in physics in the 20th Century that seems to not be the case.

What then is the character and nature of our “understanding/knowledge”, even in the so-called hard sciences?  Well, we tend to act as if we were going to get knowledge that is true for all time - we tend to insist if be fixed and permanent.  Perhaps that is not the case, and I wrote an essay on that problem, here: Electricity and the Spirit in Nature:

Now we embark on studies of the social - human associations that are something rather quite fluid and variable over time.  Will we find there that which is, and can be, fixed and permanent?

At the center of all that we can call “the social” are human beings, and their various “social” connections and arrangements.  These represent a kind of social what-is.  We can argue about what it means, what are its laws, and so forth, but we can’t really argue it out of existence.  The social is.  We live in it, we study it, and we have even given it a name: the social.

All of us have been raised in some kind of culture, from which we acquired language and words and Ways of seeing the world.  Some of these Ways of seeing the world have become habits of mind.  As habits of mind they have limitations, for if we will believe we already know something, then that too is a ghost in the own soul.  Commonly we can refer to these problems as: Unwarranted assumptions.  So we swim in a sea, within our own souls, of antipathies and sympathies as well as unwarranted assumptions.

Owen Barfield wrote of what he called: collective (shared) representations.  An example is that there is a past, and a present, and a future.  This is generally a collective representation in most cultures.  The content of any of these collective representations can lead us astray, when they are unwarranted assumptions.  So when we look at our present - our now - we might include among the related concepts and ideas, stories of origin (religious creation, the big bang), and stories of end times (Armageddon, the heat death of the Universe).  Different social communities share different collective representations.

Factually we seem to make up those stories of origin and end times.  We certainly don’t see them - we don’t directly perceive or taste a religious creation or a big bang.  That various people hold to such stories is not unimportant, but if we are going to have a “social” “science”, we have to be empirical.  One glaring empirical fact is that our consciousness is bound to the present - the now.  We can make up stories about the past and the future, but we don’t live in those stories.  We live now.  The big bang is a theory then, a story of a past we cannot ever empirically know.

Unless people can find some justification for doing otherwise, at this point I want to confine our appreciation of the social to empirical observations we can make in the present.  Most of these are already expressed in our languages.  So, we could say, that the social includes: the individual; various relationships of individuals; families; communities of various types, and so forth.

To simplify, let us describe these varieties of arrangements as “social forms”.

For those who might think this is a bit silly, just keep in mind that we are trying to create a Spiritual Social Science, and to do that we need, at the least, to define a few terms.  What makes a social science spiritual?  A good question, which I am letting develop over the course of these various “Parts”.

Another fact, which ought to seem obvious, is that the social is living (at the least).  After all, all its “parts” are human beings, who are themselves living.  We can then, without stretching out of shape our imagination, conceive of “social forms” as living.  An individual life has a biography.  So does a family, and so do various communities.  If we study (observe its details) the biography of any living social forms, we realize they change over time.  The Anthroposophical Society is a type of social form that has undergone all manner of changes over time, and probably is living, although its degree of vitality might be questionable. 

Just consider the social form: marriage.  While the tradition of having marriages is apparently a cultural artifact, specific individual marriages do seem to undergo “seasons”.  We speak of the honeymoon, and then of the end of the honeymoon, for example.  Social forms are born, grow, die, and even undergo metamorphosis.  Many social forms are embedded inside other social forms, such as the forms families and marriages being “parts” of communities. 

Here, briefly, is some earlier work I did in thinking about social-form changes over time, from my American Anthroposophy :

“Next, let us take up the family...and simultaneously, the community.  Here again we have general or universal characteristics, and when we get into the fine details, quite individual and unique characteristics.  Remember we are also going to work with this as something in movement over time.

“Take an old world village, perhaps about 500 years ago (at the beginning of the Age of the Consciousness Soul), for example.  Many large families.  Often a dozen births for each mother, not all of them live.  Many relations, as well.  An old world village might contain any number of large extended families (a few grandparents, many parents and several dozens of children and related cousins).  Rules as to marriage across these complicated lines of blood existed for very practical and obvious reasons.

“Such a village (community) would often have one language, one general culture, one religion and social political structure.  Different villages in different locales in Europe would have differences of language, culture, religion and social political structure, but all would have large extended families as the dominate basis of the community.
“Everyone would know most everyone else.  Children born into such families would have destinies almost fixed in nature (the son becomes like the father, the daughter like the mother).  No one violates social norms without severe consequences.  Individualism is generally unheard of.  People almost do not have a thought outside the standard and shared point of view.  Most are uneducated, and few can read and/or write.

“Now let us jump forward a bit - say New York City in the mid to late 19th Century.

“Here we have neighborhoods.  Large extended families continue, but not as large or as extended as an old world village.  As immigrants, parts of families were left behind in the Old World.  It is harder now to keep tradition alive.  Religions, cultures and languages butt up against each other, often in conflict (mirroring in a small way the frequent wars in Europe rooted in the same differences).  Children are less inclined to follow in the footsteps of the parent.  Marriages across lines of religion, language and culture are frequent.  Individualism increases, and the ability of the community (now fractured from within, and attacked from without) to cause conformance to its dominate values lessens.

“During the transition from the older isolated villages to the neighborhoods in the great cities, two important changes have appeared - natural science and industrialization.  Religion, as a family and community cohesive forming force, is weakened by natural science; and, the family and community by the industrial revolution (the father is driven from the home and into the factory, along with many of the children, as people leave the villages to find work in the growing cities).

“Flash forward now into the present - Los Angeles 2007.

“An inner core and an outer rim.  Mere vestiges of neighborhoods, mostly racial ghettos in the inner core, with smaller families.  Better education, similar poverty.  In the outer rim, a different racial mix, tiny (nuclear) families.  In neither place does a coherent community exist as once did in the Old World village.

“A staggering increase in homelessness.  None of these individuals has a place to call home.  Even the family has fractured into individual splinters. The I is alone even there (c.f. Riesman’s The Lonely Crowd).  Children wouldn’t think of following in their parents footsteps.  Individualism triumphs and the old world cohesive nature of community and family is near dissolved.

“What happens in our consciousness when we move these pure abstractions through time?  What happens when we recreate in the imagination the gesture of social form over the last 500 years in Western Civilization?”

Introduction 4.1.1  Magic, Mysticism and Gnosis in Social-Political (Earth) Existence

Valentin Tomberg had a kind of running argument with the directions begin taken by the Anthroposophical Society, following Steiner’s death.  Eventually this lead Tomberg to leaving aside the teaching of Anthroposophy, declaring that Spiritual Science wasn’t really possible, and offering as an alternative his “Meditations of the Tarot: a journey into Christian Hermeticism.”

As part of this gesture away from Steiner’s seeming teachings (as practiced by the A. Society), Tomberg declared (in Meditations) that authentic spirituality was made up of three parts: Magic, Mysticism and Gnosis.  If we were to see this “argument” as a kind of theological matter, we would fail to grasp what Tomberg was seeking to understand, and to teach.

It was Tomberg’s view that one could not describe reality correctly, and include the spiritual, without recognizing that the Creation itself was a magical act - a projection of the Divine Will into manifestation, ... into “being” or existence.  We were “made”.

This process was not a separation, either.  We remain “connected”, and these connections then involve the “mystical”, which includes the fact that even while apparently “separated”, we are nonetheless continuously “touched” by the Divine.  In addition, we have (or can have) “knowledge” of this “connection”, which is aptly named “gnosis”.

Here I simply want to introduce into our wider considerations the questions of trying to discern  what aspects of our social existence can be described by such terms as: magical, mystical and gnostic.  We have already noted above that our psychology is such that we are inwardly joined to the spiritual through six relationships.  Three lower relationships in the three-fold double complex: the tempter, the prosecutor, and the “bad habits”; and three higher relationships: the conscience or higher ego, the guardian angel, and the Holy Spirit.

Nothing is changed, ... we are just coming at the situation from a different angle, which can then shed some light on (illuminate) certain qualities of existence in which we swim, but sometimes fail to notice as part of our social experience.  Always what is sought is to become more and more awake to the actual nature of reality.

Recently in America was celebrated an annual “rite”: called Thanksgiving.  Soon we will celebrate a similar “rite”: Christmas.  Depending upon our “religion”, we can also celebrate Ramadan or Hanukkah, in each case what is essentially a social “rite” which is magical, mystical and gnostic ... i.e. partaking of the qualities of manifestation (magic), being touched (connected - mysticism), and having some kind of knowledge thereof (gnosticism).  

As an aspect of these social rites of “dance”, we have language, or the “word”.  This “word” is both inward in discursive thinking, and outward in speech.  Individuals are then embedded within families and communities wherein aspects of our inter-relationships are carried out via magical, mystical, gnostic means, all linked together by the “word”.

Anthroposophists go to study groups, and join Branches, as well as on occasion involve themselves in what is called: the First Class.  These are “traditions”, and can be described as “ritualistic” in form.  The “social” then includes all kinds of “rituals”, and accompanied by the “word”, we engage in rituals even in verbal intercourse:  “Hello”.  “How are you?”  “I’m fine, how are you?”

Again, the point is to enliven our appreciation of the ritual (magical, mystical, and gnostic) aspects of our shared social existence.  In fact, we can strive here and now to begin to appreciate the truth, beauty, and goodness that seeks to appear within our social arrangements.  Dating.  Courtship and Marriage.  Love making that produces children.  Birth.  The raising and schooling of children.  Labor (work). Divorce.  Disease.  And, Death. 

Individuals tend to have “routines”, ... habitual “rites” in which they engage on waking and then again in getting ready for bed.  To practice prayer and meditation is to be religious or spiritual.  To live is to create “Temples”.  The home can be a temple dedicated to Love, and the bedroom in the home a temple dedicated to that form of love we call Eros.  A bank is a temple dedicated to money.  A football stadium a temple dedicated to emotional catharsis (all that cheering and screaming and yelling and beer drinking). 

In the wonderful movie “the Contender”, the main character, played by the actress Joan Allen, while defending her atheism before a congressional committee, describes her religion as public service, and the place where she practices this religion - the Senate, as a Temple to freedom and democracy.

Are these Facebook pages any kind of Temple?  What rites of manifestation (magic) do we practice here?  What human connections (mysticism) do we forge?  What knowledge do we come to share, or offer each other, or to honor (gnosticism)?

Human social-political life is the gradual emancipation of “human society” from the raw and untamed energies of Nature - both supra-nature and sub-nature  We have suffered the Fall into matter.  Now we find that together we can overcome its consequences, and set our course once more for the gradual individual and community participation in the Divine Mystery, from which we were first magically born.  The Christian metaphor for this rite of dance, ... we know as the parable of the Return of the Prodigal Son.

Introduction: 4.1.2 Earth Existence as Speech (the basis of Goetheanism). 

Many years ago, decades in fact, I began to realize that the world-as-it-is was Speech.  At the same time, I encountered the Idea that sensible reality was Maya - an illusion.  Even Steiner on occasion used that term.  What is usually meant by the Idea of Maya is that “true” reality is the invisible spiritual that is hidden behind the Maya of existence.

Recently some new friends visited me, and one of them quoted Steiner as saying that he too sees a Tree, he just sees it far better than most of us.  Its still a Tree, and it is the “seeing” that is different.  There is more to the sensible object than we realize.

As my own view evolved on these kinds of questions, I asked myself whether the Divine Mystery would hide itself from us.  Over time I came to understand that what the cultural East sees as Maya, or illusion, comes from their memories of the prior times when clairvoyance was normal, and their teachers (such as the Seven Rishis), taught about the Golden Yuga, called the Satya Yuga, which then descends cyclically to a Dark Age, or Kali Yuga.

All that aside, as I studied the Idea of Goetheanism, it was clear that there was a “Book” of Nature that Goethe had learned to “read”, and that if I paid the right attention to the social-political, I could see that there was also a “Book” of the Social World that could be “read”.  The social-world was Speech, uttered by the Divine Mystery for our edification.

What this means is that the intellectual abstractions behind such terms as: individual, family, community, nation, and so forth, had living meaning.  There were no accidents.  Rather what was happening is that in the evolution of consciousness, the individual had to go through a period of cultivated ignorance and separation - what we “see/read” today, in order to pass onward toward what Barfield called: “final participation” - the reuniting of the ego with the rest of cosmic existence, ... another way to understand the Return of the Prodigal Son.

We were pushed/fell out of the Garden, in part in order to hunger to return.

Now the differentiation which is individualism goes fully into all the details. Each of us is to have a completely unique character, biography, and collection of mental conceptions, feelings, and impulses of will.  Sameness, if we experience it, (all rapists or abortions are alike) is false.  How can we know that?

Well, do we see just a tree (sameness) or do we see that Tree in all its glory?  In Steiner’s The Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception, he writes of the “type”.  In the realm of reading the Book of Nature, that is the highest knowledge we can have - of the “type”.

In reading the Book of the Social, the highest knowledge is to perceive the Individual.  Only the Individual can “speak” of who they are.  Where we see sameness, we remain only aware of the “type”, and so we have all these abstract generalizations which we use, such as: anthroposophists, Republicans, criminals, blacks, redheads, blonds, doctors, addicts, fat people, smart people, initiates, ... endless variations on the type, but if we stop there, we do not see what the Individual is there to teach.

The same with families.  Yes, there is the generalized category of family, but lets face it, no constellation of individuals that are members of the same family is like any other such constellation. 

A lot of our thinking is caught up in the expectable residue of the Age of Natural Science.  Natural Science hardly even recognizes the “type”, being unable to see beyond the “part” to any kind of whole.  This has led to the fascination with particles and quantum events.  For all these "theories”, no flower or poem is made up of parts, ever.

Here is a must read essay by Patrick Dixon, an English “actor”, whose stage name is Alexander Barry.  America: the Central Motif.  It is found in this piece of mine: Searching for Christian Rosencreuz (based in part on the “idea” in the movie Searching for Bobby Fisher) - regarding the fundamental flaw of Steiner- said:

Nothing I have ever read, using the anthroposophical language created by Steiner, recognizes sensible reality as Speech, in quite the way Dixon does it.  Here is a sample:

“The five Islands sunk as the five senses became immersed in the physical plane and the human being began to rise above the sea of pre-individual clairvoyance; to see the Promised land of ego-based consciousness. This condensation of and separation between the watery and aerial mantles of the Earth (this fall of the sea out of the sky) paralleled the fall of the Etheric body of the human being, into closer proximity with the densifying physical body that was rising into differentiation as the less defined etheric body was sinking. This division between the water and air elements reverberated deeper and higher, both densifying the earth as a receptacle for the more gravity-bound water and dividing further the sub- and super- terrestrial fires. Levels that were clearly defined to higher beings then began to form into the Jacob’s ladder that would be experiencable to beings bound to a sense world losing consciousness of its supersensible origins.”

Go to that link and just scroll down the page a bit.  Dixon’s “essay/contemplation” is not short, but well worth the trouble to read many times.  He “sees” the dynamic Divine teaching parables that compose the music of Earth Existence.

On the practical side of things, you might want to copy and paste Dixon’s essay/contemplation to your word processing software, and print a copy.   That will make it easier to re-read when the time comes.  A copy is also in the appendix of my book American Anthroposophy, which can be purchased here in physical form: or as a free e-book here:

Introduction 4.1.3  Politics, or as my younger brother would say: “Poli-tricks”

Rudolf Steiner’s schema, regarding social threefolding, speaks of a Cultural Life, a Political-Legal life, and an Economic Life.  I have been using the term: social-political on occasion, and here I want to face any possible confusions that might exist in my readers in regard to what is meant.

Early research of mine, into the social, developed the idea that social-threefolding was already appearing in Western Civilization over time.  During the third cultural epoch (Egypt etc.), the Cultural Life dominated the social order, with the Mysteries having the greatest influences.  People were in “classes”, and the aristocracies (such as the Pharaohs) were a part of a divinely inspired social order.

With the beginning of the fourth cultural epoch (around 600 B.C.), at the time of the founding of Western Civilization, both the Greeks and the Romans made a distinction between the State on the one hand, and the Citizen on the other.  This was the birth, basically, of the Political-Legal Life, and became crucial in Roman Law, which has become the tired and worn down fundamental laws we use today.  The older idea, of Cultural social dominance, remained, in a sense, in such ideas as the Divine Right of Kings, and as well in the fact that there were (with the coming into being of the Roman Church), two kinds of Courts of Law - regular courts dominated by the blood aristocracies, and ecclesiastical courts dominated by the Church.  For an important historical look at the development of Law, leading to the U.S. Constitution, read John Randolf Tucker’s book on the Constitution, which traces the underlying legal principles all the way back and through the history of the Celtic peoples, who were originally the Germanic tribal peoples - the “barbarians” - that lived north of Rome at the time that it Fell.

At the beginning of the fifth cultural epoch (around the 14th Century A.D.), the Economic Life began to appear in embryonic forms.  World exploration and colonization led to trading empires, which in turn led to the arising of the mercantile and banking classes out of the old guilds.  These merchant classes then entered into a war with the waning influence of the aristocratic classes, and the best book for coming to knowledge here is the 2700 page Baroque Cycle by Neal Stephenson (7 novels in three volumes), which uses the imagination (rather than a dry intellectual approach) to show how modern banking practices came into existence at the same time as did the spirit-less natural science of Newton (he believed in matter-only atoms, and his chief opponent, Leibniz, believed in monads, which Leibniz thought of as having consciousness and will).  With the American and French Revolutions, the aristocracies of blood were displaced, and the illusion of modern pseudo democracies came to be (although behind them were new aristocracies of wealth, such as the Rothschild and Rockefeller families).

These same historical processes brought about an inner threefolding of the Political-Legal Life.  The Cultural Life was threefold in the forms of science, art, and religion, but with the arrival of the printing press (which began the replacement of oral culture) we have the string of changes leading to newspapers, radio, television and now the Internet, cell phones and social media.  In between the State on the one hand, and the Citizen on the other, arose a naturally socially-generated  modern Media.

Steiner has suggested that the Economic Life was also to be threefold: producers, distributors, and consumers .  So we could say that the middle of the three Spheres (Cultural, Political-Legal, and Economic), was the Political-Legal Life, and in the middle of that was the Media, as the means by which the State and the Citizen were connected.   The Media, then, in terms of Steiner’s schema, is metaphorically the heart of the heart of the threefold social organism.

What happens in Media?

A kind of discussion arises over what our social-political existence Means.  It is not an academic - ivory tower - kind of discussion.  It is often angry, rancorous, and filled with lies.  We are today in the midst of one such heated discussion, over certain aspects of the idea of Justice that is to inhabit our legal system (concerning police - law enforcement - and their too frequent murder of unarmed black men) .  This then is the political-legal Life, and it is dynamic and living, not abstract and academic.  Rudolf Steiner has said that English speakers live instinctively in the Consciousness (or spiritual) Soul, in their Life of Rights.  In that Sphere is debated the Meaning of the Good and the True, and everyone is being forced to form their own thoughts.  If we watch such as CNN and Fox, or follow Twitter etc., “opinions” are all over the place.

Part of these discussion involve how to change our Society, and in particular the Political-Legal aspects.  Such debates as getting money out of politics are a good example of these discussions.  My studies have revealed a certain kind of logical flaw, common to most of these discussion, which it will help to learn how to recognize.   If we want our social-political life to change, we very much need a “Spiritual” Social Science - we need to know how the social-political actually works, and to stop following blindly any theory or political ideology.  It is eminently a practical problem, for as Steiner pointed out over and over again: If we can’t appreciate the spiritual components of our existence, we will fail to understand the “organism” in which our lives unfold, or to know how to heal any dysfunctions.

The Logical Flaw: This follows a kind of abstract formulation, which is repeated almost everywhere, and is a common feature of this Age of Materialism.  The formulation goes like this: If only A would do B, then C would be the result.  In essence we are trying to approach the social-political as if it operated as a “cause and effect” process - kind of like the geometric causal problems of the game of pool.  We are aware of, but frequently overlook, that people are not like the game of pool - they are instead several orders of complexity more disorderly.

Especially in the Age of the Consciousness Soul, everyone wants to be their own “lawgiver”, and fractious argument is to be expected.  So one person will say: “If only the rich (A) would be less greedy (B), then there would be more wealth for all of us (C)”.  Or another person might say: “If only the poor (A) would work harder (B), they would then have a better material existence (C)”.

Notice the first two words: “If only”.  This makes the whole statement essentially a dependent clause - i.e. it can’t be a statement of fact.  It may be a truism, but that is not the same as a true statement of social facts.  There is no fixed aspect, and all it really means is that if a certain “class” of people would act differently, then all will be better.  As we previously noted, generalized “classes” of people don’t actually exist.  That way of thinking is an abstraction, and the social-political is living, dynamic and wondrous.

One purpose of a “Spiritual” Social Science is to brush aside the confusion, and enable us to see more clearly into the real way societies evolve.  This is entirely consistent with Steiner’s works on medicine and education and so forth.  I have spent most of my life trying to offer such a Science to the Anthroposophical Society, so as to take us into the necessary work required for the spiritualization of the Third Millennium.  My life is not yet over, yet at the same time it is the destiny of Anthroposophy to take about four centuries before really impacting civilization, if it ever does.  We can’t “push the river” of social evolution.

Introduction 4.1.4: Social “Weather”: complexity, chaos, general systems theory, and the capacity of living systems for self-organization.

If the ill-logic of the “If only A would do B, then C would be the result” isn’t workable, what is workable?

Using weather phenomena, as a metaphor or analogy, can help, but just keep in mind this approach has limits.  Our modern language usages has some familiarity with chaos theory, complex systems, and we do have the idea of “fractals”, which are an interesting mathematical/geometrical phenomena.  Probably the most interesting (to me) newest thinking can be found in Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s book: “Antifragile”.  It has the subtitle: “things that gain from disorder”.

The basic idea is that too much order, or organization, and the system is fragile, mostly because it is rigid and inflexible.  The more disorder in a system (not defining disorder, yet ...), the less fragile.  Antifragile systems survive extremes of stress, and fragile systems do not.

Most everyone not asleep realizes that climate change is happening.  Yes, there are a lot of features to climate change that can be argued about, even the assumption that human beings have caused it.  We could say that the extreme sides of these “arguments” are fragile themselves, because they represent fixed and rigid thinking.  What has been most curious to me is that few scientists that get heard, do a good job explaining that climate is a complex system, and what that means.  You can hear that idea, of weather as a complex system, lurking in the ways they talk about it, but simple clarity (which is possible) is lacking.  Try this ...

In general systems theory we can encounter the idea that complex systems have a tendency to have a kind of rest state, - a state of general equilibrium.  Periodically (and unpredictably), a complex system will undergo systemic changes - the basic parameters will alter in some kind of fundamental way.  When this type of change is occurring, the complex system will loose its state of equilibrium, and extreme variations of its normal parameters will arise.  We see that in our climate in all the variations of extreme weather now being experienced.  The former state of equilibrium has been lost, and until a new state of equilibrium is reached, with its own new basic parameters, extreme variations will be the “order” of the day.

That’s where climate is today ... extreme variations waiting for the eventual new state of equilibrium.  Many climate scientists, in thinking about the long range consequences of this, posit a kind of linear process, and unfold pictures of the future that are straight-line predictions, such as rising sea levels of so many feet, and global temperature increases of a similar nature.  This linear thinking won’t work.  Climate is too dynamic and living, just ask your local weatherman, who only is willing to predict a few days out, much less years and decades.

Several years ago, I listened to a speech by Oren Lyons, a Native American Elder, at a Bioneers Conference [ ].  His thinking was not linear, but pictorial (imaginative).  He made this analogy about climate change, which I paraphrase: “Your dinning room has a overhead light that is on a rheostat.  As you turn it up, the light gets brighter and brighter, and then when you reach the end of that process, the light goes off.  We are not heading toward a warmer climatic conditions, but toward an ice age.  Heating will bring on the long winter.  Human beings will survive.  We always do.  But not everyone.”

One version of the potential “causal mechanics” of such a change is in the film: The Day After Tomorrow, where the melting of the ice cap in the northern hemisphere, being fresh water not salt water, changes the salinity (and temperature) of the Atlantic Ocean, causing the Gulf Stream to stop distributing warm equatorial waters to the north Atlantic and warm temperatures, via air currents heated by the ocean, to Europe and America.  The air masses of the earth, which receive their “energy” from the warmth of the oceans, lose that “energy”, and snow starts to fall, never to stop until a new climate equilibrium is reached.

Macro-social forms, such as Western Civilization, have aspects that are fragile.  The “structure” of these social forms is similar to complex systems.  Complex ideas inhabit our civilization, and  scientific materialism is a rigid Way of thought, as is religious fundamentalism.  The same with political ideologies.  These are paradigms that masses of individuals share, and out of which they choose to act.

At the same time, the soul-currents underlying our current stage of the evolution of consciousness (see Steiner’s From Symptom to Reality in Modern History), rise from the inner depths of human nature.  They are not readily visible, unless one learns to read the Book of the Social.  A main dynamic feature of these soul-streams is a kind of rising conflict in each individual between the impulse for increased moral warmth (socially - aka the Christ Impulse), and the arid and cold intellectuality of the untamed intellect (the ahrimanic within).

There can be no linear prediction of how human societies will move forward, as this conflict increases.  Some aspects have to be “felt”, and appears in our consciousness in a kind of dreamlike Way.  A good example of the conflict is the general disagreements as regards the care of the Earth - of the environment on which we all depend.  I wrote an essay some years ago about this conflict over the “environment”: The Quiet Suffering of Nature [ ].  There isn’t even a right answer, because while the environmentalist wants to preserve something in Nature, the people whose Way of Life is woven into the exploitation of Nature, also, with a rational sense of justice for themselves, too want to preserve something.

The main problem was, to me, that the environmentalist wasn’t yet willing to go far enough, so as to include in his working paradigms the idea that Nature has being and consciousness - an existence with which we could communicate.  The central unanswered question then was: What does Nature want?  Aboriginal peoples and traditions assume this possibility of communion, while materialistic science assumes its opposite: Nature was just dead matter, with no spirit at all. 

In fact, one of the weird flaws as to what the Bible might have to say, is that the idea in Genesis, that mankind was to have dominion over nature, - this idea was a mal-interpretation of the Hebrew, and should be read: mankind was to have communion with nature.  This itself is connected to the loss of the Goddess religions, and their being overwhelmed by the monotheistic  patriarchal religious versions of the so-called “people of the book”, the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims.   It is patriarchal impulses that seek dominion over, while it is matriarchal impulses that seek communion with.

Without a truly “Spiritual” Social Science, there is no appreciation that we live inside, and are completely permeated by, a Cosmic Being, the Christ, and all the hierarchies that work under His Impulse, including the 10th hierarchy - the human beings.

To return to where we started: If disorder helps make social structures be antifragile, how does this disorder enter the “system”? 

From us. 

Our thinking is born in those personal soul qualities most akin to the Mother forces - the realm of the uncreated and unformed.  In us, and in our seeking for individual moral freedom, lives the potential for new and living antifragile thinking.  In the old doctrine of the elements: Fire, Water, Air and Earth were all born from Chaos - from the realm of the unformed and uncreated, just as is the Creation Itself being brought forth.

When the individual, in relating to his personal social existence, draws his actions from out of that inwardly accessible creative place, instead of living in arid and rigid habits of mind, that’s where the social-weather receives is equilibrium producing forces - from what we think of as individualized love and kindness, and all the other such self generated ideals.  Rudolf Steiner perceived this situation as leading to a split in humanity, that would be so profound that physical evolution would be effected, and we would come to see, by looking at the human form, the moral nature of any individual human being.

I don’t agree or disagree.  I just believe that this indication of Steiner’s leads to a lot of important questions that are yet to be answered.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Five)

Rudolf Steiner encouraged us to look to Goethe for understanding certain potential perceptual knowledge processes in which human beings might engage.  The main one, as described by Goethe, was: exact sensorial phantasy.  By this Goethe meant the process of recreating in the imagination an exact replica of the form-nature of a specific plant, as it developed over time.

When I was developing my Spiritual Social Science I was acutely aware that whereas Goethe had the real sense-world plant, as something to copy in his phantasy (imagination), such terms as individual, family, community were conceptual abstractions.  There were no direct sense referents for these abstractions, although all of us know specific examples.  We can go out into the social world and find a individual “family” to study, but will an individual family give us what we need in order to learn of the general rules governing the coming into being of all “families”?

In fact, our cultures have many collective representations here, otherwise we would not have the words: family, community and so forth.

So, ... if I was to follow Goethe, how would I do that, since there was no sense-world analog to the abstractions family or community, that was not made up of individual human beings.  I suppose this is a similar situation to the relationship between a forest and its individual trees.  In fact, the processes of “forests” are today beginning to be well understood, which suggest that we can also study families and communities.  That, of course, is what regular social scientists in fact do.

Ordinarily, to do what I am trying to do, would require that I become familiar with such as: Hobbs, Hume, Hegal, Marx and so forth.  I have read some of that, but was stuck with something that otherwise was unsatisfactory in following their examples. So that while my favorite “social science” book is C. Wright Mills: The Sociological Imagination, I had a different kind of experience of which I had to take account.  That next ...

Now we get to why “Spiritual”, and what aspect of my experience is that which is meant to be the exact referent.

Following an acute change in the nature of my consciousness around Michaelmas 1971, I became someone different from whom I had otherwise been previously in my biography.  In the beginning, I did not fully appreciate this.

Nevertheless, I found myself with a very awake mind, living in the social-cultural milieu of Berkeley California, in the late 1960‘s through the 1970‘s.  Many discussions, lots of books, and along side politics and social change, there was also personal spiritual change being pursued.  In that context, I started having what today I would call: atavistic spiritual experiences.  The existence of a spiritual dimension as real could not be doubted.

Around 1978 - seven years into the change, I was reading a book by Herbert Marcuse, One Dimensional Man, when it dawned on me that behind every theory of the social-political lay an idea, sometimes intentionally expressed, of the nature of the human being.  Most of these “ideas”, in the modern sense, saw the human being as a material / physical  being, forged out of billions of years of chance evolution.  I was unable to accept this premise given my own “spiritual” experiences.

I then wrote in a notebook in which I recorded “ideas”, something on the order of: If the human being is a spiritual being, living in the world which at its foundation is entirely spiritual, what is the significance of that fact for our theories of the social / political life of humanity?  About three weeks later I began to meet Rudolf Steiner through his books.

As I am currently re-reading Barfield’s Poetic Diction, I have become even more acutely aware of the fact that one effect of the invasion of Logical Positivism into the minds and souls of human beings, has been the near eradication of any sense of a spiritual explanation of human social reality.  The “duality” - mind and body, attributed to Descartes, was seen as falsified.  The sociologist, the psychologist, the historian, the philosopher, ... all basically succumb to the current avalanche of thought that the human being is only matter, and never spirit.

I had to find a way to develop a social science that did not accept that error of thought.  The means for doing that I found in Steiner’s writings on the problem of knowledge, particularly his: A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception.  Since I was now working from a very specific idea of the nature of the human being, integrating my work with the general trends of social science became impossible - more and more so the deeper the social sciences began to rely on statistics and numbers, in order to try to illuminate the nature of the human being.

I was traveling a path of introspection in order to discover the inner truths of human nature, and there were basically no peers in the outer would that came to my attention.  In the years since, I had hoped to find peers in the Anthroposophical Society, and particularly in the Social Science Section of the School of Spiritual Science, but alas those folks were so involved with Steiner’s social ideology, that they could not see the true social-forest for the trees.

We were asking entirely different questions.  Uncritical believers in Steinerism were fascinated with Steiner’s idealistic version of how a healthy social order “should work”, and what could be done to bring those ideas into social reality; while I was involved in the question of how does the social world “actually work”, on its own, for clearly the idea of threefolding was not present in the social life of humanity, except as a kind of latent potentiality slowly unfolding over time, yet never noticed.

What are we to do?  How do we take abstract thinking, convert it to “exact sensorial phantasy”, and in this way learn to read the “Book” of the Social-Political World?  Has anything appeared in the modern world that can help one develop this kind of “exact” imaginative discipline?

As done in many other circumstances, Steiner “pointed a finger” (gave an “indication”).  He urged upon us the study of projective geometry.  Thus, I found myself, in my early years of working with this question of exact sensorial phantasy of abstract ideas such as families and communities, simultaneously studying projective geometry.  I wish I could take credit for doing this consciously, but perhaps I was help to proceed in this from other, less obvious, kinds of inspiration.  In any event, the two studies road side by side from several years.  Although, I was mostly involved with jobs and family needs, and this work was a kind of avocation.

Introduction: 5.1.1 Some incidental results of imaginatively reading the biography of a social form (June 2011) [originally published as an appendix to my book "Manure for the Garden of Anthroposophy" ...

This is in part a report of an actual experience connected with some inner work I engaged in with regard to the social form: The Faust Branch in Fair Oaks California. The Branch was getting ready to celebrate its 35th Anniversary, and in preparation I did the following inner work.

First, through conversation, I collected the history of the Branch from a number of individuals, including going all the way back through the day (in 1977 I believe) when at a meeting of the Branch Carl Stegmann, the retired Christian Community priest (one of the original priests and the author numerous books, including The Other America: the West in the Light of Spiritual Science), stood up out of inspiration and indicted that a Center for the Study of Anthroposophy should be formed in the Fair Oaks area. His conception was that this should be an organism of two parts: one directed at teaching the fundamentals of Anthroposophy, and the other at doing research on the spiritual history and meaning of America - a kind of American Studies program done under the inspiration of anthroposophical insights and practices.

Committees were set up to bring this about and various personalities began to prepare themselves to participate. One individual went so far as to take leave from his work and family, and go to work with Francis Edmunds (in either England or Scotland, for a year). Many lives began to change as this proposal was being brought into incarnation. Money had to be raised and land acquired, as well as all the other aspects of creating a viable cultural institution.

Seeking a leading personality for the anthroposophical studies aspect, it was eventually worked out the Rene Querido (a central European expert in Waldorf eduction) and his American wife Merlyn were brought in to head this anthroposophical study center. However, when the dust settled something strange had happened. The American studies aspect was left aside and the anthroposophical studies program soon warped into a Waldorf teacher training center, under the leadership of Rene Querido, which was eventually named: Rudolf Steiner College.

The man who went to study with Francis Edmunds was shattered when he returned to find this condition, and eventually left the Society. A number of others, who were drawn into the idea of working on research on the spiritual America were also left high and dry. When I arrived in Fair Oaks in about 1983, there was only a remnant of the impulse to study America, gathered around Carl Stegmann and called: the Emerson Study Group, which produced Carl’s works, as well as 12 issues of a journal that called itself: American in the Threefold World.

I wrote for the journal a number of early materials that later became aspects of my own work, including the original report on the relationship between anthroposophy and the Hopi Prophecy, as well as a first attempt to develop the idea of a Goetheanism of the social, which I called at that time (1985): Listening to the World Song. [This link will give a more mature (1999) version of my thinking on this process of applying Goetheanism to the social.]

For the 35th anniversary meeting of the Faust Branch I prepared by taking the stories of the history of the Branch and recreating them in my imagination. I would sit meditatively at my desk (altar) and slowly create pictures of these events as best I could based on the oral histories I had collected.

When I got to that aspect of the history related to the strange dynamics involved in the formation of Rudolf Steiner College, I experienced the gift of an Imagination (a supersensible symbolic picture), which I will next describe.

There were two main figures, one to the left and one to the right. The left figure was in blue lines (these lines were realized much like an artist would sketch the most basic elements needed to picture that to which their art was to refer), and the right figure was in red lines. These lines were not exactly static, but contained a kind of gesture of movement.

The left pictures showed Rene Querido somewhat rising up in the air as if he was rotating slowly around. Included with him were three seemingly adoring students who also were rising in the air, but below him somewhat. All figures were not on the ground.

The right figure pictured Carl Stegmann, sitting on a half built stone or brick wall, somewhat in the form of Rodin’s the Thinker. Around him, sitting or laying on the ground were three others, surrounded by smaller suggestions of half-built walls and weeds.

Simultaneously I experienced certain ideas in connection with these pictures, and I have since this event continued to study (call it forth), and think about the relevant problems, such that my ideas as to its meaning have grown. My present conclusions:

The fact that it was Rene and Carl was secondary, not primary. It could have been any two European anthroposophical personalities, with the three companions of each, any three American personalities.

The point, as it were, of these pictures was to reveal the effect of certain Earth forces, as described by Steiner, that arise in the Americas in connection with the fact that the mountains in the Americas run North-South, while the mountains elsewhere in the world all run East-West. These forces come from the kingdoms/spheres of the Interior of the Earth, and are also related to what Steiner called: sub-nature.

These forces influence the nature and structure of the soul born in these geographic regions. Steiner in fact tells us that the soul is formed in large part out of the “geography” of where the birth takes place. We can make too much of this if we think of this “geography” as solely material/physical, but rather we have to think of it as simultaneously ethereal, astral and egoistic. The soul is formed in a “field” of intersecting activities of diverse spiritual communities (see the Class Lessons for this).

Americans are born with a specific kind of soul density, particularly connected to the double, such that we easily exist in this more earthly “field”. This is why Steiner describes the double in America as far stronger than the double elsewhere. When Europeans come to America, this field of earth forces, particular to this region of the world, tends to push the European soul off the ground so to speak. The astrality of the soul seeks a kind of equilibrium with the general astrality of the place.

The Rene-like figure then represents this “European" influence as is carried out within the American Anthroposophical Society - it ungrounds the European, and to the extent we try to imitate or emulate European soul life, the American as well ungrounds himself (the other three adoring off the ground figures in the left image).

The Carl-like figure represents what can happen when a European permeates themselves with the love of America before ever coming here (as Carl clearly showed to all who knew him). This grounds them, although Carl is still somewhat above as well, since he is depicted as sitting on one of the walls. The sitting and lying on the ground figures symbolize the natural state of Americans.

The half built structure is of course American Studies, which has languished for almost all of the time anthroposophy has been studied in America.

The colors represent: for blue (water) the life of feeling, and for red (fire) the life of willing. The European is more of an artist, and the American more of a doer. More could be said, but I think this is enough hints for someone who has troubled to read this far.

Introduction: 5.1.2 Projective Geometry and the Ethereal Imagination

In linear Time, and in three dimensional Space, such as appears on this page, the eye of the mind apprehends experience within certain natural limits. When we create a mental picture, or use the imagination, the field of inner experience is not 3D, but Flat. It still takes place in linear Time, but not in normal 3D space. The space element of the mind, in its pure thought-creative activity, is “flat”, like a geometric plane.

In a very exact sense, the picture creative activity of the “I”, in the field of the mind (the inner eye”), involves a “projection” of a content out of the will forces of thought-creation onto what is our personal locus of what in Projective Geometry is called: the Plane at Infinity. True thinking is, in this sense then, an ethereal act both in process and two-dimensional fact.

Now were the reader of this to practice the drawing disciplines in Olive Whicher's book: Projective Geometry: Creative Polarities in Space and Time, the ability of the rules of this geometry to create three-dimensional appearing objects on the flat surface of a page are learned. That this is possible helps establish for us how it is that thinking transcends the three-dimensional limits of Space, and arrives at the remarkable potentials for three-dimensional-like objects to appear in the “flat” mind space.  This “flatness” is not dead, but living.

At the same time, we learn to understand through direct personal experience how what Steiner called the “ethereal formative forces” - the “life” forces which come from the periphery (i.e. the Plane at Infinity) are able to “project” their forces into three-dimensional space and form the living shapes of the objects which we experience when we move through the three-dimensional world of normal experience.

Keep in mind here that this apparent loss of a dimension is not a diminution of our experience, but rather an intensification, for this “flat” plane is one way in which what we call “the threshold” to the spiritual world is experienced by the mind’s eye (recall my report above about the Imagination experienced involving the two characters, one a drawn figure in blue, and the other a drawn figure in red).  As explained by Steiner toward the end of the 5th Chapter of Occult Science: “One who wholeheartedly pursues the train of thought indicated in these books [A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception, and The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity] is already in the spiritual world; only it makes itself known to him as a thought-world.”  While the perception of concepts and ideas is “flat” (at the threshold), the “what” that is experienced is dynamic and living, and therefor presents itself with an intensity that is richer  than ordinary visual sense experience.

To appreciate this a little better, perform the following thought experiment: Imagine a perfect circle, with a radius of one meter. Now imagine this circle “spinning” free of the “flat” surface, and creating a perfect sphere. As much as we might try, we cannot imagine the three-dimensional sphere, but we can imagine how to construct it, using the faculty of picture thinking or the imagination.

Yes, we can have a kind of illusion of inner three-dimensionality, but that arises because thinking can shift its point of view (mentally walk around any mental picture of an imagined physical object.  All the same, each separate “picture” during the “walk around” remains “flat”.  The 3D nature of the mental picture or imagination appears because of the carelessly noted habit, which we apply from sense observation.  In point of fact, in sense observation were we not to have two eyes, the 3D aspect would disappear.  The mind’s eye is singular.

Now this circle/sphere construct has a radius line, as noted, of one meter. If we contract that radius line length to zero, the circle/sphere disappears, and only the “idea” of a dimensionless point remains. If, on the other hand, we increase the radius line, all the other geometric aspect of the circle/sphere also increase. If we take this radius line and make it infinite in length, all the normal aspects of the circle/sphere increase, except for the odd fact that the arc of a segment of the curve of the circle/sphere becomes straighter and straighter, until at infinity there is no curvature at all.

If we place our “I”, imaginatively in the center of a circle/sphere with an infinite radius, the outer surface, with respect to our “I"'s point of view, becomes an all surrounding Plane.

Yes, the habits of the normal mind has some difficulty with this “imaginative” expansion of the radius line to an infinite length, and the resulting transformation from the circle/sphere to a Plane, but keep in mind that no rules of geometry have been violated at all. The underlying laws have been exactly and precisely followed.

This means that all spheres occupy an intermediary place in between a dimensionless point and the Plane at Infinity. So, for example, when we look at the starry field of the night sky we are looking at the left-behind primal “space-penetrated” objects that arise projected from the Plane at Infinity. When we look a field of wild flowers in a high meadowland, we are seeing the most earthly manifestations of the intersection of multiple suctional forces (the forces from the Plane at Infinity are levity forces, not gravity forces). The whole periphery draws the living toward it as the “all-around” Plane, and being as levity draws in all directions, living form is essentially sculpted from multiple gestures from the all-around periphery, which magically remains a Plane.  This is why plants overcome the forces of earthly gravity and grow upward.

From this all surrounding Plane at Infinity, living forces, via their suctional levity powers, give shape to all the lives ... again: Steiner’s ethereal formative forces.  Working inward toward the three-dimensional earth “sphere”, form/shape is projected from the all-around Plane, under the guidance of invisible Beings.  Where the “seed” resides as a point/gravity center, forces from the all-around, grow the Plant world  outward toward the periphery.  There is a relationship that can then be noticed between Life and Light.

Light rays from the all-around periphery sculpt the crystal with which we are so familiar.  Because the Plane at Infinity (the all-around periphery) is so rich and unbounded (being infinite), the matter from which the Plant, in all its variety of forms arises.  The Green-world is, after all, just one Being - the Plant - that is able to be shaped into countless forms, which in their turn become the locus/home of numberless elemental beings, such a sprites and faeries.

“In It (the Word) was Life, and the Life was the Light of the World” (the prologue to the John Gospel, verse: 1:4.  From the light - which itself is not visible - then arises color, such that Goethe tells us that color comes from the deeds and suffering of light.

What then happens in the picture thinking - the application of the imagination - in the ordinary human mind?

A war breaks out between the warmth element (the Christ Impulse), and the cold element (the abstract heartless intellectual thinking), in the thought-creation process as that arises in the application of these forces within the “field” of cognition wherein “meaning” is invented as a natural activity of the 10th Hierarchy, eventually to become language and speech in the social realm of our shared existence. 

The fundamental cosmic power to create light (illumination and meaning), from our own life (ethereal) forces, manifests in thought.   Our thinking “colors” the world with self-generated “meaning”.

From Steiner: “Think on it: how the point becomes a sphere and yet remains itself.  Hast thou understood how the infinite sphere may be only a point, and then come again, for then the Infinite will shine forth for thee in the finite.”

For details regarding the stellar world: “The Misconception of Cosmic Space As Appears In the Ideas of Modern Astronomy - and as contained in the understandably limited thinking embodied
in the conceptions of the nature of parallax and redshift” go here:

A question has been raised regarding the significance, or not, of any kind of instinctive Goetheanism, and in particular, as to the application of projective geometry.  I recently made a reference to the works of Frank Herbert, the creator of the series of six novels begun with the remarkable and quite unique: Dune.  I may have described him as a natural goetheanist.  Whether one wants to argue that doing something in full consciousness is, or is not, of the same virtue as something done instinctively, such a question to my mind is at the least frivolous, if not entirely irrelevant.  All the same, here is an indication of Steiner’s, as paraphrased by Olive Whicher in her introduction to George Adams “Physical and Ethereal Spaces”: “... the quality of thought prevailing in the new geometry is in reality indispensable both to the scientist in his quest of world-reality and to the individual on a path of spiritual development, ...”.

All I can attest to is that at every juncture, the disciplines of projective geometry enabled my mind to remain exact and precise even in moments where the most abstract social transformation observations required an ability to become awake to the various living qualities that permeate all changes in social forms over time.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Six)

Were we to live in another Age, we might do without the naive distinction between inner and outer.  But given our Age, that distinction is primary, and readers would be very confused were we to ignore it, for most of the words we use have this meaning latent within them.

Thus our Spiritual Social Science only advances if while we seek to understand the arising and becoming of social “forms” (or “outsides”), we as well seek a deeper understanding of human insides - that is of psychological processes.  In that quest certain goalposts are necessary.

We have these ideas from Steiner: thinking, feeling and willing.  From our general cultural understanding: truth, beauty and goodness, or in the sense of social “forms”: science, art, and religion.  The connecting links reveals this: with thinking we pursue the truth, which uses reason to create science.  With feeling we pursue beauty, which uses the imagination to create art.  With willing we pursue goodness, which uses devotion to create religion.  We can make an abstract system, using a vertical schema, this way:

thinking,    truth,          reason,            science
feeling,      beauty,        imagination,   art
willing,      goodness,   devotion,        religion

The middle, or heart of this schema is: feeling, beauty, imagination and art.  A Spiritual Social Science will only truly be visible as a work of art, thus: The Art of God: an actual theory of Everything [ ], which seeks merely and humbly to describe the form structures which the Divine Mystery has created in manifesting the social-spiritual world of human beings; individuals, families, communities, nations, peoples, languages, cultures, paradigms, religious Ways, scientific practices, modes of art, biographies, histories, and even lies, fictions, crimes, emotions ... nothing is left  out, for the World is Whole, and all parts relate to all other parts. 

During my Berkeley years, before even meeting Steiner, I saw: That the conceptions by which we emphasized “outer” events and history, as being of great meaning, was a false conception.  God did not see the world the way which we human beings saw it, and as He had touched me the first time shortly after my incarnation, it was not surprising that His touch left me capable of seeing Him as loving each individual more than He loved “outer” events, and history.  The meaning, which Love and Justice begat, was for individuals.  All the same it was to take me almost three decades to see how the details of the Creation accomplished this action, which was, when properly understood, the most beautiful work of art in existence.  How could the Creation be otherwise?

This Art was so profound that It took account of any manner of confusion we as individuals might impose upon its “meaning”.   There were no right answers, nor even any right Ways.  The “What-Is” was, is and will always be, inclusive of all the varieties of the acts of any single i-AM -  the verb that lives, and is in fact immortal.

The Perfect World took full account of all the imperfections we could throw in our own or each others Ways.

For me, a practical question remained, and was more or less as previously stated.  If there was to be a “Spiritual” Social Science, what was its point or purpose?  As a pragmatic America, what could I do with it?

Somehow or other, we billions seek progress.  We’d like better lives, or freedom from disease, or less people in prison, fewer wars, less suffering, and above all: more love.  A “Spiritual” Social Science then seeks to add to human knowledge whatever it can that aids our progressive development, as individuals, or as groups. while at the same time recognizing that the human being is not just matter,  but spirit as well.

For the longest time I believed that my efforts, in this regard, ought to find a home within the Anthroposophical Society.  Being vainly stubborn, as well as a professional fool, I have yet to give up on that so very romantic goal.  While writing these bits of thought on these Facebook pages, I have to confess that the evidence is growing that I am not the only romantic still in love with the works of Rudolf Steiner.  With that in mind, let us proceed.  

Introduction 6.1.1: A Fantasy?

There were six of them – movers and shakers of the American Anthroposophical Society. All Americans, except one of them had spent so much time in Europe, that she was only a ghost of her former American-self. She was quitting the Executive, and this group was to discuss who should replace her and how that was to be decided.

In that room was a seventh person, not sitting at the table, just moving a broom around and doing some last minute cleaning up. As the six settled down, with their coffees and teas, and biodynamic fruits and muffins, the older, fat, bald, and bearded worker pulled up a chair and sat down with them. They starred, startled and speechless.

“I won't take up much of your time, I just have a message for you from that spirit you formerly knew as Rudolf Steiner.”

There started to be some disagreeable mumbling, but the stranger raised a hand very gently and this quieted them. He began once more ….

“Michael needs your help. There are great changes coming, and he would like to make a contribution. The problem is that you are not paying attention – not at all.

“This is America, not Europe. A very different place. The reality is that the Society has a “product” it can sell, which is a very American way of offering spiritual wisdom. Right now what you do is eat your own resources, by always seeking gift money, something more and more in short supply.  You can’t run a European-like Society in America - it will fail.

“Just about everything you do follows the dead paths of tradition – you do it because you did it before, and Europe did it before, which is a horrible Way to do anything at all. So you have the same people doing the same things over and over again, - always expecting a different result, something even Einstein described as madness.

“You literally need new blood. People who are not on the inside of things, but rather are on the outsides, on the edges. Essentially you need to purge the American Anthroposophical Society of all its European confusions. You need someone who does not speak German, and who has never been to Dornach. You need a revolution and a declaration of independence from the European past. That past has far too many ghosts. To much death, and hardly any life at all.

“I recommend you replace Dr. Sease with me. A very simple act, which among other virtues is so startling that it will wake everyone up. A serious shock to the whole system of dead and useless habits and traditions.  Another virtue of this, is that because we live - we who live in the present instead of the past - we have electronic means for communication.  I can fulfill my role as a member of the Executive, and never leave my home.  I have no desire, for example, to run around the world giving lectures.  What local people think is far more important thoughts than anyone from Dornach or the Councils in America could ever think.  

“My qualifications are many. In your system of approach to the spiritual - which is not the only or even the best approach, I am an Initiate, having meet the Lesser and Greater Guardians. I am also a disciple of Christ - one of the originals in point of fact, as is evidenced by all of my writings and spiritual research on Christianity, including the discovery of a Second Eucharist in the Ethereal, that has accompanied the Return of Christ in the Ethereal. As well, I am a bodhisattva – well versed in Buddhism and its relationship to both Anthroposophy and Christianity. I am also a wizard and a fool, two disciplines one needs to have in order to remain human in spite of being cursed with great gifts of the spirit. And last, but certainly not least, I am a Shaman, something essential to appreciate because in the Americas a relationship to the world of the ancestors, the rock people, the green world, the four-legged and the winged, is essential if one is to live with and within the Earth Spirit fully.

“No member of the Society, or of the School of Spiritual Science is as qualified as I am. This all with the further virtue that I was trained in all the above disciplines by the Spiritual World itself – I am It's gift to you, even tho' flawed and human, and goofy as well. We don't need someone who we want to imagine is as perfect as Steiner wasn't, and Prokofieff wasn’t either.  Cults of personality have no place in modern esotericism.

“I've been through “the Narrow Gate” and I know how to show others the Way there as well.

“In addition, I know how to make money and thereby how to free our work from the endless demands for more and more gift money. I understand the social and the political life of modern societies to a depth you cannot imagine, trapped as you are in Steiner's Threefold Social Order ideology. I know about the Double, and the Mystery of Evil, the ignorance of which is a grave impediment for the future development of Anthroposophical Medicine.

The social world needs all kinds of knowledge that are far beyond what Steiner already gave.  The spiritual world didn’t shut up when Steiner died.  Why would they?

“A social tsunami rushes towards us, and I am the soft fore-wind that warns and guides, those who are ready to ride the vast wave of change from which the Third Millennium is to be born. And, best of all, I have the beautiful personality of an old and cranky curmudgeon, who everyone will want to hate, but for those few that know this is the thing the Society most needs, I am well trained in how to give the members and friends a swift kick in the ass.  Rent and watch the movie “12 O’clock High”, if you want to understand the needed approach to a sleepy and out of touch and uninspired social group, which the American Anthroposophical Society certain is.  Michael needs real courage and risk taking, not the safe and superficial hiding behind the words of the Great Initiate, that has become the dark and dank cave or our shared arrogant ignorance.”

The old man then stood, and told the whole dumbfounded group: “We – all seven of us - are the right people in the right place at the right time. All of which shows that the Gods have a very weird sense of humor”.

With that, parting shot, he turned and left the room.

--------------------------------------------------------------- end of fantasy?

For some very practical ideas and context, about subtle changes in the A. Society, that can gain much and do not need the permission of Dornach to inaugurate, go here: Anarchy, Social Chaos, and Revolutionary Transformation, within and about the Anthroposophical Society

The real power in the Society is on the periphery, not in the Centers - but in the Branches and the Study groups, right where it should be, and exactly where Steiner placed it when he wrote: The Life, Nature, and the Cultivation of Anthroposophy.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Seven)

Let us return to social forms - to the outsides of the social.

We shall begin first with a diagram - something at once simple, yet based upon a quite real and extraordinary complexity.  These are some of the basic “laws” underlying the creation of social forms.  It will help the reader to conceive of these “names” as processes in movement, with simultaneous upward and downward gestures, following the rhythmic nature of the lemniscate.

There are nine lines, with single words each.  It is a “stack” of three threefoldnesses, “inside” of which are more.  For example, there is this connectedness: HEAVEN - SOCIAL FORM - EARTH, which is itself a threefoldedness.  In between HEAVEN and SOCIAL FORM, there is the threefoldness:  upward into Being - the ideal - downward into living incarnation.  While this structure is “lawful” - that is it represents a kind of order or organization, all the same behind/within each process is a community of spiritual beings.  It is thinking/cognizing which perceives the relationships, which relationships are themselves not in fact representative of “separation”.

upward into Being
the ideal
downward into living incarnation
upward toward rigidity
an ideology
downward toward disorder

Social Form arises from a combination of ideology and the ideal as that is lived out through the individual human being in his collective social structures - family, clubs, churches, communities, nation states, peoples and so forth.   Both the ideal and the ideological are necessary.  For example, ideology is at its most ideal when embodied in the Law, while the ideal is most ideological in codes of moral conduct (such as the Ten Commandments).

Too much ideology makes social form excessively rigid and leads to too much order.   This then leads to the paralysis and eventual death of the living element of the individual social form within the total ecology of the social organism.  The rise and fall of Russian Communism is an example of this type of excess.   Too much of the ideal keeps the social form from being fully incarnated, a fate that befalls all utopian social schemes, even such as Steiner’s threefolding of the social organism.

Keep in mind that the arising of “social form” is an indirect consequence of other activities.  The primary activity is Christ’s Love of the individual, and the care then that needs to be given to each individual biography.  The nine “terms” are fields of inter-related processes, which sing together in a kind of natural harmony.  We’ve given here an abstract representation of that which in reality is living and in constant movement.  Thinking perceives the effects first, and then via reflection finds secondarily what stands behind them. 

Introduction 7.1.1 Darkness and the Life of the Small

If I, as a part of the grand ant-mind, go on a long journey, perhaps taking one whole cycle of the warm light, I will crawl and climb and go around many bones of the world I have not yet sensed as smells.  Having little weight, I may even use a fallen leaf as a bridge over a tiny stream of living water.  Here and there will be the messages left by my brothers and sisters, in the language of the fathers.  Some pungent with danger, others sweet with hints of food.  At right moments I will join in communion, the wonderment of talking with the reaching touching parts, brushing moments of joy in not being alone.

Scent as song.  Holy rhymes to the sacred silent reigns of light.

But ... sometimes ... there be giants.  We too are food, and what a gift to be nourishment for others.  The hardest light of all some of our story tellers call: “thoughts”.  The greatest giants, who do not even honor us as food, but simple crush and destroy, unmake the most beautiful leaf bridges or the greatest poems of the once living bones, the gifts that fall in the winds from great heights, where the living earth has touched the sky, and some of our cousins - the winged angels rest for a time, while the flutter-bys, make wind songs themselves of the heavens so far above. 

I saw a star once, it rode a leaf in a long slow spiral down and down, then waited while we drank some life from its cup, and told a tale with words too strange to remember, but whose sound was the thunder of the dark storm that remakes worlds and floods the birthing chambers, making tunnels in our castles built so carefully and cautiously against just that power over which not one of us could ever be safe.

The tale the star told was terrifying ... of giants that rode giants, and never minding where they stepped, left destruction everywhere.  But what was worse than this, the star told us, was the heavy thoughts, so dense and solid that there was nothing they could not break, nor any reign of light they could not erase no matter what flutter-by had written its death song across the brilliant cascade of light and song that made the ballet of moving wind so precious that even the Creator trembled in wonder and delight.
Memories awoke then, of my earliest times as a birthing grub, tiny and blind, only touching but not yet scent-seeing, - a tale so terrible, that told that the giants that rode the other giants, were in fact the Creator’s children, playing in ignorance of all the life and self-awareness that seated itself in every tiny thing and in every tiny place. 

Giant children that dreamed that the night’s peoples were places to go, and wonders to seek, not even noticing how much more delight could be found in what lived in the worlds and universes that were where we sang the holy songs with flutter-bys, and knew all  the secret dark caves where the smallest of the small, the dancing lights wove from nothing but the heart-songs of the Creator’s Mother, all that was and ever would be.

There was no color without these song-poems of the reign of light, and we of the ant-mind were the privileged builders that throughout the seasons, while dancing to wind’s symphonies, worked tirelessly to see that when the winter came every seed and stone had found its rightful place for the long pure rest and holy sleep from which life itself was reborn every Spring.  

7.1.2: In the worlds where Steiner never existed.

To we-moderns, who might have some memories of the 23rd Century, there was that vague lost science of physical archeology.  For most, who played with the vanity of remembering the forgotten, there was the tender art of astral archeology.  Few of we-moderns worried much, for the latest art was more fun, involved no remembering of the physical or the astral, but only the joy of past-invention - the joy of making up the what-might-have-been, without any need for arguments and the like - for such as history or even myths.   Far easier for we-moderns to decide the past to be what we liked the past to be, and leave the present then free of such weights to our freedom.

The Arch-Collective, who enjoyed much the thrust of forgetting anything remotely ancient, went so far as to play at burning-books, and tempesting tombs, but only when young.  Things were found, and collected and displayed for parties ending up in the trash..  Word players especially liked to un-invent, to un-find, to ruin remembering.  Those weighty matters that might make us less free once-upon-a-time were then during the mind-wars of the 25th Century destroyed, and unraveled.  So much delight in taking-apart, and then throwing the broken pieces of memories no longer wanted up into the air, so as to watch them fall - a chaos giving birth to whatever past-pasts we wished had been.

Some of we-moderns found an old place one once, high in mountains whose names had disappeared, where broken stones were piled and then unpiled and then repiled and then reptiled.  As we let our children play at the mind-art of moving stones by thought alone, one made a name from bits of stone: Inerest it was, and sadness broke the holding of the stone and it fell on the child who had made it, spilling blood and flesh until the Mender came and took those parts of broken child, from which to fashion another, lesser somehow, but free of sadness and the terror of memories that had haunted that place.

After we left, the Foregettings came and cleaned that place of Hauntings, so that no-child would ever again be broken there, or have their mind captured and imprisoned in some past-pasts. 

A deepness was called forth, and those ever-so-few of we-moderns, decided to unremember the name of times of past-pasts, so eventually numbers died and there was no more a 23rd or a 25th Century.   Only now-nows, dreamed into birth from made-up past-pasts. 

With the lost of even the names for time, we-moderns became so free, so unweighted, so light, that birth itself was forgotten, and each child was given their own cave of broken stone, while mountains were torn down, and seas made into mists such that not even the name of colors would darken the joy of aloneness, while all wishes became true the instant they were thought. 

Once-in-a-while the what-is itself dissolved and even the greatest of haunts, who had been called Gods in some past-pasts, wept for they held to memories the longest.  Words faded last.  No need for even speech.  All was not, and even the never-was  consumed itself such that only ash remained, for a brief-brief.  Not even mind, and the last thought was dust to something, but no one could remember or even care as the nameless will-o-wisps blew through a universe of never-wases and neverwheres.  Gone, and forgotten.

Introduction: 7.1.3: Anthroposophical Bullshit

Pretty much everything that is thought and then written in anthroposophical media, whether books, or newsletters like “being human” or “Anthroposophy World-wide”, is most likely to be anthroposophical bullshit (AB for short).  This come about mainly because the Society lost its original connection to the concept of how one practices a “science”.  Even natural scientific publications have a lot of bullshit in them, for the problem is systemic in modern culture.

Science, properly understood, involves a discipline through which one seeks to find the “truth”.  Not “The Truth", but rather something more ordinary and plain, i.e. that which is factual and which can be verified by another following the same methodology.

In regular science the principle protections against regular scientific b.s. is what is called “peer review”, and verifiable or repeatable experiments.  At typical way to recognize scientific b.s. is that the general public becomes aware of it through a press conference, which in order of time is not preceded by either peer review or experimental replication.  A fantastic breakthrough is announced and then later the arguments against this appear in small publications, which never obtain the same “publicity” status as the original press conference.  A good example is “cold fusion”, which had a lot of press, but then faded from view although once in a while someone tries to suggest they have an experiment that suggests the “theory” of cold fusion still might be viable.

Another recent example of scientific b.s. was the announcement that the higgs-boson (the “god”  particle) was observed during super-collider experiments in Cerne.  That too has now faded from the popular press scene, which would have happened right in the beginning if the press had bothered to actually read the scientific articles, instead of just the press releases.

In the case of Anthroposophical Bullshit (AB), we have something a bit different, although slightly similar to scientific b.s.  It is not so much that AB begins with a press conference as such, but rather that anthroposophical media publishes the articles simply because the author is a member of the current in-group, on some level or another.  There is not even an attempt at peer review before or after publication.  The AB is just published, and if it manages to quote Steiner with sufficient suggested “authority”, that’s the only truth value the article has to have.  Since Steiner is treated has having never made any mistakes, to quote him is to stand upon what is presumed to be god-like knowledge of spiritual facts, to which we have added the appellation: “science”, as if the use of that term placed the work in question in the same realm as regular offerings in various fields of natural science.

Steiner is in effect a dead infallible Pope on all matters spiritual, and woe to the person that suggests otherwise.

The most recent and egregious case of AB has been the elevation to spiritual scientific sainthood of the personality Sergei O. Prokofieff.  A dead infallible Saint, whose interpretive writings regarding a dead infallible Pope, now sits astride the world view of anthroposophists, and once again, woe to anyone with the temerity to suggest otherwise. 

Were any such similar set of circumstances to arise in any field of natural science, the whole community of scientists would make the author of such suggestions a laughing stock on a scale seldom seen these days.   Even P. T. Barnum would easily find that his comment that there is a sucker born every minute applies to most members and friends of the Anthroposophical Society.

Now this does not mean we are stupid, or otherwise lacking in moral integrity.  The problem is much simpler, and for that reason all the more tragic.  Steiner’s early books on the problem of knowledge (GA-2; GA-3; and, GA-4) should have settled the matter easily, but they are not studied, and even those who see the flaws hidden in them in plain sight, are too timid to stand up to the tide of blind acceptance - a kind of faith in a religion that has to be called: Steinerism, and which has nothing whatsoever to do with science.

Myself, I am basically of the view that this situation is the result of the yet  unresolved karma between the Aristotelians and the Platonists, pointed to by Steiner in the karma lectures nearly a century ago.  If you took a Platonist such as myself, and put me on a stage with an Aristotelian such as Peter Selg, I would be able to reduce him tears in about a half hour or so, not because I know more than he does, but because I know less, and I am therefor able to ask far better questions than does he, precisely due to the fact that my ignorance is more carefully constructed and my knowledge more exactly defined as against any opinions, assumptions or theories lurking within and around my more general views of matters spiritual.

The total content of any mind is often vast, and frequently assembled in an undisciplined fashion by an Aristotelian, while for a Platonist the single idea or concept is so adored that it cannot be placed just anywhere where its meaning is anything less than precises and exactly harmoniously integrated into the whole, in the same way Mozart insisted be true of every single note he set down on a page.

For the final arbiter of the good or the true is neither one or the other, but simply beauty.  There is to the Platonist a quality of moral aesthetic before which all other considerations are in vain.  God is, quite factually, in the details, not a single one of which is out of place.

Introduction 7.1.4: The Serenity Prayer, and Social-Political Realism

Think ... for a moment, of the state of medicine 100, 200, 300 years ago. Factually we are still far from the truths about health and illness ... closer, yes, but still far away.

Partially this is due to the fact that the social component, that is how families and schools and grocery stores and television advertising effect appetite and consumption, and how the need for greed effects food production and how far our climate science is from its laudable goals.

If you know something of Steiner's contributions here, you will also realize how far was is our culture are from creating social institutions that support good nutrition, healthy exercise, stressless work environments, and all other kinds of ways in which health and illness defy our efforts to fix what we know to be wrong. The grip of scientific materialism is relentless, and stands in the way of almost all efforts for progress regarding questions of health.

Now, transfer that level of complexity to what makes the political and social life of humanity function in any kind of healthy or balanced way. Our ignorance is huge, and our ability to cooperate almost not at all apparent.

Then throw into the mix the idea of karma, or the questions of morality.  The very idea there are any easy solutions is simply a near fatal fantasy.  To believe idealistic solutions exist is a kind of madness.

The fundamental question is not even seldom asked.  We have plenty of ideologies of how the social-political world ought to work, but no real science of how it does in fact work.

Anthroposophists, who ought to be well trained in arts of thinking, don’t seem to even have their feet on the ground.  There are people doing important work, but most of them have never heard of Steiner, and if they saw what people who follow Steiner do socially, they might just run the other way.

Do I argue for despair?  Of course not.  But I do argue for realism.      

The main virtue for realism is that we end up a bit where the addict has to go when he prays: “God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference.”

A perfect social-political world is not in the cards.  Something much more workable is, but we do have to admit for starters we need a true “spiritual” social science, rather then just a lot of empty and sentimental platitudes about how if only this or that person would change what they do, matters would get a lot better.

The only thing we can do is change ourselves.  “the Political Anthroposophist, and Social Michaelic Courage”

Introduction 7.1.5: Questions every single practicing spiritual scientist needs to be able to ask themselves, and to answer with full honesty.  There is no correct or right answer, except the one that is honest, which only we ourselves may judge.

One of the differences between Platonists and Aristotelians is to what degree, and in what Way,  are they aware of certain questions, which are the fundamental questions regarding knowledge in the scientific age.  These questions are behind all that Rudolf Steiner did, in that he wrote in his youth these three books: GA-2: “A Theory of Knowledge Implicit In Goethe’s World Conception” (1886); GA-3: “Truth and Science” (1892 - his dissertation); and, GA-4 “The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity” (1894).  It is not precisely these particular questions either, that are crucial.  It could be a variety of similar questions.  The central, or essential, matter remains the same, however we arrive at it.  These particular questions are just one approach to the same riddle.

1) Do I know everything?
2) If I don’t know everything, am I capable of learning more?
3) Is it possible that when I learn something I didn’t know before, that this will cause me to change my views about that which I believed before that I knew?
Each of the above questions has as its center the question of what is knowing and what is knowledge.  So another way to ask the first three questions is:

4) What is knowing?
5) What is knowledge?

6) Can I learn knowledge from someone else, or must knowledge be some aspect of my own direct experience?
To help illuminate the underlying question here, consider that I am looking at a house that is painted white, on all the sides that I can directly see for myself.  (The idea-source for this careful way of “seeing” and “judging” is from Robert Heinlein’s book: “Stranger in a Strange Land” - 1961)

7) Am I justified in saying to another person that the side of the house I cannot see is also white?
Now suppose someone I trust tells me the other side of the house is also painted white.

8) Can I, on the basis of that secondary, but not direct experience, tell someone else that the other side of the house is white?  Or,

9) Am I required to admit to the person I am speaking to, that while to my personal direct experience the house is white on all the sides of the house I do see, I only know indirectly -  through a secondary or derivative source - that the side of the house I cannot see is also white?

We have now wandered into the territory of the difference between direct and inferred (or derivative) experience.

In addition to this riddle, matters change when I use the terms thought and thinking instead of knowledge and knowing.  The changes are subtle, but not unimportant.  This then leads us to:

10) Can I gain actual knowledge from reading a book (about a house I will never myself see, ever)?

In order to appreciate this question we have to have some kind of understanding of the role of thinking and thought in the act of reading, which is why then the riddle of the relationships between knowledge and thought, and knowing and thinking, become crucial.  Again, as a sub-riddle inside the others: (10.1) Can I answer that kind of question from reading a book, or must I - especially in this instance, rely entirely on my own direct experience?

Question #10 is also related to our problem of direct and derivative knowing.  If we assume the writer of the book knows whereof they speak (such as they know the house is white on the side, which I cannot myself see), we have one kind of problem.  If we don’t know whether the writer knows the color of the side of the house I cannot see, we have a different kind of a problem, especially if they claim to know its color.

In both cases we actually don’t know the color on the side of the house we cannot see.  In the first case we assume the person who is telling us the color on the side of the house we can see is correct - an assumption for which there is no justification.  In the second case, we know we don’t know, and at the least that fact (our ignorance) can be communicated.

This whole situation changes when I speak to someone else, and try to tell them what the color is on the side of the house I cannot myself see, based upon what has been reported to me in a book, or even verbally by a trusted friend.

Now in the field of natural science, these problems are not uncommon.  What is worse, is when the question of the color of the unseen side of the house becomes a matter of competing theories, because no one actually sees that side of the house at all.  And that is not the end of the ways which the logical and knowledge problems become more complex, because sometimes what can happen (and actually happens a lot), is that even though we use the same words, we often don’t mean, by those same words, the same thing.

Now if the reader of this believes I am sneaking up on the questions that result from the fact that in anthroposophical circles, a whole lot of what people talk about comes from the fact that the main person that is used to tell us the color of the side of the house we can’t ourselves see is Rudolf Steiner, please be assured I am not in anyway sneaking up on this question at all.  Rather, I am going at it quite directly.

Most of the dialogues in anthroposophical publications consists of the uses of language and meanings that are derived from the observations of one human being, and which are treated as if they are unquestionably true.  To use a somewhat ugly, but nonetheless quite apt metaphor, the underlying logical riddles multiply like long-lived maggots on the body of someone who has been dead for some time.

None of this is intended to suggest that there is anything wrong with advice given by Steiner in agriculture, medicine, education and similar areas were verifiable results are found with ease.  That is not what is at issue.  What is at issue is the details of the world view that the spiritual history of mankind has taken a certain course, and that we, who are modern, are justified in assuming that these courses: a) happened the way he said; and b) will go forward into the future in such a way that reliance on his “indications” is beyond question.

It is that attitude, that is found everywhere, that represents the principle problem.  Not because others are not committed to a trust of all things Steiner, but because Steiner himself, in his works on the problem of knowledge made it very clear that: a) he was not to be considered an authority; and, b) that reliable knowledge obtained through thinking required certain types of inner disciplines. 

The mere quoting of Rudolf Steiner is never justified by anything he himself provided.  In fact, we can find him saying such things as: That the world more needs materialists that think, than it needs anthroposophists who do not.  It is the turning of Steiner’s lecture materials into matters of absolute faith and belief that destroys the effects Steiner hoped for Anthroposophy to have on the future of human culture.  He even gave us a name for this gross and irreparable flaw: the intellectualization of the Cosmic Michaelic Intelligence.

By  giving over to the raw intellect (the realm of Ahriman - the Lord of Lies), the teachings of the new wisdom as a “system” of beliefs, we have already lost the battle Steiner wanted to avoid that was crucial to the whole development of the Third Millennium.  We need thinkers, not believers.  And, right now this is the last issue the leaderships in Dornach, or the Councils in America, are willing to face, in large part because the culture of the Anthroposophical Society lives in complete denial that this question has any meaning at all.  Yet, it is the central riddle posed by Steiner in his youth, and remains the most important question anyone who wants to work with Steiner’s thought must master.

To return to where we began:

1) Do I know everything?
2) If I don’t know everything, am I capable of learning more?
3) Is it possible that when I learn something I didn’t know before, that this will cause me to change my views about that which I believed before that I knew?

Now imagine asking these three questions of the neuroscientist Sam Harris - to which like all of us he must (if honest) reply “no” to the first, and “yes" to the second and third), and then ask him to explain what “consciousness” is.  Since that is the principle riddle in the field of study in which Harris appears to be a recognized expert, and is as well a question very much unanswered in the field (dozens of theories), you might now recognize the problem involved in pretending to knowledge one does not in fact possess.  In fact, in this time of Ahriman’s near total control over the intellect, this is a normal feature of humanity’s life of soul.

Next, rephrase that series of questions to someone such as Peter Selg, and ask him to explain what supersensible cognition is - i.e. how do we know that the color of the side of the house we can’t see is, but which Rudolf Steiner assures us he can? (a field in which Selg seems to pretend to be a recognized expert).  If we do that, then the same dilemma faced by Sam Harris arises.  Our level of genuine ignorance is huge, and to pretend otherwise is simply to lie.  When I wrote recently about Anthroposophical Bullshit, this was that to which I was referring.

Right now, for the members of friends of the Anthroposophical Society, the main lies are the ones we tell ourselves.  Something rather common throughout the human world - few people willingly recognize the limits of their own knowledge and tend to be in love with their opinions above all else.  We - anthroposophists - are nowhere near ready to speak of these matters to the rest of the world.  In fact, one of the greatest gifts we can give to the world is the confession of our ignorance.  We actually possess fairly good questions, were to we learn to stop pretending otherwise.  A good question is of far greater value than any vague collection of unjustifiable beliefs, regardless of how often Rudolf Steiner expressed them as an aid to our understanding of reality.  Reread the introductory material to Theosophy and Occult Science: an Outline, and there you will discover how careful Steiner was to distinguish the qualitative nature of understanding as a completely separate riddle from the problem of knowledge.

In point of fact, properly disciplined the capacity of anthroposophical thinking is quite  capable of taking scientific materialism entirely off of the table of modern rational inquiry.  An anthroposophist, with a well trained and discipline thinking, is quite able to insist that science completely reconsider the assumption that there is only matter, and, as a consequence, no spirit.  In that sense the philosophical errors of the 19th Century have been eliminated.  The only problem remains  that  far too many alleged followers of Rudolf Steiner have merely substituted one set of beliefs for another.  Anthroposophy has been, by them, reduced to a vain Steinerism, and if that condition continues, Ahriman has won.

This then is the central battlefield at the Dawn of the Third Millennium: Between the instinct to lie, which belongs to the raw untamed and cold egotism the the intellect, and that warm and empathic humility that arises when the Christ Impulses faces the riddle of knowledge with self-honesty, knowing just how ignorant we truly are.  People will be surprised just how much freedom there lives in that humble truth of authentic ignorance.  Here abides in glory the real meaning of: “the truth will set you free.”.  Being able to say “I don’t know” is probably the second most important phrase, after “I love you”, a human being can ever learn to speak.

Both sets of word are emotionally dangerous, because we become so utterly vulnerable when we say them.  Rudolf Steiner might have done us a greater service had he lectured less, and learned to say both of those phrases far more often than he did.  At the same time, he was, after all, an Aristotelian by karma and by necessity - surrounded by other Aristotelians, all of them living in a culture whose main language assumptions were themselves rooted in generations of Aristotelian thought. 

At the time of Chartres (around 1000 A.D.), when the Aristotelians incarnated and the Platonists left, the whole work of the Aristotelians was set on a course to develop, through the great dialogues of the Scholastics, all the crucial language distinctions upon which the Age of Natural Science (which began around 1400 A.D.) was later to be built.  Read Owen Barfield for help in “understanding” this, should it not otherwise be obvious.

That world was at its Aristotelian heights in the 19th Century, when Rudolf Steiner incarnated and began, with great wisdom and delicacy, to unravel the confusion of materialism, and set the world once more on the right track to the truth, in a way where even the higher worlds, as represented by the Anthroposophical Movement, Christ, and the Holy Mother, were all of the same Thought, that human freedom to choose what to think was to remain inviolate.   The “I” was now enthroned in the Kingdom of the Mind.

Introduction: 7.1.6 Mood swings ...

my mood, since Christmas Day afternoon, has been a bit “edgy”, and I would not be surprised if it effected some of what I wrote in those items listed as Introduction: 7.1.3; 7.1.4; and, 7.1.5.  On the early afternoon of Christmas Day I found myself leaning over my girl friend’s mother’s body, trying to perform CPR, while she lay in her wonderful lounge chair in her sitting room, dying - turning blue actually, while the 911 guy tried to walk me through it as we waited for the EMT’s to arrive (that only took them about 3 or 4 minutes).  But by the time they got there she did not have a heart beat, nor was she breathing.  We couldn’t find the DNR, although we did find the document that let Linda make decisions, so she had to tell them whether or not to use the paddles or intubate her, a rough decision to have to make, but the two of them (Marion and Linda) had talked many times, so after about two or three minutes of discussion Marion was pronounced dead at about 4:30 Christmas Day afternoon.  She was 96 years old, and I had known her since 2008, when I first met Linda and started dating her.

As we prepared over the next days for the wake, the internment and the funeral, I asked Marion is I should speak, and she told me not to.  In this, as if life, she was wise, so I ended up not going to any of these “events” (I would have not been able to speak), but was able to write the following which was read at Marion’s funeral on Tuesday, the 30th of December.  What was read follows.  Yes, it is personal, but fuck it, I need to share it here, because I know I have some friends here as well ... it goes like this:

“some thoughts on my dear friend Marion ...

Sometimes I am very slow to notice things ... in this case, that I had fallen in love with Linda’s mother.  Nothing in my life had prepared me for even such a possibility, our culture is so fixated on sex, and that it often does not notice love at all ...

but there I was, and she was getting ready to pass, and I was in love with her, and hardly knew how to tell her at all just how deeply she had touched my soul ...

when we put her in the car to take her to ReHab, I kissed her on the forehead on impulse, and of course she had no idea what I meant, nor did I have any words with which to tell her ...

love is like that sometimes, so delicate in form and nature that we cannot but be clumsy in every attempt to express our feelings ... I’m trying to make up for that now, for I know she will hear what is being read here, and of course is now even better able to see into my heart ...

to say she was a saint is both a truism, and completely misleading ... lots of folks are saints, and even at the same time sinners, and Marion was all of that and more ... we played cards, her favorite game (she beat us all just about every time) was called: “may I”.  Linda and the girls can explain it later if you want ...

It was during these card games that I discovered that, when she wished, she could swear - as we say - like a sailor ...

she was many things for all of us, but for me she was especially someone I would have to call a “spiritual teacher”.  She never preached or offered advice, she just was, and what she was mostly calm and quiet and gentle and kind and I don’t think I ever once saw her put her own needs in front of someone else’s.  If that doesn’t make for a saint, I don’t know what else might be needed.

one last secret, which I observed and most did not ... I think she put off dying for months, for the simple purpose of making sure that Linda and Jessica (and others to a lesser degree), could try everything possible to keep her alive and pain free and happy.  Her own pain and suffering was less important to her, than was the fact that when she did finally let go, her caregivers would feel no self-recrimination - would not feel they had not tried everything possible.

So she waited and endured, and finally when all avenues had been exhausted, she let the Lord take her, because that was the final gift she had to give ... that those who cared for her would feel they had tried all that could be tried. 

I talk to her now on occasion - it is a delicate art to listen quietly enough to hear the recently crossed over.  Marco, the family dog, knows when she is about the house for he seems to bark at nothing, and as well seems to know there is a smell in the room that belongs to her ... we were all talking about her a day or so ago, and an ornament fell from the tree, at which point Marco jumped off the couch and went running around the room, nose leading the way as he tried to find her.  These days he also can be heard, in her sitting room, moaning a cry of such longing and pain that you can’t but feel he too misses that mistress of his life that it was his duty to love and guard and serve.”

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Eight)

The Wall.  In his book “Speaker’s Meaning”, Owen Barfield called the Wall: taboos.

Decades ago, and with a kind of gentle humility I tried to get my early works published, in Anthroposophical Society publications.  I didn’t push myself on people.  I thought, if I just  did the work, the work would have value, and be seen as contributing.  So I did the work.

Because I was a member of the Emerson study group around Carl Stegmann in Fair Oaks, California, in the early to mid-‘80‘s, I was published in that study group’s journal: America in the Threefold World.  Only  600 copies per issue would be produced, and there were only ever 12 issues altogether.  It was read more in Germany than in America, because of who Carl was - one of the original Christian Community priests, who had moved to America - to California - after he retired from the priesthood at the age of 70.  It was there that my first efforts to share my work appeared: “Listening the World Song”.  I was just leaning how to “read” the phenomena of the social-political world, but in Listening to the World Song I was able to present the idea of seeking to know how the social world actually worked, and what might be the needed disciplines, which thinking required in order to perceive.

When the Threefold Review first appeared in the early ‘90‘s. I sent in an article: “Threshold Problems in Thinking the Threefold Social Order.” [ 1991]  It was ignored, although several years later, in the book “The Future is Now: Anthroposophy at the New Millennium [1999]”, an article by Terry Boardman: “The Idea of the Threefold Society at the Dawn of the Third Millennium”, made positive mention of my article, because by that time I had my own website, so a Google search would discover it.  Otherwise that article has remained mostly ignored.

In 1992, at a meeting of the Social Science Section in Ghent NY, a friend had advised me that to get published one had to become political, ... that is go to many conferences, and form relationships.  But I was poor, and in my own idealism I still maintained that the work had value, and should be recognized for that value.  I believed, like a natural American romantic, that the Anthroposophical Society was a spiritual association of free thinking individuals.  I was wrong.  A more apt description of the Society is that it is very much like an academic department at a University, with all the political craziness that thrives in such a competitive social environment. Its subject may be the works of an obscure philosopher, and few Universities even today would accept this as an official “department”.  But still, the Society serves that function, however badly or well one wants to presume.

In 1995, I wrote a five-part article (writing it in five parts was intentional so as to make it possible to fit something quite long into five separate issues of the then Anthroposophical Newsletter in America): “Waking the Sleeping Giant: the mission of Anthroposophy in America” [ ].  It too was ignored, although I was able in that article to take the time to elaborate in more detail the state of my research work into the living nature of the social organism.

What happens when the Wall presents itself, according to Barfield, is that when thoughts are presented in a community that are at odds with a prevailing, or dominating, paradigm, most thinkers - already living in the prevailing paradigm - can’t go to the new.  To go to the new is taboo, and puts at risk their own position in their community.  This is why biologists, who find indications of spiritual activity in their research, can’t quite take that final step in thought and actually come out and say it (witness the work of Rupert Sheldrake ).

In my case the Wall was the assumption that all thinking on the social had to conform with what Steiner had already indicated.

So after a time, I just wrote articles and books on my studies of the Way the social world actually worked, and had to accept that those for whom I was writing - my fellow thinkers in the Social Science Section - they could not hear it, because of the Wall.  I was able to place material on my website, and self publish on-demand books, but that would have to satisfy me.  What I needed, and most hungered for, was critical dialogue.  I knew my work was suffering some kind of loss, due to isolation, but without critical exchanges, my thinking would certainly lack something. 

Yet, when I self-published my “American Anthroposophy” in 2008, there was a bit of grace, such that a review of that book (by William Bento) was written and published in the Evolving News for Members in the Summer-Fall 2009 issue, along with a small paper of mine on how the Western in American culture plays the same role as the myths did centuries ago in Greece.  Here is a link to both the book review, and the article as a PDF document:  [ ]

All the same, the Wall is there.  It is real.  It kept me out, but like all Walls it was also a prison for them - for those who maintained the Wall.  The existence of the Wall is an important factual phenomena for understanding the course of ideas as they travel in the Social Organism.  Again, read Barfield’s “Speaker’s Meaning”, where he speaks of taboos, rather than as I do - of the Wall.  The Anthroposophical Society has its own Walls, as do any large social forms, such as the Catholic Church, or the Republican Party.  Walls that keep out, while at the same time making, for the Wall-builders, a prison.

In LeGuin’s “The Dispossessed”, the Wall is discussed in many places, and from a variety of points of view.  Her book is a bit idealistic, in that her main character is able to finish his isolated and solitary work anyway.  Only time will tell if that is to be true for me as well.

I know from direct experience, that my work is supported by the spiritual community Steiner called: “the Anthroposophical Movement”.  Their cooperation is a fact of my inner life.  I could not continue it otherwise - the Wall would have defeated me psychologically.  Their support is part of why this sequence of articles arises, called: “Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science”.  When I think and write, I am not alone inwardly - their “presence” is unequivocal, and all the more remarkable because this support is offered freely, and in a fashion where I remain free as well.  I practice what Tomberg called: “learning to think on your knees”, with the consequence that I experience at the same time what Steiner called: “it thinks in me.”.

Between myself, and the Anthroposophical Movement, there is no Wall; but rather a large set of French doors that remain open daily, in all weather, and through which light and fresh air blow into and through my soul on a regular basis, in accord with the natural rhythm of all the Seasons of the Year.

Some of these breezes are remarkable, such as this that came unbidden one day a few months ago: “Albert: in Fugue”, a short-short story:

Read it.  You will be glad you did.

Introduction 8.1.23, divided by infinity: Yes, I did loose my mind but when looking for it, Grandma helped me make a serious and life changing attitude adjustment ....

In the dark of the night, when your back hurts (level 11.5 on a scale of 1 to 10), and you are waiting for the drugs (acetaminophen and oxycodone) to kick in, and after the battery-is-empty-alarm has gone off on the smoke detector, and you can't pry the damn thing of the wall, yet the only thing that works is a prayer to your recently deceased girl friend's mother who does manage to make the alarm behave and shut up (thank heaven for ghosts who like you), its probably not a good idea to take out your credit card and go to looking to see what Peter Hamilton, William Gibson, and Richard Morgan have been up to.

I think Amazon is renting an extra truck just to deliver what I bought. But then it is 15 degrees outside, although last night it was - 10, but who's counting. My well developed Jedi weather sense did tell me yesterday that when you get February cold snaps in early January, that Spring will come early this year, because while we can fuck up the weather while its trying to do a major climate change, the Seasons are resistance to extreme fluctuations, which means that while a February cold-snap in early January can only signal an early Spring, its not a good predictor of the March snow falls that will precede that Spring, except in the sense that the Loki-Weather spirits are really likely to do the "yes we can make it snow three feet every 7 or 8 days throughout March and into April first, dance."

Meanwhile, the weirdness factor has jumped up, and while I do enjoy having 175 Facebook friends, I maybe should reconsider adding just anyone who asks, because for 10 days now I've been getting e-mails from people who invite me to join in e-mail arguments over subjects so obscure that the latest guy informed me that the NSA and aliens were blocking all his e-mails, so he warned me that even though he badly needed me to reply, I might not get through.

This is true, and yes funny. The worst thing of all is yesterday I started watching Fox Noise, because I realize that what they were really up to was a whole new level of comedy. Given the general state of the world, and with Bill Mayre having falling off the edge of the every Muslim is a mad terrorist cliff, and yes, Jon Stewart is getting even funnier, but we are losing Stephen Colbert to main stream television, so somebody had to step into the breach and increase the level of absurdity, - well thank our lucky stars, Fox stepped right up. I know it seems a bit odd, but you know these weird diagrams that look one way, until you internally shift your point of view, I've discovered that with Fox all you have to do is realize they so jealous of The Daily Show, but so scared of the ratings that are disappearing, that all you have to do is watch them and imagine them wearing clown makeup, and I kid you not, they are better than some of those mushrooms I used to eat in the '70's.

Just for fun I sent a little prayer out to Rudolf Steiner, asking about him and humor, and he replied instantly that WTF did I think all those books and lectures were about. His hardest job when incarnated was keeping a straight face, not because what he said wasn't true, for it certainly was, but people were so serious about everything.

Part of his job was to get us to be so excessively serious about the state of reality, that eventually we'd get it that this was the Age of Everyone has a Stick up their Ass. Had to happen, so the Gods just brought us all to the same party, just so the resulting disaster would happen and maybe we might get over ourselves. We could even start getting back to what every little kid knows, which is that existence is the most fun and coolest thing ever, so stop being so serious about it all, and go make some mud pies, after which just lay back in the sun and realize God made the world for pleasure, and it was well past time to get over it - it being that whatever shit that sticks in our craw and makes us think we have to go out and fix something.

I started to argue about rape and war and child abuse and all that and he said for sure there are a lot if dick heads around right now, but they will get their's in the afterlife ... God's Justice is pretty awesome when you get down to it. Wilie E. Coyote never does catch the Road Runner, because when that time finally comes, he'll discover its himself he's been chasing all over creation since forever.

Plus, think about this ... quadzillions of sunsets, not one of them ever wasted. Same with people, stick up their asses and all. Want to know what happens after the Day of Judgment? We spend the rest of Eternity watching each others reruns. Never gets boring, ever.

Introduction 8.1.33 A more overt transition to the practical arts.

A lot, so far, has been theoretical and was rooted in a need to develop not only certain language conventions, but also to explore what might be called the “story” telling, or “tale” telling aspects.  A newspaper reporter, or a news reader on TV, basically tells a “story”, and this is often how the matter is represented.  So we get stories about medical issues, or crime stories, or political activities, sometimes mixed in with lighter bits, - a kind of search for “good news” to go with all the sad news and the tragedies.

Modern Media has a certain style, and is also (these days) divided into many different forms.  We have the big TV readers who tell their major world shaking (sometimes actually historical) stories for a half hour in the evening, and then the local news TV readers who tell the local stories and the weather and sports, and sometimes have hours more time than the major network news readers.

Then you have the Cable networks, with their attempts at a 24 hour news cycle, mostly created after Ted Turner created CNN.  Along side all this is radio, which often finds a certain amount of traction through the personalities of the news reader or the “announcer”.  Most of this is driven by the need to sell advertising, for without the revenue there would be hardly anymore “news” at all.  Somewhere along the line this kind of media content began to be called: “infotainment”.

70 years ago New York City might have had a dozen print newspapers, most of them producing a morning and and evening edition, and then in some instances a “halt the presses” special edition. Then came TV, finally the arrival of the Internet, and now with what is called social media, there has been a kind of fracturing process.  A lot of different takes on individual stories, and a lot of different audiences.  We, for example, have the fascinating fact that a large number of young people get their “news” from Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show, which is a comedy half-hour on Cable TV four days a week. Contrast this with the fact that Fox News, which has really let itself become an advocate of a certain political propaganda-like point of view, more than a teller of stories perhaps related to the truth, ... this Fox News is not only slowly loosing audience, but most of its actual audience is older people.

In a sense, there are so many “sources” of news stories that the individual taking a look at the news can pre-select a point of view he already likes and tends to believe.  We live in a world where the “truth”, if there is a “truth”, has a hard time becoming known.  Rather the various kinds of media are so diverse that it is possible to live in a “news” environment from which we actually receive no news stories at all - just some kind of mirror imagine of our own biases.

Yes, everyone might know that several men invaded a media business in France and killed a lot  of people a few days ago.  All the same, what that means, or what the “true” details are, would be difficult to find.

For example, when George W. Bush won the American presidential election in the year 2000, with the help of a curiously lawless Supreme Court judgment, fraud and outright violence was applied by the Republican Party in Florida, that State which became the focus of all the various legal questions regarding the validity of Bush’s election.  The tragic matter was that media in the United States never really investigated the details and it was an English journalist’s book that later exposed just how unlawful and criminally that election had been achieved.

So, we have two problems.  One is that the news is not a very good source of knowledge about the world, except in the most superficial sense such as perhaps what are the main trends in what stories are dominating the news cycle any particular day..  That other problem is that because of this ineffectual observation of modern events, it is almost impossible to understand their larger meaning though watching the news.  We are encouraged to enjoy our own opinions, and easily can find “news” sources that cater to every personal prejudice and whim.

Rudolf Steiner tried to help our thinking overcome this media fun house mirror show by speaking and writing of what he called “symptomatology”, with his basic material on this art presented in the lecture cycle: From Symptom to Reality on Modern History.   Unfortunately, it is my experience that this art is not well practice in anthroposophical circles, in large part because of the tendency of those who practice it to take as factual almost anything Steiner said, and then include that material in building up the “stories” they tell about current history and events. Among those who have worked successfully with Steiner’s The Philosophy of Freedom, this can be called the problem of the “pre-thought thought”.

We can approach any object of thought with the truth-sense of the soul already disabled.   The most common defect has to do with the problems of antipathy and sympathy, where we uncritically accept our instinctive feeling of liking or not liking the object of thought.  The second defect/weakness, while not so difficult is similar in nature, yet requires that we love the object of thought.  Love in this sense is not sympathy, but an actual internal mental action by which we seek to identify with the subject, which can include such as the various villains given to us by modern news media: murderers, criminal bankers, corrupt politicians and so forth. To develop this love of the object of thought is the attempt to perfect what Christ meant when he said “Judge not.”: “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

The third, and most obvious defect, if we are willing to notice it, - is the “plank”  The “plank” exists usually because of either an excess of sympathy or antipathy and an absence of love, such that we already believe we know what can be known.  This semi-conscious assumption is the “pre-thought thought”, which haunts the soul like a ghost.  We then see the ghost, not the world.

Now, we have then traveled a bit of a journey to reach this point in the Introduction.  In the next Parts our work will endeavor to look at ongoing events, in America, and in the Anthroposophical Society, and see if we can “read” them (appreciation their “symptoms” and meanings) with the help of some of the principles already learned, including the utility of an appropriate measure of self-generated whimsy and the absurd.  There is a lot to life that is just plain funny, and learning to laugh at ourselves is the first step in seeing the world with the clarity that comes from: “Judge not.”

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Nine)

Service.  As a practicing scientist of the social, there were occasional opportunities to apply this growing understanding, which included a real time ability to “see” the social aspects of our existence.  A doctor notes a phenomena on the skin, and couples that with some additional facts, and makes a diagnosis - suggesting a course of treatment.  My discipline was creating a capacity for healing social dysfunction, in many places including the Anthroposophical Society.

I was often around Waldorf School communities, having young children of my own in the ‘90‘s (my second family).  One day, while riding in a car with another Waldorf parent, I spoke of some of the ways I saw our  particular school, and this individual urged me to write an article about my understanding and its application in practice.  This led to my writing: “The Social-Spiritual Organism of a Waldorf School Community” [ ].

In doing this task, I first found myself drawing certain distinctions between what I was to call: Macro-threefolding and Micro-threefolding.  Steiner’s basic social ideas were not useless, they were just asking a different kind of question, and did provide a vocabulary that could be of service.

In Macro-threefolding, the concepts of the three spheres (Cultural Life, Rights Life, and Economic Life) did provide a direction to move toward with respect to large scale social forms.  In Micro-threefolding, the related social forms were much smaller in scale, and I found it necessary to think of “processes” and “functions” rather than “abstract categories”.  It wasn’t so much that a certain activity belonged in the cultural sphere, but rather that the activity revealed a kind of related dynamic and living social process.

I had been fortunate to be a parent in the Pine Hill Waldorf School, when following a serious crisis, the social life of the School spontaneously “threefolded”.   As that community, particularly the teachers, tried to deal with the crisis, they kept applying, in an abstract fashion, Steiner’s concepts, which in effect blinded them to the real observable dynamics that arose in the school, when in addition to the Board of Trustees and the College of Teachers, there was, seemingly out of nothing, generated a purely parent body, called there: the Friends of Waldorf Education.  These three functional social organs / processes in the School solved the crisis-problem, but traditional thinking ended up defeating the natural micro-threefolding that had for a time blessed this community.

The article arose from these experiences, and I offered it to Renewal, which is a parent-oriented Waldorf publication in America.  It was refused, in large part because it suggested that for there to be social health in a Waldorf School, the parents needed their own separate and functionally living organ in order to fully contribute.  Details can be found in the article.

Sometime later in my biography, it came to my attention that there was a kind of stress related tension in Waldorf in America, between those schools who treated the Waldorf pedagogy as an ideological system to be applied to education, and those schools, who were particularly modeling their social form in the Charter school format, in order to bring to children “adapted” versions of the pedagogy.   These were contrary impulses, and I worked out how to provide a mutual understanding and resolution of the conflict.  This too I offered to the magazine Renewal, but once more met the Wall. “Waldorf Charter Schools in America: some social observations:” [ ]  While the editor of Renewal liked my article, the Board of Trustees did not.

During discussion with the College of Teachers at Pine Hill, for example, a rather peculiar event happened.  The School brought an outside expert to help mediate the situation.   I was a parent at Pine Hill at that time, and because of that I was also one of the editors of a parent sponsored little magazine.  The outside expert (I believe his name was Michael Spence) took it upon himself to see to interviewing various members of the School Community and I was recommended by some members to be one of those he interviewed.  He and I spoke for about two hours, and while I had not yet written my article on the Social-Spiritual Organism of a Waldorf School Community, my basic thinking had developed many of the ideas later in that article more concisely formulated.

At the end of our conversation, this gentleman said to me that the School Community was lucky to have me as a member given the depth insights on the social issues I was then able to describe.  So, at his recommendation, I was subsequently interviewed by the College of Teachers, and was there able to offer my thoughts on how the social situation could be healed. 

Unfortunately, Waldorf Teachers, to my experience, easily consider themselves as experts in various fields, because I suspect that part of their development as class room teachers require they educate themselves on a wide variety of subjects - at least superficially.  So when I made an effort to speak to the phenomenal expression of threefolding in Pine Hill, I was basically told I could not be right because abstract cause and effect thinking, using Steiner’s threefolding ideas, already knew the parents role in the school was in the “economic sphere”.  If effect, this presumed knowledge of Steiner’s threefolding ideas, served as a kind of ghost in the mind of the College of Teachers, such as they already knew the answer, and while they thanked me for offering my suggestions, since I “violated” their preconceptions (my terms), what I had to offer, with its discussions of functional micro-threefolding, was irrelevant.

This was one of my first experiences in meeting the Wall in practice, in a situation where it was inconceivable that an individual could become something like a “doctor” of the social, since Steiner never said that, although all his work on the spiritual sciences in his book “A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception” clearly implied that such sciences not only would, but in fact needed, to come into existence.

This encounter with the Wall has continued to this day, even though I have been a member of the Social Science Section for a couple of decades now.  It is simply inconceivable to those working in the Social Science Section to consider the possibility that their personal expertise in understanding Steiner’s social threefolding ideas, in an abstract way, could, would, and should be 
supplanted with a more living form of Goetheanistic cognition, - one that experienced directly the nature of social phenomena free of the ghost-like pre-thought thoughts the reading of Steiner produces in a mind that believes it needs go no further than learn to quote Steiner endlessly.

As a beginning practicing Platonist, I was, to the Aristotelians running the College of Teachers at Pine Hill, someone who could not possible teach them anything of importance they didn’t already know.  This remains true with the Anthroposophical Society as well, for in spite of all the various problems of recent times, that someone might even exist whose appreciation of the Social was more expertly developed is an impossibility.    You cannot tell anything new to someone whose mind is already made up.

In spite of the Wall, I have continue to do research, and below is a partial list of relevant materials developed by a Platonist on social questions regarding the future of the Anthroposophical Society, in order of latest first.  Just keep in mind that the iconoclast, a kind of Socrates among the Philistine Aristotelians of our modern Athens, Dornach, is traditionally asked to commit suicide, so that the authorities do not have to face his/her vital contrariness.  The use of the Wall is as effective as suicide, or even murder, since the effect is to hide uncomfortable ideas, and control the access of regular members and friends to material with which the so-called “leading personalities”, concerning which, like all good politicians, they would not like to be asked questions.

1) “Anarchy, Social Chaos, and Revolutionary Transformation, within and about the Anthroposophical Society” A look at some contemporary goings on in the Anthroposophical Society, from a critical and humorous point of view.
2) “the Anthroposophical Society, Money, and a very necessary spiritual Revolution”  some radical ideas about the Society, its relationship to money, and how to foster needed change.
3) “The Potential Mission of the Anthroposophical Society in the Early Centuries of the Third Millennium the understanding of this Potential Mission is intimately connected to first fully understanding: the Culmination*”
4) “Letters to some Friends” a collection of e-mail letters to a few members and friends of the Anthroposophical Society, from a confessing Platonist about the Aristotelian thinking-limits dominating the Society.
5)  “Zen Anthroposophy” What happens if we modify the practice of Anthroposophy with the simplicity and precision of a Zen-like attitude of mind.
6)  “parallel thinking” individuality and social questions in thinking about the Anthroposohical Society.
7) “Campaign Tour: Notes for my Campaign to run for the office of General Secretary of the Anthroposophical Society in America”
8) “American Anthroposophy” {an effort to extend further the work of Rudolf Steiner, albeit within the context of a different characteristic (American) soul-life, than the European soul-life he mostly taught}
9) “Manure* for the Garden of Anthroposophy: A small flower box of seemingly pungent essays,
creatively preparing for the future evolution of the Anthroposophical Society, at the beginning of the Third Millennium”
10) “subversive pamphlet” (created for the 2012 Ann Arbor Conference):
11) “A Challenge to Dornach and the Councils in America”
12) “The Conscious Death, and the Resurrection, of the General Anthroposophical Society”

The total collection of essays can be found here: “Freely Thought Anthroposophy”: (many of these are more positive or informative, and include critical book reviews of the works of others; ... while a printed collection of older essays can be found here: “Dangerous Anthroposophy”:

Introduction: 9.1.1: I believe, after Grandma* reminded me of how much I was - in a lot of cases with regards to my various criticisms (see links above) of the Anthroposophical Society - myself a guy with a stick up my ass, that it was time to find a precise question that could begin a train of  thought, which might led then to the right conclusion and its nefarious relatives. [*Hereinafter “Grandma” refers to my girl friend’s mother, who passed on Christmas Day, 2014, and who my friendly anthroposophical nemesis, Liz MacKensize { } described as singing in the afterlife the words to the song: “If I had a hammer, ... “ now that she is no longer trapped in a physical body]

While sitting on the toilet (an appropriate place for thinking about “sticks up the ass”, yes?), I began to wonder:  Did or does God have or has He had a stick up His ass?  If not, how did we get one?  If He did, or does, what evidence do we have of that, and the only limitation I set for myself in trying to answer that question here was that I could not use a Steiner quote, unless I first could establish clearly not only whether Steiner had one, but what evidence for that do we have.   Also, what about his girl friends?  So many fun questions and so little time.

I Googled “a stick up his ass” and came up with these “relatives” from the Urban Dictionary: anal, anal retentive, fussy, meticulous, stiff, and stuck up.  Now I fancy that there might be a few folks that never exhibit such qualities of soul, but I also have to confess that at times I certainly have done so.  I also think the very image itself has something to offer, if we imagine someone trying to walk or move (or even run) with such a rigid object (probably long) in such a private place.

Recently I was sharing in a casual conversation with my primary care physician that it may have been  Hegel (I could be wrong) whose view of the five stages of the history of civilizations ended with this characteristic stage: Bureaucracy.   Anyone familiar with the movie The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, from the book of the same name by Douglas Adams, may be familiar with the creatures therein called: Vogons.  Viewing that film will give you a pretty good idea of what it means for there to be a whole race of aliens all with sticks were the sun doesn’t shine - the perfect bureaucrats for the whole universe.

Vogons make you stand in long lines, only to find out that the form you need can only be found in that line over there, as long as you’ve got the right requesting form from that building down the street.

We Christians do have the image of St. Peter at the Gates of Heaven looking at a book which may contain reasons for which you would be barred from entry.  God did apparently give us rules carved in Stone, and I suspect that Rudolf Steiner committed a forest full of trees worth to books with rules about how the Creation is supposed to work and what we have to do to be initiated into seership.  The Lesser Guardian of the Threshold does, in some descriptions, seem to be a creature well up on every single bad or awful things we’ve ever done.

Bureaucratically speaking, is there anyone in class who has any further questions?  The test will be posted 15 minutes before class time, and you will be required to memorize it as there will be not only be no copies of the test provided in the class room, but no pens or papers as well.  Writing answers on the walls in blood is preferable to the use of feces.  A stick has been provided as the appropriate instrument for writing, and everyone should know precisely were to find their own.

Typing answers on a keyboard to be posted on Facebook is okay, but only if you wear a blindfold.  Quoting Steiner will be accepted, but only so long as you get the quote exactly correct, including the page number and date of publication of the text to which you will be referring, including some original German - at least one term  in each sentence.  Crayons will be provided, as well as colored chalk, but only for those with a certificate from an accredited Waldorf School. Thanks for not taking offense, for none was intended.

Introduction 9.1.2 4 a.m. stomach pain.

I get up to drink some water and take some drugs. Check Facebook. Notifications points me to something I wrote in April of 2013, and people are still commenting on that thread in Jan. of 2015. Time Warp. Facebook indicates there have been 127 comments. Some people are still doing “likes” of the original post from almost two years ago.

Stomach hurts worse.

Facebook forums are types of social forms. They collect people like “tar baby”, a character from the Uncle Remus Stories

A Facebook forum allows for a certain safe interpersonal distance. Posts, while not anonymous, don’t tend to meet each other in real time. Its a bit like the United States Senate, which is open 24/7 to allow members to come give speeches about anything, as if the Senate was filled with people that are actually listening. This is probably the reason there are so few physical altercations in the Senate these days, and certainly cause for less violence in a Facebook forum (assuming words can’t hurt)
What is it that motivates people to talk to an empty room? The TV camera is there in the Senate, and in the case of the Facebook forum, that written material and related art are also “recorded”. So in the Senate and on the Facebook forum it isn’t really relevant whether anyone is listening in real time at all.

It is probably not an insignificant fact that the first reader of the Facebook post is the writer of the post. He or she is looking in a mirror and wondering: Are my thoughts being offered here as important as I believe them to be, such that I’m now recording them for posterity?

Then there is my personal (Joel A. Wendt) website. More communications I get to read first, and which then are searched by Google etc. So recently a woman who knows my girl friend was trying to find her e-mail or snail mail address, and knowing my name (as the boy-friend) did a google search on me and discovered this auto-biographical material from more than 10 years ago:

Have the ego forces of human beings created their own imitation of the Akashic record in the electronic aethers? Years ago people used to keep diaries. Some of these collections of thoughts and memories extended to several volumes.

I don’t own a cell phone except for emergencies, so I can’t take a “selfie”. My kids take pictures of the food they are about to eat while dinning out. I read a recent article that a restaurant that was loosing money, yet seemed even more popular (always full) did some research and discovered patrons were staying twice as long at their tables playing with cell phones instead of eating and having conversation. Not only that, there was a serious uptick in complaints about the service and delays, clearly due to (they hired a company to make digital videos of what was going on so as to discover this) people not taking responsibility for ordering late, and for filling up the dinning experience time with this electronic in your pocket Senate-like personal Tar-Baby.

This has been a capsule social observation brought to you by my stomach ache. No thanks are necessary.

Introduction: 9.1.3 Big Questions, such as “clashes of civilizations”.

So, there’s this geographic place - the middle-East, which over the period of a couple of thousand years gave birth to three patriarchal monotheistic religions (the Hebrews, the Christians and the Muslims).   Looked at historically, in a living way, we have a kind of war between the older Goddess religions, that ruled in many places, and efforts by men to become free of what was to them a certain kind of domination.  Most of what St. Paul wrote is based in this effort to assert the patriarchal over the older matriarchal, whether he knew it consciously or not.

We live in an age where the arid intellect dominates most thinking - we can call it the age of the Ahrimanic Enchantment if we want.  Everywhere there exists instinctive resistance to Ahriman’s rule over our consciousness - our soul life.  In the Anthroposophical Society Steiner hoped for us to be more awake to these issues, but the needed meeting between the Aristotelians and the Platonists is still proceeding at a snails pace.

The idea of there being a “clash of civilizations” is one of those arid intellectual products, as is the concept of the war on terror.  Recently I ran into some wisdom, that came mostly from the novelist Salmam Rushdie in a discussion on the Bill Maher show on HBO.  Mr Rushdie pointed out that there was no war between Islam and the West at all, but rather a big unfinished war within Islam itself - something going on for hundreds of years.  Isis etc. are just bit players in this struggle and few of them even are educated enough to perceive the wider questions.

I suppose its their version of our wars between Protestants and Catholics, which produced (and still does in some places) enormous collateral damage everywhere in the world.

These apparent conflicts between “religions” then give rise to all manner of silliness about what religion is and why we get to blame religion for all the wars in recent history.  Again, the roots of this silliness is found in domination of the intellect by its own forces, without appreciating how to get the heart involved.  Christ left clues all over the place, such that the novelist Kurt Vonnegut has said that the deepest and most important religious text ever produced is The Sermon on the Mount.

Rushdie and Vonnegut might suggest to us that we would do well not to pay attention to either academics, politicians, scientists or religious authorities if we want to understand the world
better.   No accident then that Steiner went for the “poet” Goethe; that Owen Barfield was friends with the “novelists” J.R.R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis; and, a lot of American’s like William Gibson, who just published a new “novel”: The Peripheral. 

The “imagination” has powers yet to be fully recognized, but for sure one them includes the taming of Mr. A.   For those who think science fiction and fantasy are luciferic (and lacking intellectual rigor), lets not forget that Steiner said that the cure for Mr. A. was Mr. L.

American Phoenix: at the cost of printing the book on-line, or if you want to go for a free look see: on my website.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science 9.1.4:  Media Games:

Forty years ago, when there was a Coup in South America, or Africa, one of the first acts of the so-called “rebels” was to take over the radio stations and the newspapers.  This is one of those facts which Goethe called: “an instance worth a thousand”.  By this Goethe meant that the natural world revealed some of its deep nature in the occasional single action, if we were careful enough as thinkers and observers to notice the importance of that particular situation.  The World Spoke, and all we had to do was listen.

This centrality of Media remains even more true today, although it is all a bit more complicated since Media itself has fractured and become nearly individualized.  Young people may spend a lot of time glued to the tar-baby selfie phone, and find all kind of distractions that keep them from having no clue as to what is going on in the wider world, unless like in Ferguson or Paris the events are so inflamed that it becomes impossible to at least not know they took place.

When ISIS announced itself, it revealed a great deal of sophistication with certain aspects of social media, and seems to be recruiting all manner of people who for one reason or another have been marginalized by their own society, and are now looking for some payback. 

The Age of Information has spawned a new kind of war zone, one in which most people have no idea how easily they are being manipulated by false information.  In the run up to the Iraq war #2, the Bush II White House even had a special room in the Pentagon where a small group micro-managed media output in order to create not only a desire for war in the wrong place (Iraq instead of Afghanistan), but sufficient disinformation that major media agreed that to oppose either war was the equivalent of treason. 

Then the powers behind the scene created a fake anthrax attack on Congress which immediately rolled over, exposed its throat like a good dog, and then passed the Patriot Act, at over 300 pages, without ever reading one.   If any of this is news to you, you can be pretty sure you are absorbing a lot of information without making any effort at all at discernment.

Rudolf Steiner did not even begin to answer all questions that needed answers, from a spiritual scientific point of view, and here we are 15 years into the Third Millennium and the Anthroposophical Society still doesn’t know how or why to pay attention to Media.  We still print books for god’s sake.

All kinds of people have given up on the A. Society, or simply think of it as a place were basically nice people do mostly well intended actions, rooted primarily in Steiner-said.  What the world needs is not in books by Rudolf Steiner, and the Spiritual World is pretty busy shouting at us through daily enraged events, in response to which the best that seems to happen in these Anthroposophical Facebook Forums is a shrug followed by a quote from someone who is supposedly a spiritual teacher of some sort.

Yes, the world is ending with a whimper and not a bang, while on these pages the whimper seems quite a chorus of people, most of whom don’t seem to know much at all, except that something must be wrong somewhere, and they are pretty sure its the other guys fault.  After all we recycle, and read wonderful books of wisdom.

Just in case you haven’t got it yet, in a lot of places in the world people are walking away from their computers, and taking to the streets.  Tragically, by that time, it is usually too late.

Want to know what to do?  Get involved in local politics, including the politics of your local Anthroposophical Society Branch.  Raise some hell and take a few risks.  You will be surprised how many folks are wanting to go to such a party - a party that has real world meaning.

Celebration and Theater: a People’s Art of Statecraft:

Introduction: 9.1.5  An analysis of the terrorism threat estimate

Anyone can Google and find out that deaths by terrorism are a minor figure in the total number of deaths per year.  You could make that percentage higher if you included all wars as acts of terrorism, and as well all murders.   A lot depends upon how you define what you want to know.

For example, a doctor friend of mine once said, to a whole group of people gathered in his home for a discussion of politics: that the biggest cause of death in America was the doctor.  Since my friend was a really brilliant anthroposophical doctor, its worth paying attention to that one.  Most of us can figure it out, if we count mistakes in diagnosis, errors in the giving of medicine, use of the wrong medicine, overuse of existing medicine, lying in writing papers to the public about which medicines really work, giving people flu shots, and or so-called inoculations against so-called infectious diseases, not keeping hospitals and doctors offices properly disinfected and so forth.

Where’s the rub?  The basic problem is the idea of “cause”.  

Its possible to make the case that terrorism arises because other people go to places they are not wanted, and steal, main and kill, using very advance weapons and lot of money, because it is very profitable to take stuff at its lowest cost and find the ones willing to pay the highest price.  Economics 101, really.  Except, ...

The victims of this avarice don’t like this, but not having unlimited money and advanced weapons they turn women and children into bombs and kill innocents wherever it is easy.  No military victory seems possible, and terrifying the crap out of people not so difficult.  Used to be places like Israel got a lot of this, but now its coming to a theater near you.

In the era of newspapers, we were free of this.  Then comes TV, major media, and infotainment, which means even the local new gives you all the house fires and car wrecks it can.  Attracting viewers makes money, so right now we are seeing a huge increase in talking heads going on and on about what it means that some people in France got killed by “terrorists”.

Some of them actually might say something wise, but who has time to watch it all just to find a good nugget or two.

In effect we have two kinds of events: 1) the killings and/or acts of terror-creation; and, 2) the narrative the arises in the media in response.  The events and the “stories” are often not the same.

Now in my own life time I have been involved in three events that became “stories” on the media, and each time they got it wrong, and in two of which it was clear they “edited” the story to make it seem worse (or more “exciting”) than it was.

Enter the real bogyman, and he is not the terrorist.  People know how to feed and control the beast that the media has become.  The media-beast wants good film (what makes for good TV), and talking heads that it can tell the rest of us are experts, which I suppose means they are more believable. 

The Pentagon has divisions of people that monitor media and seek to manipulate it all over the world.  The second season of Aaron Sorkin’s Newsroom made a really crazy story about that one.  Some where there are people trying to determine the nature of the narrative, and have incredible resources to back it up.  It isn’t just the meat business that feeds us pink-slime and calls it hamburger.

Here’s a link to some informational pink-slime: Pentagon’s PSYOPs: Information Warfare Using Aggressive Psychological Operations:

Now in a war we probably would like our military to use its vast resources to defend us, but when it uses some of those same skills to mind-fuck its own people then maybe, just maybe, something is very wrong inside the Beltway.  Here’s a link to Google asking about: “Pentagon psyops against Americans”:

Are we having fun yet?  Not really, but a decent question is the “cause” matter noted above.  Why?  And, who?  If, in a way, the narrative is more important than the event, why are we getting informational pink-slime from our own elected officials?

Eisenhower warned us of the Military-Industrial Complex, and a lot of people believe these folks, used the MK-Ultra mind control program to created the assassins that killed both John and Robert Kennedy.  Same issue with 9/11 in New York.  Our own government is felt by a lot of people to be behind this stuff.  Is there some secret way to know the truth?  Do we really want to know the truth?

The Roman emperors were gifted at providing “bread and circuses”- that is, to keep the people fed, and give them a release for their more aggressive tendencies.  A nice terrorist attack did take the Ferguson please stop the police from killing unarmed black men off the front page, didn’t it.  The Super Bowl is coming up, and lots of channels now show not only totally fake wrestling, but also very real live combat men on men and women on women with almost no rules, and everybody inside of a cage.  Pass the popcorn please, and when are the hot wings going to be delivered?

The really weird thing about a Spiritual Social Science is we don’t need to find a way to blame Ahriman, or Lucifer, or the Anti-Christ or the Sun-Demon or the Asuras, do we.  No, we just accurately describe what is visible to our thinking about the social.  The social sings its own songs, and most of them (in spite of pink-slime infotainment) are glorious.   Go to Youtube and look up funny dances:

Ordinary people make Youtube.  Just folks.  No hidden agenda, although you can be sure if ISIS can try to crack Youtube, our own Pentagon will not be far behind.

Here’s some George Carlin:
(watch out God)
Some Robin Williams
(a bit raw and wild and wise, from 80‘s in SF)
And for dessert: some Ellen Degeneres

Its cold here today, Friday.  Tomorrow, Saturday, it will be near zero.  I have the flu and Linda has a cold.  Sunday the Patriots are going to do battle with the Colts, and the temperature is expected to be 40.  If I’m still alive I’ll be watching.  Yes, and with the popcorn, although last week was wings ... this week I’ll go for ribs.  I know, I should think about poor in Haiti, but I don’t.   So sue me.


by John Cleese - British writer, actor and tall person

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

The Germans have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be alright, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is cancelled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.

A final thought - " Greece is collapsing, the Iranians are getting aggressive, and Rome is in disarray. Welcome back to 430 BC".

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Ten)

Above, I mentioned in passing, that the general assumptions regarding the social life of humanity, which placed in the center of things large scale conflicts, historical developments, and great leaders, was an error in thought.  That, from the standpoint of Christ, the main object of Love was the individual biography, and the contexts (or Stage Setting) were epiphenomena - that arose in service to the primary phenomena: The application of Love and Justice to the lives of individual human beings.

At the heart of this progressive evolution, that was occurring in spite of global wars, atomic bombs, and all manner of ecological crises, was something that was happening in the interior lives of human beings.  The outer-social forms served the inner life dynamics and karmic needs of individuals.  The idea of the “masses” for example, as distinct from the lives of the great (even such as Steiner), was a misdirection of our understanding of the real purpose of the social, and had us looking away from its essence - the individual Play.

At the core of the human biography was arising what I described as: “The Second Eucharist in the Ethereal” (See the essay: “The Meaning of Earth Existence in the Age of the Consciousness “Soul [ ].  The whole development of historical causes, forming the shared Stage Settings of the world, had an entirely “other” purpose, which is: The creation of social conflict in order to support the individual’s facing of real existential moral dilemmas.

In my book, “the Way of the Fool: the conscious development of our human character, and the future* of Christianity - both to be born out of the natural union of Faith and Gnosis” [ ], I described three paradigms of spiritual development, which were not meant to be the only such paradigms.

There was the Kings stream of Christian wisdom, carried by Rudolf Steiner in his role of the John the Baptist figure of the Second Coming of Christ (the voice crying in the wilderness of scientific materialism).  There was also the Shepherds steam of Christian wisdom, brought forward by Charles Sheldon in his book In His Steps.  This latter led to the thinking/ideal of the “what would Jesus do” movement.  So we had an initiate in Germany writing his fundamental book: The Philosophy of Freedom in 1894, while more or less at the same time, a young pastor in Kansas was writing his book: In His Steps, in 1897.  Then in 1933, a pivotal year in the unfolding of the Second Coming in America, supported by both Christ and the Holy Mother, there came into existence the idea of the Twelve Steps [ ].

These three soul/spiritual developmental processes were quite similar in their fundamental nature, which is why a whole chapter of my book - the Way of the Fool - was devoted to describing their inner relationships.  A core aspect of all three was the support and encouragement of individuals making their own moral Way, outside of the normal religious rules.

In addition to these phenomena of the social life of humanity, there arose among the artists working in film and television, the capacity to notice that human beings were facing moral choices everywhere.  In my writings I have given several examples, but most especially two films by the director/actor Clint Eastwood: Million Dollar Baby; and, Gran Torino.

The film and television artist sees the human condition, and using original, or derivative, sources portrays this problem of moral choice (“the” question of the Consciousness Soul Age) in a dramatic fashion.  The same impulses, namely to notice and describe our moral dilemmas, is alive in all the various versions of popular music.  Both film and music have world-wide scope, and in fact have been having international cultural “intercourse” for many decades.

All of these phenomena are described in my book: “The Art of God: an actual theory of Everything” [ ], which is fundamentally a social science text, with an obvious spiritual orientation.

I urge readers who have understood this to look around at their own social experience and see if they can find instances of where individual biographies are constantly facing personal moral dilemmas.  Ferguson comes to mind, not the event itself but the later protest aspects, which include the reactions of police forces, who feeling attacked have circled the wagons.  This does not at all mean there is a “right” answer ... there isn’t, at least from the stand point of the Christ and the Holy Mother via their influences which produce the Love and Justice in which the whole sequence of human biographies swim (including all incarnations and the total time spent in the Afterlife).

There is only the existential arising of social conflict, which produces for each individual involved a personal moral dilemma, whose true parameters only they see.  As observers of the lives of others this confronts us with the need to truly practice: Judge Not.  For unconscious antipathy, or even sympathy, is the beam in our own eye.

This is why we believe we live in a world of moral horror, such that the fundamentalists of all religions (including natural science*) finds enemies around every corner, and lost in “Judging” can do nothing more that seek to destroy that which lives in the other, because what lives in the other most mirrors something in himself of which he is deathly afraid.  That’s why the Path means for us to perceive and understand the beam in our own eye, for as long as that is there, there is no way for us to truly help our brothers and sisters.

*(This is why the brain scientists, and their servant philosophers, attack the idea of free will and the existence of an individual “I” which guides human action.  Were they to admit to the truth, then they have to look to their own moral activity (there beam/mote), and face its meaning.  See: “I am not my brain”: [ ]), for details.

Introduction 10.1.1 The Fantasy Magic of Computers

Those who do deep studies of the history (including its modern iterations) of Natural Science, such as Owen Barfield (“Worlds’ Apart”, “Saving the Appearances: a Study in Idolatry”) and Ernst Lehrs (“Man or Matter”),  sometimes speak (as did Steiner, but from different perspectives), about the tendency of the thinking in Natural Science to look at phenomena and “invent” something beneath or behind the “appearances”.

Taken to an extreme we get such interesting ideas as atoms, odd and ever more weird and tinier parts of atom, indeterminacy, quantum mechanics, quantum computing and so forth.  The “ghost in the machine” of the material world.

Goetheanism takes a different approach.  It treats the appearances as a kind of speech (Goethe’s “Book of Nature”).  The Goethean scientists just describes (basically) the phenomena and the phenomena themselves tell the needed story.  This is far more complicated than a lot of people might first imagine, and a good link to go to (and bookmark) is: “The Nature Institute”:

At that link one will find a lot of discussion of “context”.  In the wonderful work being published there on the biology of the “cell”, Stephen Talbott,Craig Hodredge and friends, find out that even natural scientists are beginning discover that in the “cell”, a quite complex organism, the whole seems to effect the parts, rather more than the parts effecting the whole.  You should read the material at that website for details ... they are delightful.

Now translate that idea - that the whole causally effects the parts - and imagine the scientists working in particle physics trying to wrap that one around their heads, amidst all those giant machines smashing small things into each other.  If biology follows such a law - lets call it the law of context - maybe physics has to as well.  Which is a variation of what Steiner taught in “the Warmth Course” , “the Light Course” , and “the Astronomy Course” .  For something more modern (and very “Steiner”), read Lehrs’ “Man or Matter”:

Yes, your are right, ... what does any of this have to do with The Fantasy Magic of Computers?

Well, ... the same style of thinking (abstract intellectualism) that created the fantasy that there were little tiny things that came into existence at creation (the so-called Big Bang), and that these ultimately led to biological forms that can “think”, has (somewhat inadvertently) played a kind of game with words.  For example a computer is said to have a memory, which as a word usually/historically referring to something only human beings have.  At the same time, brain scientists (and others), still believing/thinking everything has its causal origin in the tiny, started to describe what goes on in the brain as if the brain was like a computer.  So we get a lot of language of the sort where the mind and consciousness are produced by a meat organ, evolved from the Big Bang, and this meat organ stores “information” (in the form of memories) in the same way a computer stores “data” on a hard drive.

It really doesn’t take much to logically destroy this Fantasy Magic thinking (I’m using magic in the modern sense of something “supernatural” that can’t be true), and more than a few scientists and philosophers have done so.  The following is quoted in my article: “I am not my brain”:

“From Wikipedia

“Qualia is a term used in philosophy to refer to individual instances of subjective, conscious experience. The term derives from the Latin adverb quālis, meaning “what sort” or “what kind”. Examples of qualia are the pain of a headache, the taste of wine, or the perceived redness of an evening sky.

“Daniel Dennett (b. 1942), American philosopher and cognitive scientist, writes that qualia is “an unfamiliar term for something that could not be more familiar to each of us: the ways things seem to us."

“Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), the famous physicist, had this counter-materialist take: The sensation of color cannot be accounted for by the physicist’s objective picture of light-waves. Could the physiologist account for it, if he had fuller knowledge than he has of the processes in the retina and the nervous processes set up by them in the optical nerve bundles and in the brain? I do not think so.

“The importance of qualia in philosophy of mind comes largely from the fact that it is seen as posing a fundamental problem for materialist explanations of the mind-body problem. Much of the debate over their importance hinges on the definition of the term that is used, as various philosophers emphasize or deny the existence of certain features of qualia. As such, the nature and existence of qualia are controversial.”

This is important to appreciate because we have such cultural figures as Sam Harris explaining that in the future computers will have super memories and superior (than human) intelligence.  He seems uncertain as to whether or not this machine will have consciousness, but like a lot of folks his fear is that the “machine” might take over the world.  Even Ahriman knows this won’t happen, but it is a common meme about The Fantasy Magic of Computers.  The current plots on the TV show “Person of Interest” have two sentient machines duking it out over who (or what) is to control the world; and, the movie “Transcendence”, with Johnny Deep, tries to show the horror of what might happen if we were able to upload a human consciousness into a computer.

As to Ahriman, he’s not deluded about the nature of reality, he just plays a rather “interesting” part in it.  We’ve even got anthroposophists that are convinced the Computer is going to take over the world.  Here is an article on S.O. Prokofieff’s version of these fantasies  And, here is a link to my critical review of “From Gondhishapur to Silicon Valley - Spiritual Forces in the development of computers and the future of technology” - written by Paul Emberson:

Our ordinary thinking using common sense will have no trouble.  Just cogitate for awhile about your own memories.  Call some up.  Think about how they come and go unbidden.  All the varieties of human experience we relate to “memory”.  Consider PTSD.  I had a patient I helped in hospital - PTSD from Vietnam.  Woke up in the middle of the night believing he was back in the jungle.  Told me stories of how it was common for him to have vivid “waking” memories or nightmares about all the people he killed in that bad place.  He was pretty clear he was being constantly visited by many of their ghosts.

A computer doesn’t have an “I” that experiences.  It just moves numbers and codes around very very fast, and then formats that according to instructions.  You open your word processor program, call up a stored document and there it is on the screen.  There was no act of “memory” there at all.  The fantasy magical machine was completely unaware of everything.  Humans use the term “memory”, metaphorically, to describe this.  This is not even poetical, and certainly not logical.

Intelligence ... like Einstein, or your cat?  Next time you want to try a Turing Test ( ) of a supposed AI, ask it to describe how it tied its shoes that morning.

Expert Systems:

“In the 1990s and beyond the term “expert system” and the idea of a standalone AI system mostly dropped from the IT lexicon. There are two interpretations of this. One is that “expert systems failed”: the IT world moved on because expert systems didn’t deliver on their over hyped promise.[17][18] The other is the mirror opposite, that expert systems were simply victims of their success. As IT professionals grasped concepts such as rule engines such tools migrated from standalone tools for the development of special purpose “expert” systems to one more tool that an IT professional has at their disposal.[19] Many of the leading major business application suite vendors such as SAP, Siebel, and Oracle integrated expert system capabilities into their suite of products as a way of specifying business logic. Rule engines are no longer simply for defining the rules an expert would use but for any type of complex, volatile, and critical business logic. They often go hand in hand with business process automation and integration environments.[20][21][22]”

Notice the terms: “business logic and “the rules an expert would use”.  Any married person knows that a logic and rules approach is out of the question, and we even invented a term for the required skills: emotional intelligence, to distinguish it from the older idea of IQ.  Now emotional intelligence requires that you actually yourself “feel”.  Oddly enough you have to have a physical body and senses to “feel”.  I know there are software engineers everywhere trying to “teach” their machines to interpret tones of voice, but again married people know the years of experience required to do that simple act.  The same with “face recognition”, ... all kinds of software efforts, but when you read the details of the work you learn that a machine has a hard time distinguishing a grin from a grimace, much less keeping up with the back and forth of a husband and wife having a good verbal fight face to face across a kitchen table, the main content of which most of the embarrassed-to-be-there children would understand.

No doubt the ultimate solution for some will be to get rid of as many of those pesky unpredictable human beings as possible, and just leave the world to the machines.  Now there is something scary there, because who becomes servant and who becomes master.  I suspect that there will be a human being someplace using the machines as a tool that same way the greedy and the powerful use money and political corruption.  All the same, not sure a machine will ever get as “evil” and manipulative as as a cheated on angry spouse.

All the same the science fiction writers have been playing with this one for years, and while they can imagine all manner of the most “fantastic” possible technical advances, we really are very far away from what is needed just to adequately mimic a human being in conversation.

Part of the problem for those, who fancy the probability of “intelligent” machines, has to do with their own more or less cursory self-knowledge of what they do when they think.  They’ve noticed the train of words, and that they seem to “talk to themselves” (what we in the profession of scientific introspection call: discursive thinking).  The linguistic analysts did this, along with some of the French Post-modernists, and they then ran off the cliff that language has no real meaning, because it is highly subjective, ... so can you imagine two AIs challenged to have a public argument with each other representing one of those two points of view?   

The basic problem is missing factual information that only comes from the scientific study of one’s own mind.  Do that long enough, and trying to imagine thinking is about logical processes of words and grammar structures fails to even begin to explain what happens in our “minds” (not everyone can even agree words, much less sentences, always mean the same thing).   The brain scientists and their philosophical cousins, manage to get away with their fancies, because they remove from consideration the whole problem of qualia referenced above.  How do you teach a machine to recognize the taste of spoiled milk by the smell?  Yes, a weird sentence, but who you smell spoiled milk you remember the taste.  A machine might be sophisticated enough to do a chemical test representing one sense, but there will be no inwardness that can remember the relationships.

The idea that we can create machine-made complex analogs of human sense organs is a kind of insanity, and I don’t mean that charitably.  Talk to a trained singer about their “instrument”, and singing becomes so complex only a human being could do it.  The knowledge of breath and breathing and opening and closing of the lips, the movement of the tongue, the resonance chambers of the head, the sinuses, the throat etc. etc. etc.  It is seriously crazy to imagine a machine, however complicated and supposedly self-learning, ever doing that.

But a baby learns to do that by age 2 or 3.  Overlook that miracle, and I’m sorry, we are back to crazy again.

The sticky wicket is words.  You get sloppy with those, and use memory as a metaphor for what a hard drive does, and intelligence as a metaphor for what modern expert systems do (whatever their current name), and you are responsible yourself for the creation of a mental illusion.  Lucifer and Ahriman helped us make a crazy mirror house maze, and it was to offer us a distraction from actually finding out what a real human being is, and what real human potential is.  Sloppy thinking is the swamp land that scientific materialism is sitting on.  The purpose was  to make us swerve away from finding the divine within for a time, - to help the “I” come to a state of feeling deeply alone (a kind of culture-wide dark night of the soul).  A big giant lollipop of a distraction, and serious parts of the whole our modern culture falls for our own self-induced con-job, hook, lie and stinker.  Well, not exactly.  There are plenty of people not drinking that kool-aid  (the Romantics, Transcendentalists, even a few Anthroposophists, New Agers and a lot of modern physicists, philosophers and other scientists - some of their debates are intense and illuminating).

Funny things its the same fake out that lead the way to the Ahrimanic Enchantment (materialism) at the beginning of the Age of Science.  Keep in mind that “materialism” is not just in science ... its everywhere, for example the reliance in religious texts as precisely and exactly true).  The untamed intellect (Mr. A.), coupled with the undisciplined fantasy (Mr. L.) collectively causes a mostly asleep thinking to loose the logic (Logos quality) of the situation.  Natural Science started taking things apart, forgetting (with help) that the parts all originally appear together as wholes in the first place (see my “Electricity and the Spirit in Nature” for some examples: ).  All analysis and no synthesis naturally leads to the conclusion there is only matter and no spirit

When this lets-just-look-at-the-parts thinking gets to biology, the same anti-logos spirit puts the imagination into the state of undisciplined fantasy (Goethe does the opposite, with his “exact pictorial fantasy”).  So we look at evolution and see a mechanism, and natural selection, never noticing that logically the words mechanism and selection require an intentional act not a random one, otherwise they have no logos-meaning.  See: “Evolution and the New Gnosis: Anti-establishment Essays on Knowledge Science, Religion and Causal Logic”, by Don Cruse.   Don, by the way, has passed on, but I loved to listen to his stories of how he would write materialists in biology and ask them to write a sentence about “mechanism” and “selection” and only use words meaning random undirected processes.  Which, of course, they could not do.

As with the confusion over the computer and human consciousness, the metaphors fail to be grounded.  A computer has no memory, or any intelligence.  Only human beings have that.  The software creator can perhaps mimic that, but the engineers can’t give the silicon inwardness.  This is why Mr. A. and Mr. L. encourage the assertions so common today, that the brain has no inwardness, is an analog of a hard drive, its processes are hard-wired by evolution, there is no free will, and the human being’s experience of a self-identity is an illusion.

Ask yourself what Dornach is doing about this, and you’ll see just how far out of touch with contemporary reality the Aristotelians dominating there have gotten.

The logos-mind balances and harmonizes the erratic tendencies of the untamed intellect and the undisciplined imagination or fancy (Steiner’s statue: The Representative of Humanity).   That is, each ordinary human being has the capacity to see through the Ahrimanic Enchantment, by noticing false metaphors and engaging a careful concrete thinking of the relationship between the descriptive (or metaphorical) “word” and its real “idea”.

The “context” (remember that the whole determines the parts) of the information Age is human beings.  We make the computer what it is to become, and a main way we “make it” is by the naming capacity of the individual logos-mind.  We name the world in accordance with the truth, goodness and beauty we find there, once we wake up to making our own “beam” our servant and not our master.

Best way to do that?  When you get a question that interests you, ask yourself to answer it and don’t go running to that wall of books you’ve collected for the answer.  The logos-mind (to be metaphorical: the Rising of the Sun in the Mind) requires practice, nothing else.

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science 10.1.2 The Mystery of American Politics

I have tried in previous sections to allude to the fact that as I developed my “appreciation” for the living dynamics of the “social", I studied two social “forms”.  One was the micro-threefolding form: the Anthroposophical Society; and, the other was the Macro-threefolding form: America.

I studied these because this was where my karma placed me, and so it was obvious that I must have chosen to incarnate in these spheres.  I now want to begin to concentrate more on the phenomena of the Macro-social form: America.   I have been writing (and singing) about America for decades:

We Dream America.
We Sing Her Shadow and Her Light
We Dream America, and
America Dreams Us

Now the purpose of a Spiritual Social Science is not to create a bunch of textual material that someone later has to quote, but to enable the individual to think for themselves by providing them an understanding of something, that has been developed by a mind that is disciplined and has approached the situation scientifically, and in full consciousness of the fact that reality is rooted in the Beings of the Invisible World, the speak to us through its Voice, the world of appearances, or as I have called it, after Goethe: The Book of the Social-Political World.

In all the years I endeavored to learn to Listen to the World Song, this is what I sought.  However, not everything that can be said, will be able to be said on these pages.  The reality of the Social-Political World is even more rich than the Reality of what Goethe tried to read in the Book of Nature.   Why?

Because humanity has slowly been emancipating itself from the Natural World.  The Natural World is our Mother.  All children leave the nest, or are kicked out of the nest when the time comes.  For humanity that time is Now.

A city is not natural.  A farm nearly is, but thousands of years have now passed since most human beings lived in the Womb of the Mother, as aboriginal tribal peoples.  We are, clumsily to be sure, creating our own food: that’s what is hidden in the gesture of scientific materialism that produces “genetically modified organisms”.  The City lives outside the rhythms of the Seasons.  People don’t sleep at night, they sleep when they want.  If it is cold or hot, we’ve taken from Nature “electricity”, atomic energy, coal, and now seek to gain power from the winds and the sun ... to do what?  To do whatever the fuck we want.  To have heat in the winter from our “furnaces”, and cold in the summer from our “air conditioners”.

We no longer clothe ourselves in the skins of animals, but we manufacture materials that never before existed.  Its called “coal tar chemistry”, and just like in the movie The Graduate, the whispered advice of the man at the party, that the Dustin Hoffman character get into “plastics”, is part of reality.  The Child has been set Free, and now we live in the debates of whether this is wise in anyway, because, while many see clearly that we seem to be killing our Mother, others don’t give a shit.

While the Hippie idea of getting back to nature was nice, given Vietnam and a lot of interesting drugs in the Dionysian Ritual (self-development through intoxication) that was the 1960‘s, you really can’t step in the same river twice.   There is no going back to Nature, because Nature Herself is kicking us free.

A really good question is to wonder what the Mother wants?  My guess is She wants us to take responsibility, and that She is the Toughest Bitch in the Universe, and can survive anything we do.  Why?  Because we live in the age of materialism, and haven’t yet gone around to even knowing enough about the Spirit to imagine that we can screw that up too.  For these who like to quote Steiner, he did say that in the prelude to the infamous War of All Against All, we will have all become wizards, magicians or sorcerers - holders of spiritual powers yet to be imagined.

The Planet will die, or at least its physical body.  That’s the big “spiritual” transition that is coming up.  New Jerusalem is a non-material existence.  Will some degenerate version of human beings live on the burnt out husk of the “physical” Planet we are now eating to death?  Probably.  As to Her, I don’t think we can eat Her.  The Asuras, ... the Beings that eat the spirit, they work for Her. 

Well, actually they don’t eat the spirit as much as mulch it and recycle it, when some poor sod has gone so far down the hole of being a crack whore or a degenerate raper of children, that their “ego” (spirit), has no value even to themselves anymore, ... then the Asuras come along, and like the “bugs” that recycle a dead physical body, they recycle a “spirit” that has chosen not to function any more at all.  Personally I hope there is a planetary existence somewhere, where the “I"s that fail to be “I"s get to sleep until the Day of Judgment, where they get woken up and asked if they’d like a second chance.  I suspect all of them will take it.

Back to Earth now.  Last night Obama gave the traditional State of the Union Speech.  It was, well ... it was pure Obama.  That rational idealist seeking to comfort the confused, who couldn’t find the truth if it slapped him/them in the face.

The actor Kevin Spacey, when he was preparing for his role in the Netflix series House of Cards (a rehash of a great English BBC drama of the same name from a couple of decades ago), ... Spacey said he hung out with Congressmen and Senators and asked them straight up what was going on.  They told him, sometimes more or less in exactly these words: “Its all a play.”
Now when I was writing my book “American Anthroposophy” , a certain weird and at the same time difficult question kept popping up: What about Ahriman?  Is he going to incarnate in America?  And, if so, when?  And, why?

Here I am writing this book, and that’s a pretty big question not to at least say something about.  Fact was, however, I didn’t want to approach it with the proverbial ten foot pole.  I knew my limits, and that one seemed way beyond me.  Way beyond.

Then I read this: “The Future is Now: Anthroposophy at the New Millennium”, which appendix was called: “When did Rudolf Steiner Expect the Incarnation  of Ahriman?” by Hans-Peter van Manen. Where I discovered that Ahriman had hidden the time of his incarnation by getting translators and readers of Steiner’s works on Ahriman to not notice something.  Here is the correct language: “And, just as there was an incarnation of Lucifer in the flesh, and as there was an incarnation of Christ in the flesh, so will there be, before even a part of the third post-Christian millennium will have passed, an actual incarnation of Ahriman in the West: Ahriman in the flesh.” R.S. lecture, 1 November, 1919

In my copy of that book, and its translations of this lecture, instead of it reading “before even a part”, it reads “only after a part”.  “Before even” and “only after” lead to two very different ways of thinking about Mr. A’s incarnation.  “Before even” means prior to the year 2001, and “only after” could mean 300 years into the Third Millennium.  Remember what we noted in the previous 10.1.1 on the Computer, how Mr. A. and Mr. L get us to become confused by shifting our attention with just a few words.

So there I was, in 2007, stuck with the possibility that Ahriman might have incarnated in America sometime in the 20th Century, and I am writing this book, which has to say something about it.  So I worked and worked on the problem, and while few have found my solution as elegant as I believe it to be, none of the naysayers with which I have communicated ever did any real “thinking” work.  I spent months writing that part, and had two heart attacks in the same day (Sept 19th, 2007), because of getting too close to such a power.  Here is a link to that aspect of my book, called therein “Outrageous Genius”  And here is Liz’s MacKensie’s review of my book “The Art of God”, on the same theme: Ahriman’s Incarnation in the West: “  The Esoteric Import of Art of God, an actual theory of everything by Joel A Wendt”

I’m going to skip my solution, because as far as I am concerned, if you want to know how Mr. A. is doing, while incarnate in America, read the whole f’n article.  If you are too lazy to that then f’ you.

Obama ... During his original race for the Democratic nomination in 2008, Obama and his chief opponent Hillary Clinton, disappeared from pubic view for a weekend.  They canceled events and disappeared.  Reporters came up with this story - lets just leave it as a “story”.  Obama and Clinton meet that weekend in Senator Dianne Feinstein’s home in San Francisco, and in furtherance of the Democrat Party’s needs, agreed he would get the nomination and she would become Secretary of State for the first term, assuming Obama wins.  Then in 2016, she runs and he helps set up her bid for the Presidency.

Its a kind of win-win situation, because Obama gets the “black” vote, as the first potential “black” candidate, and then 8 years later Clinton gets the “womens” vote, and the first real potential female candidate.  The “calculus" of politics in action.  Sorry Elizabeth Warren fans, she got co-opted when she drank “why don’t you run for Senate” Kool-aid.  Warren is probably right where she is supposed to be anyway.  We need more saints in the Senate than we do in the White House.

Want to know what bullshit Clinton will run on?  Read or watch Obama’s latest State of the Union Address.  Its like a set-up shot in volleyball.  Up it goes, and she jumps in and spikes it.  The Republicans are getting ready to run their usual collection of clowns, and now that they “own” the Senate, they are trapped, because of the ideology of opposing Obama.  Obama last night presented a list of all the things the polls tell politicians Americans want.  The Republicans are incapable of giving us any of it.  2016 is a slam dunk for Clinton (I’m only sort of sorry for the sports metaphors).

Just keep in mind that after this meeting in 2008 Obama’s campaign started to inherit all manner of people involved in Bill Clinton’s former staff, including all the Goldman-Sachs folks, who were already in the path to driving the world economy to its knees.  Yeah, we can blame Bush II, but we are mistaken to be looking to D.C. for the seat of this disease.  Its not there.  Its on Wall Street.

So the world is going in the toilet, Ahriman is incarnate in America, and the “Nation State” America seems to be leading the way to hell.  Hmmm, maybe that’s a bit of a one-sided picture.  Maybe Presidential politics, with its actors and clowns, is just a side show at a carnival.

Is there a “real” America?  If so, what is “It” up to?

I’ve written a lot about this “America”.   A collection of my essays is called: “On the Nature of Public Life: or The Soul of a People, the Spirit of a Nation, and the Sacrifices of its Leaders”.

Fundamentally America is an Idea.  Always has been, and always will be.  I am currently writing a movie script about that and related matters, which is titled (right now): “Consent”, after the use of that word in the Declaration of Independence: “to secure these rights,‭ ‬Governments are instituted among Men,‭ ‬deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed‭” ‬Declaration of Independence,‭ ‬July‭ ‬4th,‭ ‬1776

Basically contemporary Americans are trying to rediscover “Civics”, the teaching of which has gone from our schools, becoming subsumed by “social studies”.  “Civics” is about what America is for, why it came into being, and what was hoped to happen when the American Experiment was launched.  The movie is designed to portray “civics” in living way in a drama, with as little lecturing as possible.  But given that America is an Idea, that’s not as easy as it might seem.

So we could say that the real America is an Idea, that has become tangled up in a jungle of lies, and it is no wonder then that the Father of Lies incarnated here, just so at the beginning of the Third Millennium, he could screw with the Idea of what America is.

From a philosophical point of view an idea is a complex of concepts, as Steiner described it in A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception.  For me, poetically, and spiritual scientifically, an “Idea” is the Ethereal Garment of a Spiritual Being.   The funny/odd thing about an “idea” is that you can’t kill it - its immortal or eternal.  America is the answer to the question:  How does a free people go about governing themselves?  The more free human beings become, the more important is the answer to that question.

Steiner gave us the “concept” of spiritual freedom in The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, but it was up to an American, Ursula K. LeGuin to give us a pragmatic and down to earth imaginative picture (Garment) of that “Idea” in her novel: “The Dispossessed - an ambiguous utopia”.

to be continued ...

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science 10.1.2a The Mystery of American Politics (continued)

Where, and how, do we meet an “Idea” in social reality - particularly such an idea as America, and that in the context of political life?

My screenplay “Consent”, near the beginning has this poetic voice over, done in the voice of the Native American homeless character: Sam walks in dreams.

‭“I walked in a desert, on a moonless night,
‭and tripped over a black rock.
‭Already then on my knees,
‭I looked under the rock
‭and found a diamond,
‭that was not a diamond.
‭It was a living light that sparkled in the darkness of time.
‭In a bell-like whisper, it sang me its name:
‭Then, surprised, ... I fell awake,
‭while beneath my feet the very grains of sand wept for joy.”

‭There were people living on these lands - on/in the Americas - before the Europeans came and declared ownership of all for God, Country, and Queen.  While Columbus Day is remembered by
‭the descendants of the aboriginals that lived here, not as a holiday to celebrate, but a day that will live in their souls in infamy, there was a time for a while that the USA aspect of America was known as: Columbia ‬

This “feminine” aspect, mostly attributed to certain English thinkers, should not be taken lightly.  This aspect of the Idea, in the sense of Columbia, also can be related to something know these days as the Black Madonna.  This “coloration” of the figure of the Holy Mother, lives particularly strongly among aboriginals converted to Catholicism in South America,

One of the stranger mysteries that I stumbled on, during the almost 14 years of my early (1969-1982) adult “education”, at the hands of Divine Providence in the environs of the San Francisco Bay Area (principally Berkeley, California), was the Hopi Prophecy.  Briefly the Hopi oral history remembers the destruction and fleeing of Atlantis, with some fleeing to the West (the Americas) and others to the East.  Details of my research on the spiritual scientific meaning of this can be found here: “The Mystery of the True White Brother”: which was updated here: “the Songs of the True White Brother”:

One basic way of putting forward this concept of the True White Brother is that the Hopi were told, by the Creator, that there would come a time when their way of life was being destroyed, and at that moment an aspect of the invading white race - the True white brother - would come to them with the life plan for the future.  In the words of one leading Hopi Elder, “they are Sun Clan, they are the Children of the Sun.”  Anthroposophy, by the way, is the New Sun Mystery.

When I was living in Fair Oaks, California (1983-1985), I first wrote of Hopi Prophecy, and Anthroposophy, in Carl Stegmann’s study letter: America in the Threefold World.  This writing prompted a local half-breed woman (half white, half Cherokee), studying Waldorf Education at Steiner College, to reach out to me and encourage me to go to the Hopi Mesas in the Southwest of the USA (the Four-Corners area), and actually visit the Hopi, which I did over the Easter Weekend of 1985.  Details of that visit can be found in the above essays.

One remarkable story she shared with me was that when she was first allowed to attend special ceremonies of her Cherokee relatives, given in their aboriginal language, the Chief (priest) kept using the word: Christ.  Afterwards she asked him why, and he told here that their people had always know there was an Earth-Spirit, and now they knew His Name.  Recall then Steiner, that when the blood fell to Earth from Christ at Calvary, the aura of the Earth changed, and Christ became the Spirit of the Earth.

Aboriginal peoples have always had their own mysteries and these elder (Saturn) mysteries should not be overlooked.   Some historians of the USA, attribute the “idea” of Articles of Confederation to the encounters between colonists and the Iroquois Confederacy. (See the book: Forgotten Founders .  Ben Franklin was apparently friendly with these people and often attended their meetings, quite surprised by the way they conversed.  Each new speaker, before offering their own thoughts, repeated in summary form what the previous speakers had said.  Would that members of the Anthroposophical Society had such discipline).

In some tribes belonging to the Iroquois Confederacy, by the way, the female leaders choose the male leaders - the Chiefs, through a long community process our modern politics would be unable to imagine.  No one was elected by a manipulatable popular vote, and only people of proven character were given such responsibilities.  Imagine an Anthroposophical Society based on that principal - one done in front of everyone, instead of hidden away in private groups that essentially pick their own successors.

With this background then, let us return to the question: Where and how does an Idea live in a social form, perhaps keeping in mind that in the Americas, there may have been an Idea already living here before the Europeans invaded.

From my screenplay: “Consent”:

”Carl, looking at laptop camera:‭ “‬America is an idea.‭  ‬Its always been an idea.‭  ‬A main element of this idea was to answer this simple question:‭ ‬How does a free people govern itself?‭  ‬We’ve been engaged in that‭  ‬experiment for over‭ ‬200‭ ‬years.‭  ‬An experiment testing whether self-interest could be wise.‭  ‬This has been true among most ordinary people.‭  ‬We play by the rules,‭ ‬we work hard,‭ ‬and we mind our own business.‭   ‬Some people have chosen to not play by the rules,‭ ‬and to corrupt our political life with money and to steal our freedom,‭ ‬essentially making us wage slaves in a great big version of the Company Store.‭  ‬Corporations and money rule,‭ ‬not the American People.

‭” “This is wrong.  Can it be fixed?  Yes, and without violence.  We just change the nature of the conversation.  We talk about the real ideas; and, ... because we are many and those who try to rule are few, we will prevail, without violence, just with peaceful and politically real conversations.  No b.s., just plain talk.” “

‭One of the aspects of all this that can confuse people, especially non-Americans, is what does this have to do with us, who live in Europe, or South America, or other places different from the USA.  From my book/collection of essays: On the Nature of Public Life: ‬

“Now some may think that if the United States is being forged into a People of Peoples, what does that mean for the rest?  This is a quite legitimate question.

“As was pointed toward in the beginning of this paper, the 2004 presidential election in the United States is the concern of the whole world.  In a very real sense the rest of the World’s Peoples are the Father and Mother of the People of Peoples, and we who live in the United States are their offspring. We are their clumsy and errant adolescent child, who in our natural nationalistic egotism think we should be in charge, and that the whole world should revolve around us.  In a kind of self important drunken ecstasy we stumble around the house and the neighborhood, wreaking everything in sight.

“I am sure this is written everywhere in the various wisdoms of the world, but in that which comes to Western Culture as the Ten Commandments, number four or five (depending upon your rite) implores: “Honor thy father and mother” (“ order that thy days may be prolonged upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee..”).  As I tried to point out in the essay America’s Growing Moral Debt (see below), the People of the United States owe a great deal to the rest of the World.”

The Earth is One Place, not many.  And the motto of the USA, E Pluribus Unum, Out of Many, One, does not just apply to us.  Part of the Mystery of American Politics is that it belongs to the whole world.  It will not be healed of its dysfunctions by its own people.  How long, if your neighbor is a wife beater and a drunk, do you stand by watching her and her children suffer, while doing nothing but sitting there in self-affronted judgment?

America is a universal Idea.  It never has and never will belong to just a few.  From my “Economic and Social Rebellion”:

“The American Experiment (its Spirit, as it were) is not confined to the geographic America.  It is related to a slowly evolving universally human impulse for brotherhood, which at its highest moral/spiritual level includes individual and mutual sacrifice.   An excellent example of this all-human impulse was represented by an office worker standing in front of a tank in Tienanmen Square, in an effort to show solidarity with the protesters there, many of whom were soon to be killed.  This same moral-spiritual solidarity impulse arose in the recent social phenomena we are calling the Arab Spring.”

to be continued ...

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science 10.1.2b The Mystery of American Politics (continued)  Some Occult Background Material

America, in having to become the place where Ahriman incarnated on Dec. 25, 1950, has what might be called an occult or esoteric “history”.  Every place does of course, but only certain “thinkers”, with the right help, can put the pieces together.  This is a bit of a diversion, but is needed as “background” so as to appreciate other matters we will take up later.

First it is important to recognize a couple of dividing lines, as it were.  One physical (the Atlantic Ocean) and the other Spiritual (the meaning of the “event” of the Second Coming of Christ).  While Rudolf Steiner was the John the Baptist figure of the Second Coming (the voice crying in the wilderness of scientific materialism), he realized he should not cross the Atlantic, so in spite of invitations, never went further than the Western reaches of Europe in the British Isles.

The Second Coming is not Christ doing something different (He’s always been available: ask, seek and knock), but a change in human consciousness was first necessary (the arrival of the on-looker separation), which allowed “self-consciousness” to arise (Barfield points out that this word only appeared in English a little over 250 years ago.

Prior to the beginning arrival of the Return of Christ in the Ethereal perception capacity, there was a spiritual/physical battle in Europe, which led to the American and French revolutions.  These were part of the necessary beginning of the end of the old aristocracies of blood, which had to happen to make possible the arrival of the appearance of democratic institutions, although that was to fail, and the occult brotherhoods succeeded in creating, among the new mercantile and banking families, a vast money reservoir, and thus a successor aristocracy of wealth, to replace the one of blood.  Hidden oligarchies of wealth are what really appeared.

These latter wealth aristocracies still strive to rule today, from behind the scenes, but having been seduced by ahrimanic economic theories, rather than a true “Sun” economics (Rudolf Steiner and Elizabeth MacKenzie - see her: “Aesthetics of Economics and The Scottish Masonic Tradition In the Light of The Folk Spirits” ), the families of wealth are realizing that making the growth of wealth fully dependent upon Central Banks endlessly printing more and more money, contained an end game limit that was bound to fail. ( - google other stories if you want more details)

The leader of the spiritual/religious aspect of this battle was Christian Rosenkreuz, the founding teacher of the Rosicrucian Order (Order of the Rosy Cross).  The personality more involved in the physical/social aspects was Saint Germain, who was the founding teacher of the Free Masons.  Legend actually has Saint Germain (known publicly as “the professor” in America), yelling from a balcony at those hesitating to act, “Sign It!”, at the moment the Declaration of Independence was signed.  The esoteric aspects of the Catholic Church, of course, wanted both these men dead, but the power of the Church to routinely kill heretical leaders was fading.

All the same, significant portions of this battle still rage today in America.

We know the Free Masons designed Washington D.C., although letting it be built on a former swamp was perhaps not a good idea.  The Occult Brotherhoods are very active in these battles, which one can discover by researching what goes on at the Bohemian Grove in California, and the Skull and Bones Society at Yale.  America Rhodes Scholars are sent to England to become educated in the now failing elite (favorable to the aristocracies of wealth) economics, which is what happened to Bill Clinton and tied him to those personalities like Larry Summers, and others at Goldman Sachs.  At the height of the 2008 crisis, falsely blamed by some on Bush II, the Secretary of the Treasury was Henry Paulson, a former Chief Executive of Goldman Sachs.

Wall Street, as observed before, as the center of the temporal power of the oligarchy, is stronger than Washington D.C., which has adopted the role of a well paid, but passive, servant. 

From a certain point of view, the main spiritual nature of those developing their gifts in the Americas, has to be seen as gifts of the will.  Americans do.  Thinking philosophically, in the sense of European residues of the Epoch of the Intellectual Soul (something that has rendered our Universities powerless to understand the world), has limits.  Christ’s teachings are acts of will.   For example, those who think I write too much, need to realize that I’ve driven completely across the United States, a journey of more than 3000 miles, five times, seeking the resolution of various biographical riddles.

A profound act of will (of several people) occurred in the founding of the 12 Steps of AA around 1933, a significant year as regards the Second Coming (see my: “The Spiritual Scientific Import of the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous”: ).  The overcoming of addictions (and we all have them folks, we just don’t name them that - mostly we call them bad habits) involves serious applications of the will - the intellect/heart is pretty useless except for understanding and sympathy.  “Bad” habits (psychic parasites living in the astral body) are only removed by the application of will forces.

Even Rudolf Steiner knew that the Double in America was far more powerful than the Double among the Europeans (see Geographic Medicine), which is why the sciences dealing with the Double (such as the 12 Steps) are far more advanced here.  AA arose through an inspirational  cooperation between Christ and the Holy Mother, that led to aiding the wills of living and deeply troubled human beings.  They (the human beings) led, and the higher Beings followed.

So one way to see the modern situation in America is that while the Occult Brotherhoods fight over power at the top of society (still confused about the declining value of hierarchical social forms), ordinary people engage in profound spiritual development at the level of ordinary life.  At the social commons lies a whole other kind of “power”, one that will ultimately be far superior to dying institutional forms, many of which were born all the way back in the Third Cultural Epoch.  Only the multi-national Corporation seeks to live on into the Third Millennium, a creature all of its own, completely free of the “I” forces of human beings. Nation States are being made things of the past. (see 1.1.3 for details)

The American Anthroposophical Society could play a more awake role here, but is blinded by Steiner-said, and a basically complete failure to even begin to appreciate American Culture.  Here is an article I wrote on a few of the characteristics of American Culture still ignored by the Society: “American Culture - a first look”:

As a kind of cherry on the top, of this essay/dessert, I will share with you next some of the stories of a classic American “will-initiate”, my long time friend: Arthur Lisch.  Arthur, by the way, was a member of the “diggers”, along with Peter Coyote (fake actor’s name of a guy who maybe wanted others to forget his once being a serious hippie), and Wavey Gravey, the hippie Clown. Here’s one of their stories - a reprint of a newspaper article on the “diggers”, who went about feeding hundreds of thousands who gathered in San Francisco for the Summer of Love in 1966 etc (a second echo of the Return of Christ in the Ethereal):,4010626

I didn’t meet Arthur until later, when he had settled down, become an anthroposophist, and married a Waldorf School teacher.  He has many stories, and beginning in the ‘60‘s traveled around a lot (wandered), ending up in odd places.  He trusted his instinctive will, and once found himself and his girlfriend in some forested country land in the East of America, where they drove by a place where there were dozens of cars parked out on the road.  Being Arthur, they walked in and introduced themselves.

Turned out this was a meeting of serious Native American elders, and some of the young folks present wanted Arthur and his girl to leave, until one of the elder Elders reminded them, more or less by saying: “if he found us, he is meant to be here”.

I once heard him give a remarkable presentation on what he called: spiritual geography, at a conference around 1997, in Sonoma County, CA.  He had a relatively large topographical map of California, with actual raised three-dimensional features.  He demonstrated for us that if you looked carefully at the raised features of this map, you could see the impression of a dragon, lying in a way that essentially surrounded the San Francisco Bay Area, with its open jaws pointed at San Francisco from the North and its body and tale curled all the way around first north, then east, and then south, encompassing the whole East Bay, including Oakland and Berkeley.

He then showed us the locations, all through California, of all the Catholic founded monasteries there named after St. Michael.   There were at least a dozen.  The most southern monastery, was near the coast of Southern California, just opposite an island off that coast that local Native tribes called: the Gate of Death.  Not only that. you could draw a straight line from the most southern, all the way north traveling through Santa Cruz just south of the SF Bay Area, through what is now called Mt. Davidson in SF itself, but which was originally called Mt. St. Michael, and has a  60 foot concrete cross on the top, finally passing through Santa Rosa.  All the Michael monasteries in California were on this line. 

The monasteries in Santa Cruz (cross?) and Santa Rosa (rose?) showed the influence of the Rose-Cross on this geography.  The line, according to Arthur, was a spear, and it goes right through the mouth and head of the dragon, and what this represented was a geographical premonition of Michael’s defeat of the dragon in 1879, wherein the dragon was thrown to the earth. 

Keep in mind that the western edge of California is on the meeting border of two of the four Ethers, circling the earth.  These borders of the four ether-zones run north south.   “The Etheric Formative Forces in Cosmos, Earth and Man: A Path of Investigation into the World of the Living.” by Guenther Wachsmuth: ( ).  Carl Stegmann, author of “The Other-America: the West in the Light of Spiritual Science”, describes therein that the giant-ism of plants in that region of the earth, such as the Redwoods and the Sequoia, as due to this confluence of these two ether-zones.  Nor does one want to accidentally step on one of the huge “banana slugs”, that come crawling out of the plant life in Northern California in the course of a nice winter’s rain.

California is also on the Ring of Fire ( ), which is the left over remains of when the Moon was removed from the area of the Pacific Ocean as described by Steiner in Occult Science, order to create a realm for certain classes of Beings that would have keep Earth evolution taking a course in the direction excessive hardening.

One last Arthur story ... One day, I think this was in the late 80‘s or early 90‘s, Arthur, then living in Northern California felt the urge to go to Washington D.C. and investigate the architectural stuff of the Free Masons.  So he went, and while doing some research visiting with various clerks in government offices, found out that near the center of the cross formed by Lincoln Memorial, the White House, the Capital Building, and the Jefferson Memorial, in which in more or less the middle also lies the Washington Monument, there is set a small (3x3x4 foot) concrete block, placed their decades ago by the U.S. Geological Survey, as a marker from which to take exact instrument readings of directions (exactly East, North, South and West), as well as an exact above sea level elevation measurement.

Arthur was aware of the significance of the Four Directions to Native Americans, as well as the fact that the Four Directions are clearly mentioned in the Foundation Stone Meditation, and in fact that when Steiner did an open air ritual ceremony connected to the laying of the actual foundation stone for the original Goetheanum, he actually spoke to the spirits of the Four Directions directly, - Arthur then of course went to find this Survey marker.

While he was looking at this remarkable artifact, pointing in exactly the Four Directions, he noticed, perhaps a hundred yards away, a circle of people, who as he walked toward them turned out to be Native American Elders, some of whom remembered meeting him years ago when he wandered into their gathering in an Eastern forest.  He had had contact with a couple of them in the intervening years, and he was welcomed into their circle.

He discovered they had been coming to the Mall for several years, doing a seven year cycle of ceremonies praying for the future of America and of the Earth.  When Arthur pointed out the Four Directions artifact, the group moved the circle there, and the last couple of years ceremonies were held with that Four Directions artifact in the center of their ceremonial circle.

When I went to visit Hopi Elders, on the Easter Weekend of 1985, to discuss their prophecies of the True white brother, Arthur was to go with me, but at the last minute his wife fell ill, so I drove myself alone, the almost 2500 mile round trip, for that effort to make a connection, between Native America spirituality and Anthroposophy.  A connection did happen at a spiritual level, but not on the physical plane.  See the essays mentioned above.

Of course, Arthur and I are not the only anthroposophists seeking to foster such relationships with America’s aboriginal peoples, and in my view, given the general failures of the Society in America to become grounded here, the Michael Festival that Steiner hoped would be inaugurated, has never come to pass ... apparently. 

The fact is the “Spirit” finds other places, when something It tried to foster fails.  For that reason I believe that the annual meeting of the Bioneers, which takes place around the middle of October in Marin County in Northern California, is that Michaelic festival.  Here is a link to an article I wrote some years ago on the Bioneers:  Here is a link to their website:

In fact, I suspect that the spear drawn on that map by Arthur years ago, goes right through the “eye” of that dragon, as it passes through the location of the Marin County offices, which are used for the Bioneers conferences and were designed by Frank Lloyd Wright.  Here’s a link to google images of that remarkable building:

I hope you have enjoyed this slight and introductory material on the Occult Mysteries in America.  There is a great deal more should one bother to lift their heads above their collections of the texts of Rudolf Steiner ... with a bit of reminder of one last theme that has been presented before: the Culmination ( ).  This event, taking place between 1997 and 2003, on the Internet discussion group “the Ark”, at least at this point seems to have had no notable effect on the Mystery Nature of American Politics, although at least four American personalities involved, all richly connected to Rudolf Steiner, participated in the Culmination, three of whom are still living, and one of them (me) does write a lot about American Politics, and is currently shopping a screenplay on the deeper Idea nature of the Republic.

to be continued ...

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science 10.1.2c The Mystery of American Politics (continued)

The World Is.  It includes me, and others.  Words wander by, not unlike the bird songs, and whispers of the wind in the trees outside my window.  I go out into this world, most often of necessity: getting groceries, visiting the doctor.  Sometimes for pleasure, but age and infirmities often set limits.  Can’t walk well at all.

I have a TV, and a computer or two, as well as a phone.   Then there are books, some of them so lovely they make you cry, like the recent one by Patrick Rothfuss: “The Slow Regard of Silent Things”.

Some of my five children call me weekly, or more often.  My eldest is helping me write my screenplay.  I live with a woman, and she has her children and her life and interests.  All around me the play of words, from friends, from the TV, from books, even from the wind, which sighs and roars and whispers songs only felt in the heart.

Then there are the crows.  What a funny word to describe a lot of crows: a “murder” of crows.  I came home one day from a meeting near the Old North Bridge in Concord, MA, where the American Revolution began supposedly with the “word” spoken by: “the shot heard ‘round the world.”  My family - we were living at River House ( ) at the time - told me that a “murder” of crows had visited that morning, 50, 60 ... more, countless, everywhere on the roof, in all the trees, pecking at the ground.

That evening a bunch from the meeting earlier in the day at the Bridge invited themselves to visit - they were having a conversation and needed a place to continue it, and thought we might want to join in - Linda and I.  The group was connected by an interest in Rudolf Steiner and Anthroposophy - except Linda, of course.  Linda reads Sanskrit, studied Vedanta for 20 years, and is on Vestry of the local Episcopalian Church.  Makes for interesting word experiences.

One of the visiting gentleman, a European, was ask to speak about his “spiritual experiences” and talked for almost 30 minutes about his “initiation” where he fought with Ahriman and won.   In the silence when he was done, where several people had clearly become hypnotized, I yelled out: “Fuck Steiner.  Fuck Initiation.”  The spell was broken.  Later, after everyone had left, or gone to bed somewhere in that big house, I wondered out loud to Linda whether the murder of crows had visited earlier in the day because Ahriman was coming to visit that night.

I miss River House, and especially the Grandmother Tree ( ), who was a very good friend, and give the best and calmest kinds of advice.

I once worked very hard for weeks on an essay about the Third Fatima Prophecy: “Saving the Catholic Religion from the Roman Church - through deepening our understanding of the Third Fatima Prophecy” ( ).  After I posted it to my website, I walked down the driveway at River House, to put a Netflix envelope in the mail box, when a river (50 or 60) of squirrels erupted from a copse of trees on my right, danced back and forth in front of me for about two minutes, and then disappeared into a copse of trees on the left.  I’ve always felt the presence of the Holy Mother and Her Friends in my Nature experiences.

I tell these stories because I spend most of my day (and have for years) with a TV in line of sight with my computer screen.  I keep it on CNN, with the sound off, keeping a bit of an eye on the material scrolling across the bottom.  I read Drudge everyday, get a digital NY Times everyday, read Alternet, and Democracy Now, and also get Sam Smith’s Underground News a few times a week.

I follow the links and am apt to read The Wall Street Journal, or the London Times.  I subscribe to Al Jezeera’s Internet feed, but it is more or less the same as everyone else, including the Huffington Post, which I also get through e-mail.

I listen to the world song, as it comes through the News, with the same love and appreciation of what lives there, as that which comes to me from Mother Nature.

I pay special attention to films and television dramas.  My experience is that the artists involved are often very perceptive.  My book The Art of God is full of references to films, because I find artists so acutely attuned to the human adventure.

I have 180 “friends" on Facebook, and 936 subscribers to my videos on YouTube.  Some people are reading what I write on the couple of Anthroposophy Facebooks groups to which I belong.  I send stuff, on occasion, to “being human” and Anthroposophy World-wide but hardly get acknowledgement of receipt anymore. 

Then there are thoughts.  A head full of thoughts, from waking up in the morning to going to sleep.  Songs everywhere, some in my head, some outside via the senses.  On many occasions they seem connected, as if there was an intelligence weaving them into a whole.  Is that intelligence me?  In The Art of God, I described God as distributed.  In everything.  So is God talking to God in all these words, or all these songs?  Or is God talking  to Himself?  Is there a difference?

Politics has a lot of words.  A flood, a torrent, a tsunami.  I live now.  I live in a wonderful boat, doing well in the seas of now.  What about the other boats?  Do I care?  Should I care?  How can I care?

Years ago I gave up on some of these kinds of questions, and just decided if all that is, sings, then I should sing too.

Here is the current version of the last scene, before the credits, of my screenplay “Consent”:

[background - Gloria is subpoenaed to appear before a Congressional Committee, chaired by a Republican.  Their concern is to reassert the ongoing narrative that the government is in charge, and there is no oligarchy.  Gloria appears by herself, with apparently no attorney.  This takes place about half a year after the “event”.]

Gloria has sat down in the chair before the microphones, alone.  She has no papers with her.

Chairman Roscoe: “Mrs. Stephenson.  You seem to be alone.  Were you not advised to come with a lawyer?”

Gloria: “I am one.”

Roscoe: “What?  You are what?”

Gloria: “A lawyer, Mr. Roscoe.  I’m a lawyer”

Roscoe: “Oh, well .... okay,  By the way my proper title is Congressman Roscoe.”

Gloria: “Well, if we are going to do proper titles, then maybe you should call me Citizen Stephenson.” 

Roscoe (looking at aides): “Huh ... I’m sorry.  I don’t understand.”

Gloria: “I know Roscoe, ... that’s why I came here, ... to help you understand.”

more conversations among the aides and such

Matrix (the committee’s main legal council): “Mrs Stephenson, there are certain protocols for this place.  It is proper to refer to the Chairman as either Chairman Roscoe or Congressman Roscoe.  Please do so in the future.”

Gloria:  “Really?  What’s the plan then?  You going to spank me if I don’t behave?”

Matrix (showing some anger):  “Mrs Stephenson, I’ll remind you, you are under subpoena.  If you don’t follow the rules, you’ll be found in contempt of Congress.”

Gloria: “Well, you are right about that, I do hold Congress in contempt.”

bits of applause and laughter from the audience in the room, Roscoe bangs his gavel for silence.

Roscoe (trying to get his “authority” back): “Mrs. Stephenson, we know you have ... “

Gloria (interrupting him):  “That’s Citizen Stephenson to you, Congressman, if we are going to have titles and such.  (Roscoe tries to get control back, but Gloria just goes on, talking over him).  You see Congressman, the reason you and your groupies back there are confused, is that you haven’t been paying attention.  I’m a Citizen of the United States of America - you know the ones - the ‘We the People' folks.  You work for us not the other way around.  The only reason I came here today was so that what went on between us would be on live television.  You need a lesson in Civics and I’m here to deliver it.”

more applause and laughter ... Roscoe uses the gavel, and it is ineffective ... finally things quiet down.

Matrix and Roscoe confer, and someone comes toward Gloria carrying a Bible for her to swear on. 

Matrix: “Lets get on with this, and leave the sideshows aside.  Please stand and raise your right hand and put your left hand on the bible.”

Gloria: “Why?”

Matrix: “That’s the usual  procedure Mrs. ... ah Citizen Stephenson.   People take an oath before testifying to the Committee, ... to tell the truth.”

Gloria: “Are you and Congressman Roscoe going to take that oath as well?  If I’m supposed to swear to tell the truth, you should swear to tell the truth too.  This is American isn’t it, and one of our fundamental legal principles is equality for all under the law.  So if you want me to swear, then you should swear too.”

Roscoe, interrupting: “We are here to have  you testify ... ma’m ... (trying to avoid calling her citizen).    That’s why we’re here.”

Gloria: “Its not why I’m here.  If you get to ask me a question under oath, then I get to ask you a question under oath.  That’s only fair, isn’t it?  The law is supposed to be fair, right?”

more applause and laughter, Roscoe tries again to gavel things into silence, and this time it doesn’t work, so he and the other politicians and aides just get up and leave the room.

Gloria (getting up and turning to the audience):  “Shows over folks. What do you say we all just go to lunch someplace, have a drink, or smoke a joint and get better acquainted.” 

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Eleven)

Revolution.  Anarchy.  Steiner’s The Philosophy of Freedom was a textbook version of philosophical anarchy.  Freedom was not there as a moral principle, but as a means by which the individual’s own personal sense of what was right and what was wrong was philosophically and scientifically justified.  Steiner said this most clearly in A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’ World Conception: “Man is not behaving in accordance with the purposes of the Guiding Power of the world when he investigates one or another of His commandments, but when he behaves in accordance with his own insight.  For in him the Guiding Power of the world manifests Himself.  He does not live as Will somewhere outside of man; He has renounced his own will in order that all might depend upon the will of man.”

The Second Eucharist in the Ethereal* reveals that Christ so powerfully supports individual spiritual/moral freedom, that in that Second Eucharist Christ spends His life forces into the will of the morally free human being.  We choose, He follows.  What is a physical/material Host in the First Eucharist, is, in the Second Eucharist, aspects of the Life Garment of the Creator God Himself.

*[For the whole, see Living Thinking in Action: .  A part of this is at the end of this Part Eleven introduction.]

The first hundred years of anthroposophical activity was to make possible my book: The Art of God: an actual theory of Everything.  What I did was eat what Steiner and his best pupils gave/created.  When I found my Way to those works, in the second seventh of years of my incarnation, I devoured them.  I ate Steiner, Coleridge, Emerson, Adams, Whicher, Schad, Schwenk, Hauschka, Barfield, Tomberg, Klocek, Clarke, MacCoun, Bornfield, Stephenson, Zajonc, LeGuin, - I dined on dozens of minds through their books, including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

I was the dry sponge needing, what is said in the First Leading Thought: “ ... only they can be anthroposophists who feel certain questions on the nature of man and the universe as an elemental need of life, just as one feels hunger and thirst.”

To that heady stew I added my own seasoning - my own nature.  Nor was I any kind of intellectual - that was not my gift.  Yes, I was a truth seeker, but even more I was driven to find and act out of knowledge of the good.  Was I perfect?  Good grief no.  But the main core of my inner life, to the extent that I sought knowledge, was selflessness.  I did not act for me, and in point of fact, my knowledge-seeking actions often came at a personal cost to me.

William Bento’s review of my American Anthroposophy called it “bitter medicine” ( ).  Again and again, I sought out and spoke the truth to my fellow anthroposophists, and this act above all led to the Wall.  The creators of this Wall did not like the truth, but rather preferred their self-generated myths: that Steiner was perfect and never made an error; that Prokofieff was the perfect interpreter of Steiner, and he never uttered an untruth; and Ben-Aharon was flawless as well. Pick a supposedly significant anthroposophist and there you will find a myth.  

Yet, I failed/refused to so believe, and as a consequence I would not be published precisely because the mirror I held up to the Society was too clear and too revealing - Bento was correct, it was: “bitter medicine", although even he did not fully understand that work, so I had to write my own commentary on my own work “Bitter Medicine* - Saving Anthroposophy from the Anthrposophical Society and Movement” ( ).  

The Anthroposophical Society had no life in it.  The discussion processes in the Society did not take account the rules of knowledge illuminated by Steiner’s early writings on epistemology.  Steiner thought was turned into unquestioned systems of belief.  That was no end to the flaws I found.

In the end, I even had to go so far as to discard Steiner’s threefolding ideas, for my attempt to describe the existing order of the social world of humanity, and there found not threefolding, but Christ.  Christ was right out in the open, in plain sight.   We lived within Him.  But the Society, and especially the Social Science Section, was blind by what they turned into a spiritual ideology - threefolding was the way the human social order ought to be organized, and how Christ had actually ordered it be damned.

The Art of God (a Sixth Gospel) will be hated by both the religious and the scientific, for it does the unthinkable.  It actually explains how the world works.  And, that in a far better and more understandable way than does any fundamentalist religion, ... even that fundamentalist religion we have to call Steinerism, and those aspects of natural science: the theories of the Big Bang and Darwinian Evolution.

It is not me, by the Way.  I only describe the order and the organism of human social existence as being the effect of Christ’s Love.  What could be more radical to science, religion, and traditional anthroposophy, then to unveil the fact that the social / political earth organism is the Being of Christ - a matter even Steiner pointed toward when he said that at Calvary, when the blood of Christ fell to the Earth, the Christ became then: The Spirit of the Earth.  A Cosmic Being had descended as far as was possible into the world of matter, and so became what all human beings fed on, and thirsted for, and incarnated to find.  He eternally says: “I will be with you unto the ends of time”.

I was a anarchist among members of a Society that did not seek spiritual freedom, but rather by bowing in reverence to Steiner-thought managed the opposite, succumbing precisely to that which Steiner warned about in the last sentence of the original introduction to The Philosophy of Freedom:  “One must be able to confront an idea and experience it; otherwise one will fall into its bondage”.

In the lectures given after and explaining the fire that destroyed the First Goetheanum, Steiner even lamented in Awakening to Community (lecture three), on the consequences of failing (which has happened) to properly take up The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity (or Freedom):  “The way it should be read is with attention to the fact that it brings one to a wholly different way of thinking and willing and looking at things....The trouble is that The Philosophy of Freedom has not been read in the different way I have been describing.  That is the point, and a point that must be sharply stressed if the development of the Anthroposophical Society is not to fall far behind that of anthroposophy itself.  If it does fall behind, anthroposophy’s conveyance through the Society will result in its being completely misunderstood, and its only fruit will be endless conflict!"

But our true Teacher is not Steiner, but Christ, who acts in such a Way that it was entirely unnecessary for human beings to even acknowledge His Role.  Christ’s Gift was completely selfless.  The Author of the Creation required of us nothing, but that we recognize what we and He all shared: Our Father.  From: The Meaning of Earth Existence in the Age of the Consciousness Soul:

“...Christ as holy breath breathes upon the slumbering burning embers of our own good nature, just as we breathe upon a tiny fire in order to increase its power.  He sacrifices His Being into this breath, which gives Life to the tiny ember-like fire of our moral heart.  The holy breath becomes within the soul of each human being who asks, seeks and knocks a gift of Living Warmth that enlivens our own free fire of moral will...

“...The outer world is but a seeming, and what is brought by the Culture of Media mere pictures of the Stage Setting for the World Temple that is home to our biographies.  When we think away this outer seeming - this logos formed and maya based sense world, and concentrate only on the Idea of the moral grace (Life filled holy breath) we receive and then enact out of the wind warmed fire of individual moral will - as individual law givers, as the fulfillment of the law and the prophets - we create this Meaning of Earth Existence.  Every act of moral grace, given greater Life within in the deepest intimacy of our life of soul, is an ethereal communion with Christ, even though we may only experience it as what to us is a mere thought of what is the Good at some moment of need in the biography.

“Christ gives us this Gift, by Grace, freely out of Love, and with no need that we see Him as its Author.  We hunger inwardly to know what the right thing to do is, and when this hungering is authentic, we receive Christ’s Holy Breath.  This does not come so much as a thought-picture of the Good in response to our questing spirit, but rather as the contentless breathing substance of Christ’s Being.  We are touched (inspired) by Love, and at this touch we shape that Breath into the thought that we then know. The nature of its application, and the form in which we incarnate this thought, is entirely our own.  We shape the thought completely out of our own freedom - our own moral fire of will - for only we can apply it accurately in the individual circumstances of our lives.

“As the Age of the Consciousness Soul unfolds accompanied by this Second Eucharist, the Social World of human relationships begins to light and warm from within.  For each free act of moral grace rests upon this Gift of Christ’s Being to us - an ethereal substance received in the communion within the Temple of the own Soul, freely given in Love whenever we genuinely: ask, seek and knock during our search for the Good.  Our participation in this Rite, this trial by Fire leavened by Holy Breath, leads us to the co-creation of new light and new warmth - the delicate budding and growing point of co-participated moral deeds out of which the New Jerusalem is slowly being born.

“This co-creation is entirely inward, a slowly dawning Sun within the macro Invisible World of Spirit.  Moreover, we do it collectively (as humanity).  While each of us contributes our part, it is our collective conscious celebration of the Second Ethereal Eucharist (creating the Good) that begins the transubstantiation of the collective (presently materialized and fallen) thought-world of humanity into the New Jerusalem.”

Introduction: 11.1.1 The Yearning for the Sacred

We can hear, among many today, a sentiment that goes something like this: “I am inclined to the spiritual, but I am not religious.”.  In America, according to polls, the admission to having religious beliefs are holding firm - if not growing, while in Europe, they are declining.  Recent movies, “Transcendence” (about a man, and then a woman, who join their minds to machines only to become one with nature in a mechanical way), and now the Luc Besson film “Lucy” (about a woman who accidentally takes a lot of synthetic growth drugs, whose consciousness expands until she  too unites with “everything”) - in both these films the “theory of evolution” (Darwin) becomes a kind of intellectual trap (or limit) which the creator of these film cannot go beyond.

These are popular films, ... there are lesser known films, such as “Cafe”, where the encounter with the divine is expressed by the appearance of a young woman to a computer nerd in a Cafe, who explains to him that he and his friends are “programs” she (as a kind of “god”) has created, but at the same time set free to make their own choices.  Here the sacred is bound inside a computer metaphor that in its own way too limits the imagination of the film’s writer.

On the other side of this spectrum of neo-religious film art, there is Mel Gibson’s movie about Christ: “The Passion”, which focuses almost totally on the scourging of the Christ, and then His death on the Cross, without really appreciating the significance of the Resurrection.  To this we can add the more recent “Noah”, in which the flood story is done as if “Noah” was a kind of obsessed nut job, who God used to save the animal kingdom, but not human beings.

Meanwhile, a new Pope, Francis, gives out pieties that many today want to hear, while the Catholics seem not quite sure what to do with the fact that this pleasant and kind man was also first a Jesuit.  And, in America, the political Right, and the political Left (to a lesser degree), can’t produce a politician who is free to be an atheist, although the earlier movie “The Contender” is about the Senate confirmation of an avowed atheist as Vice President, when the prior one has died in office.

Then over in California, a sexual/physical movement (the OM movement) has burst forth, spreading out all over America, which tries to renew sex - or at least deepen on a physical level the sexual relationships between men and women, but can’t find the word Eros in its vocabulary [ ].  The Hippies came and went (for the most part), and sensed God was in everyone, but no longer up in the sky wearing a white beard and looking powerful and wise.

Many young, believing completely the doctrines of materialist science about evolution and the big bang, manage not to recognize that these doctrines too are a kind of religion, where the neo-priests are called: scientists.   These folks, when thought about by serious and skilled philosophers, are now being called anti-theists, as opposed to atheists, because they mostly are against religion in the sense of God as a “cause” of everything, but not entirely unsure with what to replace it.

Then there is Anthroposophy, which got seriously lost in Guru worship, and cherry picked what parts of Steiner it would turn into a belief system, while at the same time ignoring his warning that the most dangerous thing to the Anthroposophical Society was the Christian Community (see lecture six, of “Awakening to Community”).

Now Steiner was no slouch when it came to spiritual insights, and he basically stayed away from Christianity, leaving its deeper future to a Myth he created about a great coming to a theater near you spiritual teacher, the Future Maitreya Buddha - who would be “the Flesh become Word”.   The anthroposophists go to the First Class (at least some of them) and want to treat it like going to Church, and believe in their own Myth of the magical Christmas Conference, trying very hard to pretend that whole thing didn’t fail as soon as Steiner died.

If one was to generalize, we could say that with the change of consciousness in the last couple of hundred years, leading to a firm self-consciousness, everyone wants to be a spiritual teacher of some sort or another, even if they don’t call it that name.  Just follow the blog of Sam Harris [ ] (who wrote The End of Faith) if you want to catch that impulse in action.

In American Christianity, on the Protestant side of things, we have the rise of the mega-churches, which are a kind of Whole Foods supermarket of all things community and possibly spiritual.  25,000 members all going to hundreds of groups inside on organization, run from the top down by a charismatic preacher.  These preachers used to be all over television, and are still found on the radio at odd hours, although radio is mostly dominated by payola driven record companies and far right talk show hosts - hate based politics as religion.

Then there are celebrities.  Movie stars.  Television stars.  Pop music stars.  Occasionally a writer, such as George R. R. Martin, whose fantasy novels were made into a hugely popular series on HBO.  And, lets not ignore the professional celebrities, such as Paris Hilton, or the Kardasians, who have no talent for anything whatsoever.  And, lets not ignore  the neo-terrorists like ISIS and Boko Haram, who have provided a level of hate-filled violence that borders on the absurd, but at the same time yearns to dominate publicly via social media such as websites, Facebook, and Youtube.

Here we encounter one of the darker sides of Media.  I once watched a CNN bit about a protest over violence in the middle-East somewhere, that seemed to involve hundreds, until the camera pulled back (accidentally) to reveal that the protesters only amounted to about 30 people with signs and burning flags, while in the far background you saw all kinds of people going about their ordinary business, totally uninvolved.  If the TV camera wasn’t there, there probably would not have been any protesters either.

Andy Warhol was right: Everyone wants their 15 minutes of fame.  The Arab Spring led to more oppression, and anyone know what happened to the Occupy Wall Street People?  I think most of them are on Twitter and Instagram these days. Hell, I made over 270 videos for Youtube.

Egotism, anyone?

Maybe something else is going on, and these seemingly out of control efforts at standing out against the background of faceless masses is all about something else.

When I wrote “The Art of God: an actual theory of Everything”, I used the terms: “the distributed God”, borrowing that metaphor (sorry folks) from distributed computer networks.  If computers, massively linked together when otherwise not being used, could be set to work to solve problems requiring a lot of processing power, what about people all over the world trying to do the good?  A massive creative parallel synergy of good.  Or, sometimes, not so good.

Most people aren’t “standing out”.  Most people just go about their business, raising families, trying to do a good job, and not get too lost in some kind of defective addiction or other problematic bad habit.  They are often consumers of what the “standing out” folks are up to, finding “spiritual (?)” nourishment or inspiration in others. 

On a certain level we live in a modern Tower of Babel - every “standing out” person throws new kinds of language usages into the mix, and the “consumers” find words or ideas there that satisfy some yearning of their own.  If we step back a bit from what goes on on TV News, we can see this “language” creative process in action.  For example, we’ve recently entered the age of “gates”, such as Watergate, and more recently Deflate-Gate (if you don’t get that last cultural reference just “Google” it). 

Are religions falling apart because at some point everyone is going to have to create their own “religion”?  Yet, somewhere deep in the souls of human beings there are yearnings, desires, wants, appetites for some kind of “meaning”.  Included in those desires is one to decide for themselves what the world and their lives is to “mean”.

Perhaps we should not be surprised that with billions of individuals wandering the modern world, the search for “meaning” seems to create a lot of noise, because just about everyone wants to self-determine the good and the true.  Rudolf Steiner was pretty much right-on when in Theosophy he defined the Age of the Consciousness (or Spiritual) Soul as:

“By causing the self-existent true and good to come to life in his inner being, the human being raises himself above the mere sentient-soul.   A light is kindled in her which is imperishable.  In so far as the soul lives in this light, she is a participant in the eternal.  With the eternal she unites her own existence.  What the soul carries within herself of the true and the good is immortal in her.  Let us call that which shines forth in the soul as eternal, the consciousness-soul.”

Is this the individualization of the yearning for the sacred?  Why not.

Introduction: 11.1.2  The Sacred Nature of the Lower Chakras

Rudolf Steiner was fairly clear that in thinking, we are most awake, in feeling, we are dreaming, and in willing we are mostly asleep.  Thinking is dominated by the processes at the nerve-sense pole of the physical form, while feeling is dominated by the processes at the rhythmic pole - the circulation and the breathing.  Willing belongs to the metabolic-limb pole.

He seemed to turn the whole thing upside down by suggesting that the economic sphere belonged to the nerve-sense pole, the rights sphere to the middle rhythmic realm and the cultural sphere to the lower pole.  I’ll leave that aside, because I never understood it.  Perhaps someone will read this and clarify the situation.

My own research suggests that there is thinking in thinking, feeling in thinking and willing in thinking.  Likewise there is thinking in feeling, feeling in feeling, and willing in feeling, as well as thinking in willing, feeling in willing and willing in willing.  The fact of there being willing in thinking leads to thinking’s higher potential when we learn to control both the attention and the intention (acts of will) in thinking.  Want to understand thinking in willing?  Athletes and dancers know this ... you can’t think and act (will) at the same time.  You train, but at the crucial time it is the feet and hands that think.  Scientists mistakenly call this muscle memory, but at least they have noticed the phenomena.

The chakras are a seven-fold system, that consists of the three three-fold subsystems.  We can directly observe these processes (we don’t need to be clairvoyant), during meditation, when the body has become very still and at rest.  At that point the total field of “consciousness” - of soul - is available for our introspection (acts of our spirit).  The next is an addendum to my longer essay: “Sex, Porn, and the Return of the Divine Feminine”:,porn.html

“The seed for these next thoughts arose during a conversation with another person about some of these ideas.  None of this is meant to be definitive - that is the reader doesn’t have to buy into any of it.  Rather the point is to direct the reader’s thinking-attention in certain directions - that is toward their own inwardness instead of the sense world, concerning which they should ultimately form their own concepts/ideas ...

“The seven chakras are an integrated system - they are not separate and individual, but form a whole.  Their traditional names in certain representations: the Crown Chakra; the Eyebrow Chakra; the Throat Chakra; the Heart Chakra; the Solar Plexus Chakra; the Reproductive (or generational) Chakra; and, the Base Chakra. 

“There are in this system (or arrangement) three more obvious threefoldnesses - or three subsystems of a sort.  Threefoldness is an important concept needed for understanding how complex systems function together.  The heart is the center of two polarities: crown, eyebrow, and throat above, and solar plexus, reproductive, and base below.  The eyebrow is the center of the “above” system, with crown above and throat below; while the generational is the center of the “below” system with solar plexus above and base below.

“Each “polarity” is a kind of mirror of the other, with the three above the heart more heavenly in nature (more conscious to the “I”), and the three below more earthly in nature (less conscious to the “I”).  In each subsystem the same rule of relationship applies: the crown is more “heavenly” and the throat more “earthly”; while the solar plexus is more “heavenly” and the base more “earthly”.  As a consequence there is a relationship between the centers of the subsystems - that is between the way the eyebrow chakra functions and the generative chakra functions - each metaphorically the “heart” of that subsystem,

“Within the eyebrow chakra, from the standpoint of our human personal experience, that is where mental pictures and other inner picturing such as via the “imagination” takes place.  This is a spiritually “generative” activity - this creating of mental pictures and the use of the “imagination”.  Lust, or better represented - Eros - i.e. the generative power in the lower or earthly sense, often becomes inwardly linked in the soul with the power of fantasy - for example we have: sexual fantasies. 

“The solar plexus, where bodily movement is “generated”, is also where “dance” arises.  But first, to better appreciate this, we need to borrow from Tomberg an image of “two eyes”, one over the other, that he uses in several ways.  Keep in mind that we are “looking” at this from the inside out.  For example, close your eyes and make an image - any kind will do.  Where in the spacial sense of your bodily organization does this picture arise?  That “where” is what our eyebrow chakra looks like from the “inside”.

“This two-eyed seeing is the natural cooperation of the crown and the eyebrow centers.  Tomberg is trying to get us to realize that in our inner “picturing” these two “eyes” cooperate - and experientially we can observe this meditatively.  When we truly think (that is when we “generate” thoughts), we actually engage in a kind of perceptual seeing which is double natured in a way.  We attend most easily to the eyebrow function, especially when we consciously create an “image” as a “spiritual” exercise.  But the “crown” is open to the spiritual world in a way - it is a kind of receiver or antenna.  So when thinking serves “others” (or the Thou), the “wind” or “spirit” unites with our thinking via the crown or antenna function.  Our thinking-perception becomes a cooperative “art” - two “eyes”, one above the other. 

“In “dance” we think with the limbs - in the sense of their function as an extension of the “will” into the physical world.  This thinking with the limbs (in dance) is two-eyed like the mirrored above with the crown and the eyebrow function.  Dance in this sense is also a mirror of what we might conceive of as the “play” of the imagination, most obvious in fantasy, yet more disciplined in Goethe’s work on exact pictorial fantasy that stood behind his development/perception of what lived in the manifestations of the “plant”.

”“Dance” and sexual intercourse are the most obvious expression of this two-eyed lower chakra functional interrelationship.  For example, a few of those who dance with partners speak of “dance” as making love in the vertical.  In addition all we have to do is recall all that we have seen of different kinds of “dances” over the years of various cultures, and of the importance of dance as an aspect of  ritual.  In America - to continue the example, when “rock ‘n roll” arose African based sexual rhythms combined with tin-pan alley romantic love songs, and Elvis Presley led the change in the nature of popular dancing among whites, so as to include overtly erotic movements.

“Armies “march”.  Protesters march.  Limb expressions are basic, and when the child learns to stand and then walk and then run, the soul is manifesting more and more of the lower chakra powers, all hopefully directed by the upper chakra powers or capacities.

“At the same time, in thinking we use the term “grasp” as a metaphor for when we “understand” an idea or concept.  Thinking contains a lot of limb-like functions, and in The New Mystery of Thinking we strive to appreciate in practice the twofold nature of the “will-in-thinking” in sense of the “attention” (that which we think concerning) and the “intention” or why we think - that is: what is our purpose or what is the riddle that drives us.

“Now in the upper pole (crown, eyebrow, and throat), we also have the function of the phenomena of sub-vocalizing.  Some people can’t “read” without almost reading aloud, and reading/thinking does involve a movement of the lower pole (the throat center) of the upper threefoldness in the sense of what we experience as “discursive thinking”.  Certain meditative practices involve the inner repetition of words, so that this near-silent inner-wording guides the two-eyed function of the eyebrow and crown centers in a certain direction.  Some of the “power” for this comes from the fact that the throat center is nearest the heart, and that thought/concept should led us to also contemplate the significance of the solar plexus center also being nearest the heart.

“Again, close your eyes and talk to yourself inwardly and silently in the way you sometimes think.  Where in your bodily organization does this inner wording take place?

“The point of all this discussion is to direct the reader’s mental activity in the sense of realizing that the study of the chakras, or seven soul functional centers, can be carried out by thinking itself, if it just contemplates normal human behavior as well as what we experience directly ourselves within our own souls.  No atavistic visual clairvoyance is needed.  We just need to think carefully about our own nature, and how that is also a universal representation of all of human nature and ultimately of all of human social life.  Everything is interconnected, or as Emerson puts it - the mind forms rays of relationship between all objects of experience.

“The reader is invited to make their own observations, for that activity is then the surest way to better appreciate just how much we can ourselves “know” through thinking.  Sit quietly.  Let go of all outside inputs.   Only pay attention to the field of consciousness that is the totality of our experience while at rest in a chair.  Our feet hurt, our back is not properly relaxed, a finger itches.  Engage in making inner pictures and speaking mantras.  Notice where in the total field of our consciousness these experiences take place.  The soul and spirit are right in front of us all the time - we just have to attend to them, keeping in mind that the act of attending is itself a spiritual act.”

Now we know procreation has to be one of the most sacred acts in which human beings engage.  The Roman Catholic Church has tried to morally/forcefully control this “power” for a long time. If there are no physical bodies being generated, there are no avatar-bodily forms in which the spirit can incarnate.  Lets think about this a little bit.

In the essay above, Sex, Porn, and the Return of the Divine Feminine, it is explain how “lust”, or physical desire (a lower chakra process), brings together human beings for procreation.  It is also explained above that this “lust” includes the hunger for incarnation of the child still in the spiritual world.  There are not two “lusts” active in sex, but three.  Millenia ago, this “generational” power was understood, which is why the Goddess Mysteries celebrated “sex” in the Temple.  It was only after the three patriarchal monotheisms (Hebrew, Christian and Muslim) arose that the destruction of the old Goddess Mysteries was carried out so explicitly. 

Please remember that St. Paul, was not a disciple, but went around trying to crucify early followers of Christ’s Teachings, as part of an effort by the Hebrew Mysteries (in which he was an initiate) to eradicate competing mystery wisdom.  Christ had to literally knock Paul off his ass onto his ass, to get him to pay attention.  This Saul/Paul transformation was not the only one to arise, but like all sudden converts, a thoroughly overzealous Saul/Paul wrote his somewhat beautiful letters everywhere excoriating others to what was to be the right way to follow Christ.  These letters clearly sought to keep women from priest-like roles, and to force the view that the physical body (the corpus) was the seat of sin.

When the Roman Emperor Constantine made his pact with the devil hidden in some of the early Church leaders, they collectively finished off the ancient mystery temples, destroyed their libraries, and created a so-called “New” Testament in which the now sainted Saul/Paul was made to appear as the founder of the Christian Religion, when clearly the Disciple Peter was meant for that role.  The Gospels that had other unapproved teachings were eliminated, although Fate was able to preserve several so that in our Age we could rethink Christ’s Teaching in their light.

The Goddess religions of ancient times understood the chakras, yet their holy and sacred nature had to become then lost for a while in the mists of time.  The Roman Church was unable to hide the Eucharist, however, although it did not understand it.  When Christ gave this Teaching during what we today call Holy Week, it was, yes, His Body and His Blood that was to be taken as spiritual nourishment, but the early Church did not understand that all of the physical world was the Body and Blood of the Cosmic Christ.  There is nothing in which He does not reside, as the representative of the Father (I and the Father are One; and, No one get to the Father except through Me). 

We can wonder at the loss, except for the fact that this loss was allowed intentionally by the Mysteries, so that the human being could become completely free.  What Barfield called “original participation” had to disappear into the “onlooker separation”, so that humanity would find itself on its own.  The modern Age was for all to become a collective Dark Night of the Soul.

The fundamentalists fight a rearguard battle, trying to force people into blind faith in the God of the Book.   But the Divine Mystery never was captured by any Book, and has always inhabited the all-that-is.

Steiner made an effort (lets not bother with whether he did a good job or not - that’s just sour grapes from people who could not begin to do what he did accomplish) to rediscover the Divine Mystery in Everything.  Beginning with thinking, via his writings on philosophy and epistemology.  At the same time, Steiner could only work overtly with the chakras from the heart and above.  People were just not ready for those below.

Yet, what else has begun in Biodynamics, but an understanding of the mystery nature of the substances we need for “nutrition”.  The preparer of food is encouraged to be conscious of the sacred nature of their arts, and we pray before meals.  The farmer “stirs” the preparations, and when they can, they get a lot of people to take a turn at “stirring”.

Steiner taught that when food is digested it is completely destroyed by the “metabolic” (another lower chakra) processes, and then recreated as it crosses the intestinal wall into matter that has become completely owned by our own spirit - our own warmth organism.  While basically unconsciously, all food is transubstantiated in the human body by the human I.  It is dematerialized - and disappears from existence, and the unconscious will forces thus generated exercise something in the soul and astral body-spirit complex.  Only after this is new matter created - an original act of creation.

Because our food is so poor however, so degenerated into the non-living, it has to be eliminated and the astral body-spirit complex warmth body forces necessary cannot be exercised.  If they cannot be “exercised” than initiation is made more difficult, because o the role those forces then developed in the warmth body need to play in the katharsis or purification of the astral body is not fully developed in the modern human being.

What can't be so transformed is eliminated and returned to the wiser and more thorough processes of Nature.  Remember the chakras function as a whole and the upper three can contribute to the work of the lower three, especially by beginning to realize how completely the Cosmic Christ penetrates and supports the totality of the Creation, at all levels.  The lower chakras are sacred, just as is everything else.

Up next: The Transcendent and Holy Beauty of the Double ...

Introduction: 11.1.3 The Transcendent and Holy Beauty of the Double

What we despise we cannot understand; and, we can only gain knowledge of that which we choose to love.  Let’s start with a tale, parts of which we shall borrow from Steiner.  I’m not looking here for any kind of rigid technical accuracy, but rather for the poetry of the situation as it were.  Why is evil ugly?  Perhaps it is not:

A long long time ago, a sphere of purest warmth is created by Beings, so exalted in the great scheme of the Creation that trying to give them names, such as Seraphim, or Cherubim or Thrones or Spirits of Personality or Spirits of Form is almost ... almost but not quite ... blasphemy.  Arthur C. Clarke wrote a wonderful tale called: the Nine Billion Names of God.  Perhaps the reader can see the problem.

This sphere was coextensive with the current orbit of Saturn, and Steiner labeled it the Saturn Incarnation of the Earth.  By any measure that is something very large, and seems to have arisen in three-dimensional space, and at a certain time, so we could say that already Time and Space had been created, perhaps just to house this warmth artifact of the Divine.

Into this womb of warmth was placed ... what?  The embryonic nature of human beings seems not quite adequate.  Perhaps individualized tone creators is a bit better.  Not one of them was destined to be alike any other, and if each sang a different melody and had a different rhythm we might get a bit of a hint of what was growing there.

It is said, in the oldest stories, that this sphere of warmth was immobile in a way - static.  That is until the Son manifested Himself as a mere point, and sacrificed His own capacity to move.  Thus anchored, the whole sphere of warmth itself began to rotate urged on by the love from the surrounding powers, and as it rotated currents arose around each of the singing motes, and these motes began to dance their becoming in a cosmic womb of warmth.

Eventually warmth and tone became matter, but first there was Let there be Light, and the Sun incarnation of the Earth arose.  In the vast darkness of Space and Time, Light played upon the warmth, and ... “1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

There could be more, but lets just leave the richer poetry to the true poets - who wrote all the Great Creation Myths which humanity currently possesses ... 

Uncountable eons later, human beings began to loose their connection to the Divine.  The creation stories seemed less and less true as that aspect of the evolution of consciousness, known as the on-looker separation, brought about the appearance of the Age of Science as the most modern path of Knowledge.  By that time the singing dancing “motes” had acquired physical bodies, and some of those creative processes left debris in the rock-like layers of the material body of the Mother, who we call today the Planet Earth.

The scientific mind, freed now of the mortal necessity to believe the creation myths (heretics were killed, remember), looked at the debris and said: “well, all this stuff came from somewhere, lets figure out where it came from”.  A quite reasonable question under the circumstances.

Now modern science was born in Western Civilization, and those who wanted to think freely, chafed under the dominating influence of the Roman Church, so it was natural to look for (or perhaps invent) an explanation in which Gods or Goddesses played no role.  Supernatural explanations were not needed, and the latest supposed great genius (Stephen Hawking, now replacing Albert Einstein) wrote a book that asserted this was so: “The Grand Design” [ ]

According to Wikipedia: “It argues that invoking God is not necessary to explain the origins of the universe, and that the Big Bang is a consequence of the laws of physics alone.[1] In response to criticism, Hawking has said; “One can’t prove that God doesn’t exist, but science makes God unnecessary."[2] When pressed on his own religious views by the Channel 4 documentary Genius of Britain, he has clarified that he does not believe in a personal God.[3][4][5]”

A curious word that “Design”, however.  From Wikipedia: (noun) a specification of an object, manifested by an agent, intended to accomplish goals, in a particular environment, using a set of primitive components, satisfying a set of requirements, subject to constraints; (verb, transitive) to create a design, in an environment (where the designer operates)[2]

Does Hawking or his fans even notice the hypocrisy to hold to a view that a random chance created process “designs” something? The word design requires an active agent with goals.  Oh, well.

Science begins by taking things apart (we’ve been over this before) but then forgets that  experienced phenomenal stuff comes in wholes and as processes - not parts.  Yet, by the time (and sort of as the last thing to examine) science starts to look at consciousness.  Already committed to a matter-only conception of the universe, it becomes quite difficult to admit that consciousness by its very nature is not visible, even to instruments.  There is material “brain stuff” there, but however else they approach this, clearly they are trying to explain this invisible inside of the human being as a product of the meat.

Except, ... to the “instrument” of ones own mind, this inside is perceptible.  We directly experience “consciousness”, and while some maintain we can’t examine our own consciousness, the whole history of depth spiritual practices is about that very act.  Anyone who practices even meditation knows that.  Not everyone draws the same conclusions, but that act is practiced all over the world by millions.

So ... meanwhile ... what happened to the dancing singing motes?

They Fell.  My recollection is that Tomberg describes this as a “fall” into number, suffering and death.  What evolutionary biology discovers, by examining the geographical remains (mostly fossils and bones), is a long sequence of highly ordered “plant” and then “animal” forms, arranged in long periods of time (millions of years by our “numbering” - remember part of the Fall is into “number”), broken by short periods of chaos (one “explanation"/theory is the so-called: punctuated equilibrium [ ]

Biologist “assume” that until there is nervous system, there is no consciousness.  They don’t know this, but rather it their best guess.

To return to our tale ... the dancing singing motes are very special - very special.  You might say they are seeds of the Father principle of the Creation.  Because the Divine Mystery lives naturally outside of Time and Space, in Eternity, the whole of the Fall, and its resolution is seen, from “In the Beginning ... “.  In fact, the Prologue to the John Gospel says this: “In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was towards God, and God was what the Word was.  It was with God in the Beginning.” (see the Unvarnished Gospels*, by Andy Gaus).   The phrase ... the Word was towards God ... implies a state of separation, coupled with the concept of return - or why go “towards”?

*[Translations from the Greek leaving aside the years of “interpretations” of the Gospels to make them  conform to later arising theological doctrines.  For example, a Catholic Bible will say that the First Commandment is to Love God with all thy heart and all thy mind and all the soul, while in the original, un-doctored Greek, it reads: Love God with all they heart and all thy mind and all thy spirit.]

So, ... the special dancing singing motes Fell into matter - into number, suffering and death.

This happened so that there could be resistance.  In the same way Christ ceased to move so that the warmth sphere of the Saturn existence could begin to turn, so did matter arise so that there was a “world” that resisted the motes.  If we look at the bones in the geographical record we see the story of the evolution of these avatar-like bodies - what James Cameron in his movie Avatar imagined man could build and into which could be transferred human consciousness.  Only the Divine Mystery was way ahead of Cameron’s imagination in that regard, because that is what he already himself was -  an immortal dancing singing mote residing for a time (from birth to death) in an avatar-like physical material body, that falls apart - dust to dust - when the mote abandons it at death.  The story of the “bones”, assumed by evolutionary biology to tell the whole tale, really only show the process of development by which the avatar-like physical body was created, step by step, to become capable of receiving the mote.

For most of the physical evolution, the mote resided in a non-material body, “above” the developing physical body, only dipping into the avatar-like organism for moments at a time.  Thus, the line of humanoids slowly became tool makers, as the divine intelligence carried by the mote participated longer and longer in the daily lives of these avatar-like bodies, until the time arose when we could inhabit them for great periods of time, until it was necessary to “sleep”, for consciousness was antithetical to life, and the two processes had to be kept in balance. So at night, for modern human beings, we sleep ... that is the ego or warmth body, and the astral/desire soul body leave the life and physical bodies in bed, regularly and if possible rhythmically, so that the damage done to the avatar-like body by “ego-consciousness” can be repaired.

Earth was also very attractive - it had to be a “Garden” otherwise who would want to live there.  Eventually the spiritual masters of the East decided that modern times were so much darker than they had been in the beginning - in the time of the Garden, that getting off of the wheel of life was important, thus was discovered enlightenment and the seeking after nirvana.

This was a okay idea (from the 6th Buddha), until the Creator sent His Son to become human and to also experience: number, suffering and death.  We falsely believe human beings did that to Christ.  Not so.  He followed us.   He imitated us.  He too Fell, because what else does perfect Love do when Its lover seems lost.  It willingly goes as far as to Hades, and this the Christian myths teach, for after death, and before the Resurrection, on the Saturday of Holy Week, Christ - we are told - descended into Hell.  A path He had to take so as to Fall all the way into the arms of the holy mother as so wonderfully depicted by Michaelangelo in the Pieta.

After Christ’s sacrifice, which was to follow us where we go, the 6th Buddha - now in Heaven -  inspired then what is know today as the Bodhisattva vow, which is that as one approaches enlightenment, that goal is set aside until the Age arises when all sentient beings can become enlightened (leave the wheel of life). 

All the same, the dancing singing suffering dying numbered mote is a bit delicate and undeveloped.   We are young and inexperienced.  We need help.  The Fall into Matter is not easy.  So the Divine Mystery, during the Fall, way back at least to the Moon Earth existence, creates hierarchies of helpers.  Once in matter, the motes cannot be seen by the physical senses, although they can be inferred.  But in the realm of the soul they need all kinds of invisible help, and this help then takes the form of six types of communities of also invisible beings.

Franz Bardon, the teacher of magical powers and their related trials, says: “there is nothing unclean in the whole of the Creation”.  Think about that a minute.  We may Judge, but the divine does not.  Its too busy doing other stuff, like loving each individual unconditionally.

So we have three lower types (or classes) of helpers, and three higher types (or classes) of helpers, all invisible while we reside in matter, and normally only have regular sense organs.  In our present we have these kinds of names.  For the lower helpers: the luciferic double, the ahrimanic double, and the human double (or psychic parasites/egregores).  For the higher helpers: the guardian angel, the conscience or higher ego, and the holy spirit (which is a community sometimes called “the Paraclete"). 

Why do the higher helpers get the more cool names?

Prejudice, ... and fear.  Neither group is more holy or sacred or beautiful than any other class of invisible helpers, who reside in the soul as close to the “I” as your own skin is to your own body.

We could call the luciferic double the tempter (Tomberg did).  The Tempter says: yeah, you deserve it, grab that pint in premium ice cream off of the shelf and go home and indulge.   You just saw your boy friend holding hands with another woman and you deserve a treat.

Meanwhile, your higher ego (giving you one of those painful pricks of conscience) knows that you haven’t called your mother in weeks, but wants to forget what the lower ego knows, which is that mom’s a pain in the ass drunk who is just as likely to call you a failure as say something kind or nice, so the ahrimanic double (the prosecutor according to Tomberg) intervenes, and says: be cold, forget it, you don’t need the grief, and yes you are a failure so what.  She is too, where do you think you got these bad habits in the first place.

Years ago, in the animated Saturday afternoon cartoons, you would see the main character (say Bugs Bunny) with a devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other and the two are arguing.   All of these six communities of beings are helpers for the “I”.  And, it is the “I” that is to decide, not the “helper”.   The “I”, or invisible dancing singing mote, is caught in between the communities of helpers, just as Christ is everywhere “in between”.

The psychic parasite or bad habit is most often from karma.  When you excarnate after death, these creatures are saved by various communities of spiritual beings during the afterlife, as our astral body is slowly purified by the higher helpers.  When we re-incarnate on the way to a new birth, which ever bad habit is needed for the operation of karma in that life is added to the astral body, by the same community of spiritual beings that preserved it in the first place.

So the tempter is also a friend indeed, as needed for comfort and advice to just cool your jets and take a break from the goads of conscience.  The prosecutor judges you and everyone else - its an equal opportunity asshole, and all of us are at one time or another assholes.  You don’t like the voice that calls you a drunk, then stop it by stop being a drunk.

Meanwhile the related psychic parasite (Tomberg’s egregore) is something you created, so if you created it, you can un-create it.  Nice thing today is there are 12 Step groups, so you don’t have to fight those battles by yourself.  Best to have company and a shared community of the similarly troubled.

Our “I” - our personal wonderful dancing singing mote has the very best invisible friends one can ask for.  Give you shit when you need it, give you comfort and good ideas when you don’t.  Pay attention, but remember: you are the one in charge, not them.  Oh, and while He doesn’t need credit, nor does She, personally I think some words of gratitude might go to Christ and the Holy Mother, ‘cause they made this system up, run it rightly for the purpose of Love and Justice, and never ever forget to listen to you ... ever.  After all, we live in linear time, and They have all of Eternity to care about us.  Maybe even for the helpers too - some gratitude might be in order.  Can’t hurt, can it? 

Steiner, stuck with folks living in the Intellectual Soul, could not but depict the three lower helpers (the three-fold double complex of tempter, prosecutor and egregore in Tomberg’s somewhat judgmental way of seeing things) in the early Class Lessons as “creatures”, perhaps a bit ugly in form, not unlike Gollum in the Tolkien stories.  Or, Lucifer and Ahriman as bogeymen under the bed.

But the Divine Mystery doesn’t make ugly, - that is a human judgmental conception.  The Creation is everywhere strangely and exotically beautiful.  Only in the intellectual West, does Good and Evil exist in the form of good and bad (ugly demonic) hierarchies.  All over the rest of the World, aboriginal peoples populate the “Underworld” with pipe playing (though horn-footed) Pans, making music for circles of half-clad and sexy dancing nymphs.

Introduction 11.1.4 The Bill Gates Syndrome

Bill Gates is a man, who through a combination of hard word, theft of the inventive work of others, and an extraordinary bit of luck, became a multi-billionaire.  If a billion is a thousand million, Gates supposedly has around 50,000 million give or take.  His luck, if you don’t know that story, was to offer the DOS software he wrote to IBM as a licensing arrangement, instead of outright selling it to them.  IBM did not anticipate the growth potential of what was coming, and said sure, we’ll pay you a licensing fee every time we use your software.

Bill is not liked in a lot of places, and since his partial retirement has been in the News a lot, via money he and his wife give away, and such recent pronouncements (along with a rising chorus), that intelligent computers are coming and we should be very scared.  He and his foundations have also gotten involved in education, all over the world, on a huge scale.

It is kind of like a giant, walking all over culture world-wide, without having the common sense and decency  to recognize their own limits.

The “syndrome”, I am naming after him, is where an individual whose fate it is to be very successful in one sphere of activity, begins to believe he/she is such a genius that there isn’t any problem (sphere of activity) in the world that can’t be solve out of that genius and with the tool of vast amounts of money. 

Most of these people are “specialists”, and don’t even have the idea from their education that there can be “generalists”.  Generalists would probably do a lot better with its application, but are also likely never to find their way to that level of wealth.

The Koch brothers have this syndrome, they just apply it to the realm of political life.  They are not as evil as some like to think, but just true believers in themselves as right about how the world should be organized, with enough money as a tool to shape the world according to their desires.

For both the 2008 and 2012 elections, Karl Rove collected money from many true believers with a conservative business bent, made a lot of promises, and turned out to be wrong.  He was so wrong at one point, that he was caught on Fox Noise exclaiming, just wait, just wait, Ohio is going to go for us.  It didn’t and some folks believe Karl had gone so far as to try to fix the election through manipulating electronic voting machines and similar devices so as to change the vote, while it was being counted.  

George Soros has the syndrome to a degree, and has written a kind of philosophy of governing,which has resulted in this: Open Society Foundations  If you don’t know who George Soros is, he is a very successful individual who buys and sells (and manipulates according so some) in the currency markets.  Currency markets really just buy and sell “air” - there is no real there there at all.

During that last century or so, Central Banks all over the world have been pouring made up money (just print it, and then step back and see what happens), such that in finance today less than 1% of value comes from the production and sale of real goods and services and the rest is fake money being manipulated by all kinds of “players”, who think they know the nature of the game. 

Most of the commerce in the world, even in oil and such, is rooted in debt, because the fake money has to borrowed from these banks in order to come into existence.  Yes, the oil is sold as a viable commodity, but the money to purchase it, refine it and deliver it comes from debt, not savings or earnings.  It was massive debt that caused the 2008 financial debacle, and the follow on response in the financial world is to increase even more the amount of debt at play in the world.

A lot of them know this is a zero sum game. “In game theory and economic theory, a zero-sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which a participant’s gain (or loss) of utility is exactly balanced by the losses (or gains) of the utility of the other participant(s).”

Now years ago I read a very curious remark of Steiner’s, where he basically said that a lot of giants of industry were initiates in former incarnations.  While the movie Aviator, about Howard Hughes, offered the explanation for his genius as connected to OCD, yet if you read the various books about his life (I have), you can see again and again how an unusual “intuition” gifted him with all manner of quite remarkable insights.  Since I like to write these bits with a few pieces of an entertaining sort, let me tell a story about Howard Hughes, now dead, but at one time one of the richest men in the world.

Because of his desire for privacy, and his need to control, he discovered that Mormon men, with their habits of no drinking, no smoking, no fooling around, and basic honesty and hard work, were perfect to have around in large numbers doing all the personal stuff and also acting as filters between him and the vast world of all his business interests. 

At one time Hughes was living in the top floors of a Las Vegas hotel (which you can look up if  you want).  He hardly ever left his main room, did a lot of weird things there, which included watching over and over again the same film: Ice Station Zebra [ ], while eating mostly Baskin Robbins French Vanilla ice cream.

His aides, never telling this to Hughes, decided that instead of always having to run around Las Vegas to get this particular ice cream, contacted Baskin Robbins and arranged to purchase a semi-trailers worth of this product.  They took over a giant freezer at the hotel, off loaded the thousands of gallons of this ice cream, and from that day forward Hughes never again asked for this ice cream to eat.

Now my view is the Hughes was atavisticly clairvoyant, but had no way to talk about his experiences, given his other quirks.  So one way he entertain himself, via his special intuitions was to mess around on occasion with the people that worked for him.  He “knew” about the massive ice cream purchase and since the way he spent his money was often highly personal, he did something that to him was funny.

Some of you might be asking if there is a point here.  Yes.

The rich are not evil, but rather they are, just as is often said, very different.  They are not like the rest of us at all.  And, having ego’s just like us, their individual peculiarities often end up seeming to act on the world in ways we believe we never would.  But that’s the rub isn’t.  What would you do if fate gifted you with 50,000 million dollars?

Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science (Part Twelve - the last “part”): Why?  Why a Spiritual Social Science?  Why this series of “essays”?   And the answer is: Final Participation - the beginning: the role of Anthroposophy in America, and the Redemption of a Sacramental Way of Life.

I recently watched a TV show in which a kind of why question was asked by a character trying to pretend to admire a guru type individual.  The character asking the question wanted to know what the “purpose” of the “teaching” was, and the guru type said: there is no purpose, but there is a “reason”.

In Catherine MacCoun’s wonderful book: “On Becoming an Alchemist: a guide for the modern magician”, she, in pondering the questions of what goes on in the Now, makes a distinction between “how” and “why”.   In appreciating How the present Now came to be, we can begin to discern something “spiritual”, because we can look back into the past, and see the sequence of choices and events involved.  Why the present Now came into existence comes to us out of the future, and can’t be seen because we can’t see the future, except in the form of hints and premonitions.  Yet, as the Now goes forward, the whys sort of pile up as it were.  We move through them and as we do they “explain” the Why of the sequences of Nows we have come to endure, and hopefully love.

For example, in early January of 2008 I left Fair Oaks, California to travel East. 

In the year 2007, my life was a series of  crisis - I was in my 67th year of life as regards my physical body.  My girl friend at that time had kicked me out of the house we shared.  My body was falling apart with the arrival of a condition called a-fib, and then, and in the Fall of 2007 I was to suffer two heart attacks on the same day.  A month later, my passionate efforts to dissuade the local A. Society Branch (the Faust Branch - oddly a very European name for such a Branch in California) that to continue the study of Paul Emberson’s book:  “From Gondhishapur to Silicon Valley - Spiritual Forces in the development of computers and the future of technology” [ see my review here: ] was dangerous, because the study of that book’s misinformation was pushing Michael and Christ away from the Branch meeting, and inviting Ahriman in (which I could “see” with my thinking).  This led to angry outbursts and an in-effect social dismissal of me as a member of the Branch.

My mother died in November, at age 95.  Another long story, but a good end to her trials in life.  The man owning place where I was renting a room, asked me to leave at the beginning of December, because he was becoming associated with a Persian woman (an educated Iranian woman), and she was uncomfortable with a single adult male possibly sharing the house into which she was to also move. 

A kind of friend living in New Hampshire, a half-breed Mohawk  and Scottish Highlander clairvoyant, offered me an apartment that had been built in half of her garage.  So the choice arose, do I go across the whole Country Eastward, or hunker down someplace near my children (four of whom lived in the northern parts of the San Francisco Bay Area).

Without knowing why, it was clear to me that I ought to choose the “adventure” and once more go to New England.  I then drove across the Country in the “dead” of Winter, a whole other story in itself, which the word adventure barely describes.  After a series of unclear events New Hampshire, I ended up moving back to Concord, Mass. in the Fall of 2008, and while there went to a meeting sponsored by some other old friends, and at this meeting I met Linda.  I started courting her, and one day we were sitting on the sofa in her family/TV room, and leaned into each, and as our shoulder’s touched, all desire slipped away, and a great wave of contentment appeared to envelop both of us.  From that moment we knew that with each other we would always be home.  We have been together, other than the usual get to know each other trials, since October of 2008.

How and Why.  Linda was well versed in the Eastern philosophies, had had her own version of a satori-like enlightenment, and thus began a long discourse on East and West between the two of us, where her special wisdom lent a powerful “wet-stone” to the sharpening of my own mind.  Since living with her, I’ve created over 270 videos for YouTube, written: “The Art of God: an actual theory of Everything”, another book: “The Mystery of Evil in the Light of the Sermon on the Mount”, finished my novel American Phoenix, as well as dozens of essays.

About a year ago I joined these Facebook pages on Anthroposophy, and became very frustrated for all manner of reasons, some of which clearly belonged to my own attitudes.  It was a good learning experience, but I did become aware that while I could on occasion point to some of my previously written material on my studies of Social Science, there did not exist anything organized or really coherent as regards the whole.  So I sat down in October, 2014, and wrote over a couple of days a kind of 12 part subject outline for an Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science, and then committed myself to write weekly, and as well to create along the way something for my website, which now runs to about 110 pages in my word processor.

I anticipated that there might be comments, and tried to invite them and make room for them, but for the most part the “air” in that regard was dead.  Except for the odd fact that I started getting a lot of “friend” requests - a lot.  Previously I did not honor such requests, but changed my mind and from perhaps 30 or so Facebook friends, I currently have: 182.  I also tended to get a lot of likes, which is a nice thing, as people are very busy, but at least I suspected they read what was written, even if they didn’t have time to go further.

So, in a certain way, a whole lot of people helped me write a small book summarizing my research and its related inner processes.  Thank you.

This has been the opening remarks of Part Twelve, and as has been my practice I may write more in the following week, but next Saturday, February 7th, 2015  will be the end of the whole exercise.  All the same, over the next seven days or so I intend to write some details about: Final Participation - a beginning: the role of Anthroposophy in America, and the Redemption of a Sacramental Way of Life.

Introduction 12.1.1  The Relationship Between America and Anthroposophy.

It is not an accident of history that there is an Old World and a New World.  The mystery of the Gamer Brain:

I’m also more and more convinced that the distinction between fiction and non-fiction doesn’t really work, because after all most non-fiction consists of a lot of opinions and speculations masquerading as facts and truths: e.g. Big Bang cosmology and Darwinian evolution at the level of speciation.

Another way to look at the same thing is to notice the role that the picture making capacity of the mind participates.  Fiction we often consider the product of an act of fantasy; while, non-fiction we consider to be the product of an act of intellect, sometimes related to logic or reason.  These last two, logic or reason, tend to be formalized in natural science, but in normal consciousness we often use a non-formal sensitivity, which we call “common sense”. 

One of the founding documents of America is Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” [ ] From Wikipedia [ ]:

Common Sense[1] is a pamphlet written by Thomas Paine in 1775–76 that inspired people in the Thirteen Colonies to declare and fight for independence from Great Britain in the summer of 1776. The pamphlet explained the advantages of and the need for immediate independence in clear, simple language. It was published anonymously on January 10, 1776, at the beginning of the American Revolution and became an immediate sensation. It was sold and distributed widely and read aloud at taverns and meeting places.

“Washington had it read to all his troops, which at the time had surrounded the British army in Boston. In proportion to the population of the colonies at that time (2.5 million), it had the largest sale and circulation of any book published in American history.[2] As of 2006, it remains the all-time best selling American title.[3]

“Common Sense presented the American colonists with an argument for freedom from British rule at a time when the question of whether or not to seek independence was the central issue of the day. Paine wrote and reasoned in a style that common people understood. Forgoing the philosophical and Latin references used by Enlightenment era writers, he structured Common Sense as if it were a sermon, and relied on Biblical references to make his case to the people.[4] He connected independence with common dissenting Protestant beliefs as a means to present a distinctly American political identity.[5] Historian Gordon S. Wood described Common Sense as “the most incendiary and popular pamphlet of the entire revolutionary era”.[6]”

Something was happening in the New World that had not been possible in the Old World - a kind of logic and reasoning free of “the philosophical and Latin references used by Enlightenment era writers”.  While the early colonists in America, mostly came from European countries, they nevertheless had to encounter and deal with the so-called savages already living here: the Red Indian.  For a long time it was difficult for American History (the story of America) to recognize that the Red Indian peoples had a viable culture, although Ben Franklin and others saw immediately that this was true (See “Forgotten Founders”: [ ], whose subtitle is: Benjamin Franklin, the Iroquois and the Rationale for the American Revolution.  Notice, please, the use of the word “Rationale” in Bruce E. Johansen’s 1982 book.

Native American cultures did not need the “Enlightenment” in order to understand Nature or to be wise.  Rudolf Steiner, in discussing America, noted this: “...America is the place at which races or civilizations die.” R.S. The Mission of the Folk Souls, lecture  6. 

And this:  “The Indians then took over with them to the West all that was great in the Atlantean culture.  What was the greatest thing of all to the Indians?  It was that he was still able dimly to sense something of the ancient greatness and majesty of a period which existed in the old Atlantean epoch, in which the divisions of the races had hardly begun, in which men could look up to the Sun and perceive the Spirits of Form penetrating through a sea of mist.  Through an ocean of mist the Atlantean gazed up at that which to him was not divided into six or seven, but which acted together.  This co-operative activity of the seven Spirits of Form was called by the Atlanteans the Great Spirit...He clung firmly to the Great Spirit of the primeval past.”  R.S. Lecture 6 above.

And this: “The time will one day come when this American woodenman, which actually everyone is still - when he begins to speak.  Then he will have something to say very similar to European Anthroposophy.  One can say that we in Europe develop Anthroposophy in a spiritual way; the American develops it in a natural way.” (R.S. lecture to workmen 3 March 1923)

Imaginatively, the Atlantic Ocean is not just a physical barrier between Europe and America, but at the same time a psychological and spiritual barrier.  This “barrier” functions in such a way so as to free the American from certain effects of the degeneration and falling apart of Western Civilization in Europe, which is more peculiar to that region of earth-existence, and involves grave economic problems coupled with a large immigrant population that is not being successfully assimilated to the degree that immigrant populations have been and are being assimilated in America.

The Americas are also the most materialistic and at the same time physically densest region on the Planet.  That spiritual/evolutionary process we call “the Fall into Matter”, finds its deepest point of penetration in the Americas (the “woodenman”).  This also effects social processes, such that communities and families also become hardened and dense - less able to flex and adapt in the same way common to European social forms.  The density is so intense that the “individual” is actually squeezed out of the family and pushed into the world free of all the old ties of blood, so otherwise binding in Europe, and elsewhere.  See Clint Eastwood’s wonderful movie Gran Torino for a dramatic exploration of the differences between an iconic American individualist, and his neighbors, fresh from the mountain regions of Southeast Asia, the Hmong.  The latter are being assimilated, and by the third or fourth generation, only the individual will remain.  Recall Steiner, from above, once more: ...America is the place at which races or civilizations die.” R.S. The Mission of the Folk Souls, lecture  6.

Now “woodenman” is an unusual metaphor (pictorial thought).  From my book American Anthroposophy [ ]:

I have spent some time contemplating Steiner’s use of the adjective wooden in describing the American’s instinct for Anthroposophy.  Clearly he could have used an even more material metaphor, such as crystalline.  That he did not, but chose instead to us a term from the world of plants, particularly of the higher plant which is the tree, can give us something to help our understanding.  The tree, while rooted in the earth, in making its wooden pillar makes the earth itself into a living form which then raises the tree’s leaves and blossoms much further in the direction of the cosmos than those plants that remain nearer the earth on the forest floor.

“Our physical nature, as Americans, is of the earth, and to the extent that we remain instinctive, so is our soul life captured by this earth bound existence.   Thus our thinking is also earthly and material, unless we spiritualize it, unless we bring moral forces into it consciously.  The more our native goodness penetrates our thought life consciously (instead of instinctively), the more we do what the tree does when it spreads its leaves and blossoms (on its way to bestowing its fruit for our benefit) into the air far above the earth.  Here is what I wrote in the essay below on conscious thinking out of the American Soul (“In Joyous Celebration of the Soul Art and Music of Discipleship”): “The purified will (an appropriately moral intention and attention) creates heart warmth in the soul-soil of feeling, out of which the light and life filled flower of thought is born”.”

“American” thinking produced: “Common Sense”; “the Declaration of Independence”; and, the  Constitution”, all of which represent an early effort to create a social order where free individuals may thrive - something still not generally possible in Europe (the social Center) or Asia (the social East).  Old Worlds and a New World.  The French are obsessed with being “French”, for example.  The Folk Element remains dominant.

The free individual is a necessary precursor to moral freedom.  And moral freedom is the goal/purpose/reason/how/why Christ said the following, which aptly describes what is beginning to happen naturally in America:

Matthew 10:34-40:  “Don’t think I came to cause peace across the land.  I didn’t come to cause peace, I came to wield a sword, because I came to divide a man against his father and a daughter against her mother and a bride against her mother-in-law, and to make a man’s servants his enemies.  Whoever prefers father or mother over me is not worthy of me; and whoever prefers son or daughter over me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me.  Whoever found his life will lose it, and the one who lost his life because of me will find it.  Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me, receives my Sender.

Contemplate this during meditation, prayer, and thinking, if you dare.  While America is going through a stage as the People of Peoples, the net effect of the social order is to steadily increase individualism.  It wasn’t too long ago when critics of individualism spoke derogatorily of the “me” generation, although in the ‘50‘’s there a come a book: “The Lonely Crowd”.

Young people today, especially those called “millennials”, are noted for their absence of racism, sexism and other judgmental confusions of the generation of their parents.  They thrive in social media, in group dates (not as couples), and are also oddly a-political.  Its not that they don’t have a point of view, for those points of view are over Facebook, Twitter and so forth, but rather that they can’t find a point to voting or joining political parties.

The need for environmentalism, and for dealing with climate change, they take for granted.  Another peculiarity is the attitude that “information” should be free, and the need for intellectual property rights makes for many no sense at all.

The generation, born and educated on the cusp of the Third Millennium after Christ’s Birth, are naturally moral, and have trouble understanding why the rest of us are not.  They are also rather inventive and creative in ways that again seem part of their nature.  Just watch YouTube, with is tsunami of individualized art.  The generation, that will grow into adulthood in a world on the precipice of financial chaos and ruin, expects to be able to deal with it.

While the reader of this may wonder how I observe such things, just keep in mind that I have raised five children through adolescence and into their young adulthood (they are now 52, 49, 43, 31, and 26).  I read the books they recommend, converse with them about their lives and live amazed at their habits, which include all kinds of time spent playing computer games. 

Their use of modern technology is as natural to them as breathing, and when asked about the “games”,  they reveal a remarkable sophistication at the social arts of cooperation, making friends in distant places, for the purpose of solving shared “game” problems, which often require the building of communities and other functioning group behaviors in order to thrive in the “game” environment.  They turn their back on “our” cold intellectual world, preferring one in which the imagination and relationships plays the greater role. 

It is we who make fun of the so-called isolated gamer, never really appreciating that world at all, because we have already judged it to be false.  We have a lot to learn and they have a lot to teach.   They are a new species of human being - living in a post-literate world.  From an obvious spiritual point of view, we need to recognize that these young people came into this Now prepared to deal with it, in ways we will not be able.  Remember the first rule of a Spiritual Social Science: We must learn to love the object of thought in order to have true knowledge of its nature.

Introduction 12.1.2 More America and Anthroposophy - the Mystery of Tianniman Square
[ ]

During the 20th Century, the Anthroposophical Society found a way to forget what Anthroposophy was.  Lacking that understanding, the Society instead of being what it was meant to be, became a festering locus of Steinerism, and lost all connection to the rest of the world (thinking it was spiritually better than other systems).  This was mostly fostered by what happened in Europe - two world wars, and related social failures, causing the Society there to draw into itself - circle the wagons so to speak, and otherwise become entombed in the concrete of its own illusions about Anthroposophy.

Here is some Steiner, paraphrased: “In Anthroposophy, it is the Truth that lives in it.  In the Anthroposophical Society it is the Life that lives in it.”  These are not mutually exclusive conditions, but rather bear a reciprocal inter-supportive relationship - the one building up and maintaining the other.

The American Anthroposophical Society, making itself fully dependent upon, and looking only at what went on in the Center (Dornach), to the exclusion of understanding the place (America) in which it found itself, failed as well.  The Platonists gathered at the periphery of the Society in America, but were again and again rejected by the Aristotelians that dominated the Life of the Society, believing they knew best.  Spiritual egotism (Lucifer) won the day, and in spite of efforts for years by the Platonists, the Aristotelians remain fixed in their views and unable to believe they could use any help.  

As a consequence Michael abandoned the Society, both in Europe and America, and sought other forums in which to inspire what was needed for the rebirth of civilization.  These were many, for humanity itself was ready and willing to find the Truth.  Humanity just didn’t need to take the Truth in the form of a worship of dead German philosopher/guru’s conceptual frame of reference, which he had called: Spiritual Science.  The Society, in America and Europe had the words, but not the deeds.

Even in 1933, a light appeared in Dornach, and it was not V. Tomberg, but rather the Englishman Owen Barfield.  In a lecture given there (see Barfield’s Romanticism Comes of Age), Barfield makes a crucial Platonist distinction between method, and the content produced by method.  Anthroposophy - the New Mystery of Thinking, was the method or how, and Spiritual Science was the content or what was produced by the method.  But the method required a devotion to Natural Science and its moral foundations, which were laid in the open in the idea that any knowledge of the True (content) had to be accompanied by an exact description of the how (method) it was produced.

We can easily forgive what happened in Europe, for the Opponents were successful in destroying German Culture by making it appear (via National Socialism and its cohorts) to be filled with the vilest evil possible (the Holocaust).  The only chance for a Michael Impulse to enter into civilization was America, and at the turn of the Millennium, the attack on America was begun.

By 2000, Ahriman incarnate, Karl Rove, had found his tool, a son of privilege (George W. Bush), whose soul was weak, horribly immature, and dominated by a father and a grandfather that had themselves made agreements with the Agents of Chaos.  The grandfather had supported Hitler, and the father then supported the Saudi’s whose Islamic fundamentalism and oil riches, enabled them, via a vast anti-west educational system (the Madrases) to foster hate against the “Great Satan”, among underprivileged Muslims all over the world.

When Rove and Bush occupied the White House, and thus the center of political power in America, they were able through fostering two completely unnecessary wars, and systematic torture, to nearly destroy the America Dream as it lived among the poor and oppressed all over the world.  Just as with German Culture, American Culture was to be crucified.

 However, American Culture was not like German Culture.  It was not rooted in decadent and decaying hierarchical social forms, that functioned from the top down, but rather was consistently inventive from the bottom up, from the social commons.  Where did the computer revolution arise?  Not from DARPA, the military-industrial complexes research arm [ ], but in garages, and basements.  Ordered wealthy structures did not produce the computer revolution, but rather the social commons and such amazing cultural artifacts as open source software [ ] designs -  something that happened all over the world where free individuals created something out of nothing.

Two other artifacts of American Culture need to be recognized: film (including television) and the musical revolution created by Rock ‘n Roll.  While corporate entities tried to dominate these for commercial gain, the creative impulses again belonged to individuals.  The whole world entered into, following film and music, a Michaelic Conversation at the level of the social commons.  Some brief examples follow, hopefully pointing the reader in the right directions:

Akira Kurosawa, in imitation of the American Western (see my Learning to Perceive the American Soul: ) begins to create a series of films about the Samurai era of Japanese history (just like we have a history of the Western), reaching international acclaim with his Seven Samurai, which is soon imitated by American filmmakers with The Magnificent Seven.  Not to long after, the Italian director Sergio Leone creates the so-called Spaghetti Westerns, taking an American TV star Clint Eastwood, and putting him on the world stage, leading Eastwood to an acting and directing career of epic proportions.  Even today, Eastwood’s latest film: American Sniper has created a much needed conversation about the recent wars, and the role and damage done to America soldiers in these morally unnecessary adventures.

In my essay above, we will see the reason for the importance of the Western as an archetype of the individual as a free actor in the Age of the Consciousness Soul.  This individually free moral actor is not confined to the geographic America, for the American Spirit is fundamentally an all-human impulse, and was especially characterized by an office worker standing in front of a tank in Tiananimen Square in 1989.

With Rock ‘n Roll, specifically Elvis Presley, social dancing underwent a completely new direction, where Black rhythm and blues was combined with white Tin Pan Alley romantic songs, and the musical fuel for the whole 1960‘s and ‘70‘s in America was set in play.  Thus began a still ongoing (also true in film) international Michaelic Conversation that led for a while to Jamaica, Bob Marley, and Reggae.  Then later on to what was known as World Beat [ ], although the dominance of commerce in the United States kept a lot of this music off of the radio airwaves.  World Beat was a response from all over the world, at the level of the social commons, and when this “answer” to rock ‘n roll was heard in the inner cities of America, Hip Hop was born, although Gangsta Rap (again, a fake commercial art) dominated the general public's mind).

Some years ago, I was listening to Terry Gross’s public radio show Fresh Air, and she was interviewing the poet laureate of England, and asked him if he was aware of any poetic voice that was as powerful as had been that of Bob Dylan [ ], and he said yes, the Hip Hop singer Eminem (Marshall Mathers) [ ], was the new poetic seer of America, and perhaps the world. See also the movie 8 Mile [ ].

I took a walk once, in the dark of night in that region of Detroit, Michigan, known as 8 Mile.  It is a story well worth telling ...

In 2003, I had recently moved to Prescott, Arizona.   My friend Stephen Clarke lived nearby in Sante Fe, New Mexico.  There was to be a mostly private gathering in Detroit, of some anthroposophists disposed toward trying to understand the spiritual America.  So I drove my pickup truck to Sante Fe, and Stephen and I drove one of his rebuilt Mercedes across the lower middle of the United States in the direction of Detroit.  We stopped a couple of times at Indian reservations, where Stephen, who was cultivating relationships with Native Americans, would go into various offices and seek out certain Elders who he knew the name of, but had not yet met.  Stephen brought with him gifts of tobacco, a kind of social gesture he had learned was important.

After the second stop, in the middle of emptiness in the Oklahoma Panhandle, the car broke down.  We hitched a ride to a nearby town, holed up in a local cafe, and Stephen placed calls to obtain the rental of a truck and a trailer on which he could put his car, to drive back to his own garage (he own’s Mozart’s Garage in Sante Fe).  He urged me to take a bus or two and continue my journey, but I denied the wish, and said it was more important to me to keep company with my friend while he dealt with his car issues.

A year later I was living with my then girl friend, Kelly Sutton (an anthroposophical doctor) in Prescott, while she took a kind of sabbatical and rethought what she wanted to do, her medical practice in New England having fallen into near financial ruin because she needed 2 and 1/2 employees just to handle the insurance claim issues.  We learned that an Annual General Meeting of the A. Society was scheduled for early November, 2004, in Detroit, so we made airplane, car rental, and motel reservations. 

The AGM’s theme was to be America, and several of our friends (in the America Work as we called it) were going to speak (Stephen Clarke, and Steve Burman, for example).  This theme had been set up by the Central Regional Council, chaired (I believe) at that time by Robert Karp (he now works for the American Biodynamic Association).  Just a month before the AGM, all the speakers were canceled, and it was said (via social undercurrents) that this was due to the disliking of one scheduled speaker: John Stirling Walker (by what were called “leading members” of the society).  Apparently Walker had publicly insulted a certain female figure who had a high position in the Society.

I am, by the way, not defending Walker, for he was certainly a kind of conversation dominating rascal.  What didn’t make sense to us, was why the whole list of speakers and the general theme was canceled, just to eliminate one speaker.

Kelly and I, having spent money (mostly hers) on reservations, went anyway.  We arrived late in the evening, the day before the AGM was set to lead off with a speaker at the Detroit Waldorf School around 7 p.m.  Trying to find our motel, we got lost.  This led to a verbal altercation (who was responsible for us getting lost).  Kelly (Irish Catholic born) verbally kicked me out of the car, and I found myself walking in the cool of a rather dark late evening, in the 8 Mile region of Detroit.  This was where a lot of Black people lived, in case the reader hasn’t yet got the point.

I was mad.  The neighborhood was full of street lights that didn’t work, empty lots full of trash and discarded furniture, and dark houses many of them boarded up.  I expected at any moment to be accosted by black gang members, robbed and killed.  My mind was in a turmoil.  I looked in vain for distant lights indicating a major intersection that might have gas stations or fast food places where I could make a call for a cab.  I had my airplane ticket, and was basically planning to go to the airport and cash it in for the first flight back to Arizona.

Slowly it dawned on me that Kelly and I had both been attacked by our ahrimaic doubles, acting in concert, so as to once more prevent me from connecting with anthroposophists in Detroit, just as had happened a year ago, when Stephen and I had tried to drive there. Nor was this so much about me delivering a message at the AGM, that was the lesser deed.  The real deed was for me to meet, and become conscious of, the ahrimanic fear-driven interference, and overcome that and go to the meeting in spite of the inner opposition.

Eventually I saw off in the distance, some lights at an intersection.  By the time I got to that area of 8 Mile, I must have walked 4 miles (my knees were not so bad as they are today).  I had wrestled the ahrimanic double to the ground and told him to go fuck himself. 

The intersection was just a couple of streets are right angles, controlled by stop lights.  On one corner was a fried chicken place, well lit.  Everywhere else was dark.  I walked into the chicken place and I was the only white person there.  Several booths were occupied, and the workers were behind a six inch thick window of Plexiglas, in the middle of which as a rotating tube of Plexiglas, that could be used to receive money and turned in such a way that food was then dispersed to the customer. 

A Very Large black man got up out of a booth, walked up to me and said: What the fuck are You doing here?  He was not angry or hating me, he was just totally shocked.  I told him my story of the fight and the walk and wondered if someone had a cell phone I could borrow to call a cab.  He reached into his pocket for his cell phone and called a number, as the cab was actually on the other side of the chicken place, where the driver hung out waiting to hear of fares.  The very large man introduced himself, and introduced me to the cab driver and off I was looking for the motel, whose name I knew, but whose directions were not clear.

Kelly meanwhile, regretting having made me leave the car, drove around a lot and found an open church, and was righteously warned not to treat her man the way she had treated me.  I called her from the motel when I got there, and she was already on her way.  When she walked through the door of the motel, I looked at her and said: “What took you so long?”  We both laughed.

My next letter here will tell the story of that AGM, which is by itself very instructive and not to be missed.

Introduction 12.1.3 The 2004 Annual General Meeting in Detroit, Michigan.  Ahriman and Lucifer’s ability to overwhelm the membership of the Anthroposophical Society in America, via the threefold double complex.

This, unfortunately, is a tragic story.  As previously mentioned, Kelly and I traveled to Detroit originally expecting for the first time to have an AGM that took up the subject of the Spiritual America.  A month before our leaving Prescott, Arizona, we found out that the expected thematic material had been completely changed, and the reports on the research on the Spiritual America canceled.   This was allegedly done because one of the speakers was found severely lacking in certain social graces (a true fact), although no mention was made (or apparently considered) as to whether his lecture on the relationship between Lucifer and Ahriman and the Democrat and Republican Parties, might prove illuminating.  Nonetheless, the powers that be in the A. Society in America canceled the whole Spiritual America program and replaced it with something else.

The evening before I was confronted with my own ahrimanic double (while wandering in the 8 Mile area of Detroit), which forced me to overcome its resistance in order to go to the AGM in spite of the obstacles placed in my way.  This was a rich experience, although not one what was pleasurable in any ordinary sense.

The next day I found a local Kinko’s Copy Shop, where I duplicated several dozen copies of two essays that I intended to hand out during the AGM weekend.  Since I was not being published anywhere in regular Society publications, this was the only recourse I had in order to be able to offer the results of my research.  These were 1) “The Law and the Spirit” [ ], which I felt qualified to write, in part, from having obtained a law degree, become licensed to practice in both Montana and Colorado, and having served as a clerk for a Montana Supreme Court Justice for a term; and, 2) “Concerning the Renewal of Anthroposophy - rediscovering the true meaning of the New Mysteries”: [ ].

That Friday evening the AGM led off with a somewhat lengthy lecture by a well known European born anthroposophist, Dr. Ernst Katz, who had been living in America for some time.  It was given with intelligence and some enthusiasm, but at the same time was filled with thoughts that basically began: Steiner-says.  It was, sadly, Anthroposophical Spiritual Science presented in the form of religion, something I had begun a few years before to call: Steinerism.  No mention was made of the metamorphosis of thinking - the “method” that is unique to Anthroposophy, and all inner work was, according to the lecture, to be devoted to the idea of meditation, as if the A. Society was the only group teaching a style of meditation practice.

Someone, not Dr. Katz but one of the moderators, asked the participants to think about what was said, and to prepare themselves overnight to offer their thoughts on the next morning, before the Saturday work was commenced.  I hardly slept that night, given my own inclinations, and the need to work up my courage to say what was in my heart.

The next morning, when the time came, I went to the center of the hall (all this was taking place in the Detroit Waldorf School), faced the audience and said I wanted to speak about the elephant in the room - namely the fact that the planned conference on research on the Spiritual America had been at the last minute canceled and was now replaced with something completely other.  I wanted to know why, what reason could be given for such a last minute change, especially since only one speaker was “irregular”.   I was very nervous, and while I was making my statement, Kelly was moving through the audience passing out  copies of the articles I had printed the previous day.

There were many gasps.  Who was I to disturb the sleep of all present, and ask them to wake up and perhaps look at the reality of what was going on.  Some shouted at me to leave my position before them, take my seat and essentially shut up.  I paused, and when I said I could not in good conscience pretend nothing had happened, silence finally reigned.  Robert Karp got up and related that he was satisfied with the explanations given to him and the Central Regional Council, although after the end of the AGM he admitted to me in a private conversation, he should have taken the opportunity to speak of his real feelings.

The powers that be, who never act in front of the rest of us with any transparency, had removed him from his position as head of the Central Regional Council, and blamed him for the fact that Mr. Walker was a jerk.  Robert was the scapegoat, and the morning meeting accepted his effort to make peace, given that Wendt was up there disturbing everyone’s slumber. I didn’t move, but soon it was offered to me that time would be given for a public discussion of the questions that I had raised, and would that satisfy me.  I consented, went back to my seat, and the AGM proceeded on its already established path.  Of course, the promised time for discussion of these issues never came to pass.

There were three basic lectures offered during the rest of the time of the AGM, before the actual Annual General Meeting of the A. Society in America happened on Sunday morning, as required by the legal rules of incorporation for non-profit organizations, a matter never clearly admitted by any AGM anywhere, as far as I know.  The lecturers were all women of social rank in the A. Society in America (Gayle Davis, Joan Almon, and Marijo Rogers), who were also fans and friends of the European born Waldorf expert, Rene Querido, who had crossed the threshold earlier in the year.

Instead of celebrating America, we were invited to celebrate the work of a man (Rene), who had taken over the impulse to found a center for the study of America, as well as providing a foundation year for anthroposophical studies in Fair Oaks, California, and turned it into a Waldorf teacher training center, leaving in the dust the inspiration of the Christian Community priest (one of the originals) Carl Stegmann (author of the “Other America: the West in the Light of Spiritual Science”), to found a place where the Spiritual America could be researched. 

Now to better appreciate this switch to Steinerism, and the celebration of Rene Querido, instead of presenting research on the Spiritual American, you have to understand that the Tuesday before this early November AGM, George W. Bush had just been re-elected.  The Country was in turmoil, it was clear that serious cheating just like in the year 2000 was at play in this latest   election, we were involved in two unpopular wars,  and while nobody knew it yet, Ahriman’s incarnation was in full swing, with Karl Rove sitting in the White House, playing  the role of the character from Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, called Wormtongue, and with amazing clever genius manipulating others via lie after lie affecting the whole situation of the world, not just what was going on in America.  Even today, we mostly dislike Bush II and Dick Chaney, forgetting completely that Rove is still out there, playing with our politics, cleverly behind the scenes.

At the final plenum, where the members are offered a brief opportunity to speak their minds, a young woman, perhaps a fresh Waldorf teacher, or Waldorf mother, spoke up with much quiet and plaintive emotion:  “Weren’t we suppose to know something about America?  Wasn’t anthroposophy supposed to be able to speak about the madness ruling our Nation?”

I hung my head in shame, covering my face with my hands, upon hearing this lament, so profound and to the point.  At the end of the Plenum, Kelly, an anthroposophical doctor no less, went up to one of the co-chairs, who were sharing the job of General Secretary at that time, and  announced to her that she was so disappointed with what they had done, that she was quiting the Society.  In my own journeys, through the years of membership in the Society, I have watched countless beautiful people leave, all with mostly broken hearts at what we have become.

Can the A. Society in America be redeemed?  I sometimes think it should be destroyed, and then I remember it is already doing that on its own.  I will write here on Facebook a few more papers, as I wind up the original effort to create a more formal “Introduction to a Spiritual Social Science.”  On one of the Facebook anthroposophy pages, someone wondered what was the point of reading me, or of my writing?  Not a bad question.  I write because that helps me think, enables organizing, and as well there is often the wonderful experience of a new perception, even of something thought about once before.  People are free to read or not.  I get a lot of likes, which is one sign.

One fellow recently posted that he didn’t read me because I am claimed to be “the bodhisattva”.  It really is amazing how lazy people are.  All the knowledge and understanding one can need is in my works, yet most people don’t bother, and/or just make superficial judgments.  Their loss.

For the future, I will work on finding a producer for my screenplay.  Maybe that will lead in some unpredictable direction.  I will also return to creating videos for YouTube, finding some new tools with which to play: an electronic white board, a tiny rhythm synthesizer not economically feasible before, and wonder of wonders, a pen that leaves a fluid on a page that can carry an electrical current, which product includes various types of transistors, and the like, that look like tiny band-aides.  Just plop them on the page, make a circuit with your “pen” that goes to a tiny power source, and viola, a radio on a sheet of paper.

Meanwhile, the Aristotelian Anthroposophical Society in America, can’t find America, connect to the Platonists, or much less discover the door to the 21st Century (very out of touch with social media).  This is not a criticism, it is simply a fact. 

These members and friends of the A. Society are all basically well-intended human beings.  Yet, the collective human errors of over nearly 100 years since Steiner died, have accumulated like a much too long winter’s snowstorm.   We are buried in them.  I use this metaphor because right now, it is zero degrees outside, and with a second storm just finished, our yard is buried under 4 and 1/2 feet of snow now, with more on the way later this week.

No critical analysis of the Society’s works, and the contents of its publications, is carried out.  We claim to do some kind of Science, but most members don’t know what science is.  We study Steiner endlessly, but give little evidence of learning anything from anywhere else.  I’ve hundreds of pages of the Society’s problems (and potential solutions) on my website, with all manner of quotes of Rudolf Steiner in support my conclusions.  I have equally hundreds of pages of fresh spiritual research, but being a Platonist, the Aristotelians that dominate the Society are completely perplexed with what to do about any of it.

I’ve reported on the existence of a Second Eucharist in the Ethereal to go with the Return of Christ in the Ethereal.  I’ve done considerable research on the threefold double complex.  I wrote a whole book about how the social-political order of the world is an embodiment of the Word (how it is that we live within the being of the Cosmic Christ).  I’ve identified Ahriman’s incarnation.  I’ve researched the New Mystery of Thinking.  I spent decades preparing myself to be useful to the A. Society, but unfortunately, my message remains, as William Bento described in his review my American Anthroposophy: bitter medicine. 

Why?  Because we are not an functioning esoteric Society.  We are most like a university department, devoted to the works of a single thinker (Steiner), with all the infighting and competition normal to such a social form.  We run on habit, and tradition.  We are neither as smart or as wise as we pretend to be.  We have a “guru", and still have not learned the basic lessons having to do with the problem of “knowledge” in the Age of the Consciousness Soul, although our “guru” tried every which way to guide us there.

Meanwhile, time marches on.  Michael has his own agenda, and we don’t much figure in it anymore - at least as much as many anthroposophists believe.

Introduction 12.1.4  The Paradoxes of Existence

There may be no escape from our Now.  There may be no escape from our Self.  When “I” go to sleep at night, isn’t it still the same “I” that wakes up the next morning?

Maybe I am wealthy, beyond measure.  I sleep in a large bed with at least three blond bombshells every night.  Women willing to grant my every whim.  Each night a different three.  I have to forget that I know their hair color is not natural, nor the size of their breasts, or the shape of their behinds.  Maybe I have to forget as well that I have no organ for the purpose of sex, without that famous little blue pill, which if I take too many will kill me.

Bored, I might get into drugs, except ... the addictive part, whether physical or psychological, which will seek to soon rule me, instead of me ruling it.

Perhaps I like other, less “normal” pleasures, which some might call perversions.  Even with great wealth I would need an army of workers to fuel the system which brings what I hunger for fresh every day.  What has happened to all those children whose pictures haunt the sides of milk boxes?

Is it possible that being poor is not such a bad thing?

Maybe not.  Maybe I spend each day in a Mexican prison, the toy of bigger men, and lazy guards.  If I am once in a while lucky, perhaps no other prisoner will steal that days ration of gruel, or if really lucky a scorpion will come in the night and end my every-lasting misery.  When alone, and not bothered, I wonder if suicide might possibly actually lead to an eternal darkness and unconsciousness, where the endless Now and the never satisfied Self are truly no more.  Is that not the siren song to which the Asuras respond?

Or, I could be a dark skinned woman in Darfur ... kept pregnant by those who rule the camp.  Babies with fat bellies swollen with emptiness.  Seemingly forever walks up and down a long dusty road, with an old but now clean olive oil can balanced on my head, filled with water.  Every few days some white woman comes by in the once in a while with washed and clean clothes sent by others who no longer need them, and some uncooked rice for me to make into food.  With others like me I live in a city of tents, to hide from dust storms, while our babies play - how odd the joy that children bring in spite of having big empty bellies and no toys but a stone, a broken piece of wood and a torn piece of cloth.

What about memory?  If I took a pill that destroyed memory would each day bring a fresh Self?  What really is it like to have one of the different kinds of dementia?  Can my Self and its Now become invisible in some form of Madness?  Did Helen Keller ever - even for a moment - regret waking up?

Sleeping/waking.  Remembering/forgetting.   Life/death.  Madness/sanity.  Which is an escape from which?

The I that I name Joel A. Wendt seems to have written millions of words, some of it even recorded in speech on video for YouTube.  Am I those words?

I worked for a while as an egg-flipper (a breakfast cook) in a large family restaurant off of Interstate 5 in Northern California, near Yreka.  There were usually two front line cooks, until summer started, and then there had to be three.  Always there were a couple of old lady back cooks, making gravy and biscuits and hard boiled eggs.  Baking turkeys and hams on holidays.

It took three cooks in the summers at the two six foot long grills and the six burner stove, to serve a 1000 people a shift.  With one partner-cook, we once served 800 breakfasts, just the two of us, in about 7 hours.  With another we went to his trailer one afternoon, where his wife and six kids also lived, got very stoned on weed and an eight-ball of speed, and tried to figure out just how many eggs we had cracked between our two careers (his was longer than mine).  When we easily passed the first million, the giggles took over.

How many breaths in a life of 74 years?  How many heart beats? One boring night when I worked the graveyard shift at the psychiatric hospital, I tried to count up how many times I had opened the doors to patient rooms to check and see if they were still in bed and breathing.  10 years, five nights a week, 40 rooms, and bed checks every half hour.  When working in a factory, another guy and I created a 186,000 pieces of mail on one machine in an 8 hour shift.  Our names then went up on the record board in main floor machine room.

How many thoughts in a life?  Can number ever measure anything?  On the television show, the West Wing, President Bartlett, when finishing some bit of work with his staff, would often ask: “What’s next?”

As I write this: “What’s next?” 

My  nose itches.  I had beans for a late evening snack because it is 2 degrees outside, and I find my body wants something warm in its tummy before going to sleep in the cold of winter.  Except I drank a glass of Mountain Dew, and between the caffeine and the beans, my tummy growls and the bathroom beckons.   Ah, just gas.

Yes, ... it is a mystery why I write this, although the greater mystery, perhaps, is why you read it.

Seven billion people all trapped in their own Now, coupled inextricably to their own Self.  Each story and each context different and unique.  When Christ suggests we not Judge, is He perhaps giving us a clue about precisely how to gain intimacy with some of these individual mysteries - a Way to find and to truly “know” the other - the Thou?

How many of these billions have the mental categories of good and evil?  Do they all agree on what is good and what is evil?  If they don’t agree, can there by any good or evil outside of some individual’s subjective judgment?  Yet, each one seems to act as if They know the real good, and others do not.  So much we share in common, and so little we are alike.

Number, suffering, and death = living existence?  Read: “Everything and More: A Compact History of Infinity”, by David Foster Wallace.  He committed suicide on September 12, 2008, at age 46.  How many angels does it take to square dance on the head of a pin?

In the dark of a long winter’s night, the muse of crazy finds purchase inside my head.  We make love and words fall through my fingers against the plastic of a keyboard, to wind their way in a swirl of wires and bored mothers, to appear like magic on a field of white - letters as secret codes running across the world of my vision, screaming their pain at their existence.  Does a paragraph or a sentence have consciousness?  Don’t think so?  Why not they ask?  Do we not exist too?  Do we not climb on waves of light into doorway to your mind via the vortex of rays that impinge on the back of your eyeball?

Is there a world of ideas somewhere?  Invisible to the physical eye, but blatantly visible to the spiritual eye.  I even wrote a thing: “The IDEA of the Thought-World - and its practical implications for our shared political life”: [ ]  I truly wonder whether anyone has ever read it.  Or should read it?  Why bother when your own “I” has its  personal access panel to that world?

I sing poems of goodbye now, to the Facebook pages of Anthroposophy and Independent Anthroposophical Research Examination.  When I quit those pages in a few days, will it be like an electronic suicide?  Will I be missed?  Will I miss the others that danced with me there among the Electronic Aethers?  Will there be an emptiness in my soul ... an ache of sorts, needing to be filled?  Even grief?

Yet, I have all kinds of “friends” now, whatever “meaning” can be found in that -which is not at all sarcastic by the way, for Facebook friends do send unexpected gifts.  I will still, every morning, as part of my regular routine (my acts of my Self, in the corners of my Now) go to my Facebook page, looking for clues left there from the wonderings of other minds.   Bits of sage advice quoted from sages old and new.   Pictures of food, or parties, or dogs and cats, or dancing quarks amid evil prognostications of eminent collapses of civilizations, and the odd features of stranger than strange doings across the boundaries of words, concepts and ideas the haunt these pages - ghosts of something mirrored in dozens upon dozens of minds - all searching for the great viral video that makes us laugh, at least at that moment, and pretend that ISIS hasn’t beheaded anyone today, or that politicians actually offer wisdom when their mouths open.

How many snowflakes fell here these last couple of days?  If I had Eternity could I ever count them, and write all their names in the Book of Existence?  I suspect, and even hope, that our sharings lend warmth to each other, of such strength that the dancing of angels on the heads of pins is because we billions of human beings heat up the whole of existence with such fires of Being that those very pins are too hot to stand on, and that the angels dance because they must, although the rhythms to which they dance comes from the best music heard everywhere and anytime, which is the simple laughter of playing children, who transcend every moment of the youthful existence, the fantasy prisons of Now and Self, knowing with grave and wondrous instinct that the best way to live is to always color outside the lines.

Introduction 12.1.5 The Individual Self as the co-Conductor and co-Composer of the Music of the Now

With the above last words of 12.1.4: “ ... the simple laughter of playing children, who transcend every moment of the youthful existence, the fantasy prisons of Now and Self, knowing with grave and wondrous instinct that the best way to live is to always color outside the lines.” we have drawn closer to what Christ, the Son, as the stand-in for the Father, meant by: lest ye become again as little children, ye cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.

Similar to music, the Now follows rules of order, which rules are the active presence in the nature of existential reality of the near-god anthroposophists have learned to call: Ahriman.  Ahriman is limited in what he can and cannot do by the Holy Mother and Her Companions, and by Christ and His Companions, both of whom work with us as individuals in the co-Creation of the totality of Now, which in a most magical way includes thousands of millions of human beings.  While Ahriman provides Order, Christ and the Holy Mother, along with us, provide “meaning”, which word in turn can include Justice and Love.

“Meaning” is drawn from the unlimited well of the realm of the uncreated and unformed.  This “well of meaning” is helped by having Ahriman’s geometrical and mathematical nature offer “order”, as a kind of oppositional and resisting force to the unlimited quality of the uncreated and unformed, which the ancients recognized as Chaos, and by which they never meant what so many mean today by chaos: random chance. 

Evolution arises as a natural consequence of the interaction among the tendencies between Order and Chaos, both of which are sublimely creative, and which appear most obviously in the distinction between living matter and consciousness, which Steiner sometimes noted as a kind of Rite of Opposition, in the human organism, between the forces of life (order) and the forces of death (consciousness, or the gateway for the actions of the uncreated and unformed).

If you will recall our earlier discussions of past and future, and how and why, these Ideas are deepened by relating Past, How, and Justice, to each other, as well as Future, Why, and Love.

We have the most powers as regards our individual “Self”, whatever you want to take that reference to mean.  We are the actors in the Play, which the Bard described centuries ago, this way: “All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances, And one man in his time plays many parts, ... “ As You Like It, Act II, Scene VII.

The best artistic expression of the essential nature of the Self, in particular as it presents itself to the rest of the world, I found in Catherine MacCoun’s remarkable book “On Becoming an Alchemist”, where she calls individuality our: “style”.  Everyone has a unique “style”, from ways of dress, patterns of speech, to how we walk and so forth.

One of the primary rules of Order/Life, in the fashioning of the Now, that is given to us to help keep our tendencies to excess in check (somewhat, and depending), is the Day.  The Fable/movie Groundhog Day gives wonderful expression to the mystical/magical nature of the Day.  The Day does not always have to be too governed by routine, such as is imposed on the nun, the monk, the prisoner and our own minds.  Remember the child, and that each Day will present itself with fresh opportunities to “color outside the lines”.

The Day, as presented in the film in archetypal formulation, is repetitious.  We live day be day.  We survive day by day.  We grow/become day by day.  We decay day be day.  Steiner often spoke of the “power” of this rhythmic potential.  To pray, or meditate, daily - regularly and rhythmically, is to strengthen something daily.  The danger is to let the will-in-thinking, the true mind - the spirit - go to sleep, and allow routine to become habit, and not deliberate activity.  In the fable/film this is what the main character wakes up to: the potential of the Day’s magical and mystical openness to receiving/giving everyday, something new - something from the never-before.

Macro-cosmically, the Day exists inside the Seasons of the Year.  Rudolf Steiner taught of this in his Calender of the Soul, where he reveals how day by day and week by week, the soul expands and contracts over the course of the Year.  This expansion and contraction is written large in the Cycle of the Seasons, and in the lives of the lower kingdoms of Nature: the silent stones, the glowing green world, and the singing of the four-legged and the winged: Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter.  Life, Expansion, Decay and Rest.

So too then the human Biography.  Life, Expansion, Decay and Rest.  What we sometimes fail to notice is that Decay, which is mostly of the material order inhabiting our physical organism, is accompanied by a freeing of the “style” of our innermost being/self.  The old man and old woman often become less socially inhibited.  We even sometimes metaphorically speak of this “time” of life as a: second childhood.  I wrote of this in my essay: Dragon-Riders: the human being in maturity [ ].

Further “time” structures of order are the Century, and the Millennia.  We today are in the first Century of the Third Millennium, following the Incarnation, which singular Event Steiner characterized as: the turning point of “time”.  Within these larger cycles of rhythm and time, Steiner noted the Epochs and the Ages.  Civilizations, Races, Peoples, Paradigms, Religions and the Evolution of Consciousness, rise and fall within these larger cycles of “time”.  These larger time-forms tended to follow a rhythm of “seven”, much like the seven year rhythms existing in the biography.

The order of the soul, and its energy centers, is ruled by the rhythm of “seven”.   There were, according to Steiner, seven Elohim in the form nature of the Sun Being, as was the Creation in the Hebrew Bible given an order of “seven”.  Everywhere “order” in the sense of number.  Unity, duality, threefoldness, quarters, sevens and on. Lines in time, out of which the human being is slowly learning how to color beyond.  We sleep and wake and work now according to our own rhythms, ignoring those of Nature and the hourly cycle of the Day.

We now get to “style” so many basic aspects of our personal biographical time and life.  People even give individual order to diet, something far less possible in ages past.  The metabolic life needs rhythm as does the life of the blood and the circulation, while less so the life of the nerves and the senses.  Remember, consciousness in the totality of the human organism seems to be opposed to the “forces” of life.

As someone who has experienced the 10 seven year rhythms of the biography, I can report that Steiner aptly characterized each one.  Most near at hand, and recent in “time” was when at age 63, upon entering the 10th period, karma fell away.  Whereas before, my biographical life was dominated by outside influences, such as work and family.  I retired on Social Security at age 62, and less and less did my children need my presence.  Work and family slipped into the background, and each Day became open, almost to the point of being capricious. 

I was being given no choice but to invent within the Day, and the Week and the Month and the Year.  The lines of time themselves dissolved, in a way which I have to confess was also much filled with Grace.  I did not have karma taken away, so much as the Gods themselves lifted generous aspects of its “weight”. Yet this was such a gift, that without fully understanding the Why of it, I could feel the How it was happening.  I knew this fresh freedom, and personally, inadvertently, began its Season with a 45 Day fast.

Now don’t think I was being religious.  I was not.  I was grossly overweight, and needed to give to my body some rest from the punishments my consciousness had imposed upon its metabolic nature.  I had not anticipated or expected the “visions” that came, about 21 days into the fast, so I took notes, of these dream-sendings that flooded in most every morning.  Just to give one example:

I woke up one morning in this half-asleep dreaming state, and saw within my mind’s eye a stream of pictures of all the significant women in my life, as if they were images on a deck of cards.  This “condition” lasted for a time, and I could, a little bit, make the pictures move back and forth, but not really un-glue them from their time-related unfolding.  All the same, the pictures were not just images, but were accompanied by “feelings” and there was order to the “feelings” for I was being “shown” how it was in my biography I had been taught about Love, by the women whose presence had adorned it.

What the dream-sending taught me was that what in memory was segmented - in parts - was also in fact a whole, a kind of story-tale that I was capable of putting into something like what Goethe did when he recreated in his imagination, the sequence of leaf forms through what he called: exact sensorial fantasy.

Upon reflection is was if the Holy Mother was saying to me: “Look here you fool, we of the female persuasion have given you many gifts.  As you go on, do not let them rot in some dry corner of your soul, gathering dust.  Put the clues together - there is wisdom in them”.

This experience, gifted in the dream-sending, I have over the years brought more consciously to mind and this inner reflection has then fueled the video series: Misery Loves Company: the Redemption of Eros, which begins here: [ ]

These “Instructions in the Arts of Love” are all derived from what the women in my life taught me.

Other visions were written of in a notebook, and many of the related ideas were later (after the fast) more consciously thought, so as to become through the rhythm of time (as karma slipped away, and my own creative freedom came more to the fore) the first of several books: “the Way of the Fool: the conscious development of our human character, and the future* of Christianity - both to be born out of the natural union of Faith and Gnosis” [ ].  This book was a conscious effort to create a connection between the Shepherd’s Stream (Faith) and the King’s Stream (Gnosis) - see the references in Steiner’s Foundation Stone Meditation.  “... Light Which warms The simple shepherd-hearts, Light Which enlightens The wise heads of Kings.” [ ]

Respect the potential creative Rhythm of the Day, by coloring outside the lines of time, social structure and mental confusion.  You will be pleasantly surprised by what then arises within, and without.  The Rising of the Sun in the Mind happens one Day at a time.

Introduction: 12.1.6 Cleaning up some old Business ... while saying goodbye ...

I’ve had my share of “relationships” with women.  They tend to have very curious attitudes about anger, or perhaps better said: fiery discharges.  They don’t like to be on the receiving end, and if you let them know you have a plan to engage someone else (not them) with such a burst of emotional energy and force, they will urge caution, and offer that the truly spiritual believe in being “nice” and “kind” in speech.  Forgetting that they too wake of up on the wrong side of the bed, and when its them being fiery in anger, or even worse, cold, it is always best to give them the last word, and otherwise keep one’s mouth shut.

Now, I have also been told that I have a “woman” inside of me as well as a man, and while I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about this, I am aware that on occasion there needs to be a “discharge” of energy, that if not released turns inward and can become depression.  So this next bit begins with a bit of fuss and bother concerning my time spent on these Facebook groups. 

Not to worry, I get more mellow at the end ...

Technically, this is the last bit in what will be a book on my website.  So I thought about my last words, and thought, and thought ... no, not really.  In fact I started writing the below after looking at some comments on a section in the Facebook discussion group: Anthroposophy.  The curious thing was I was the subject of this comment thread.  Not all of was about me, but enough.  Some of it was kind, some of it was confused and some of it, ... well, some of it I did not like at all.  So this is what I wrote, and I'll have to live with it, in the same way those who made my personality a subject of discussion will have to take responsibility for and live with their words.  So, ... I’m going to be leaving two anthroposophical Facebook discussion groups.  But got to say a couple of things ... about things that piss me off.  Linda, that’s the girl friend, says I shouldn’t.  She might be right, but I don’t care.

First on the list is Jeff Falzone.  Makes me feel like I’m walking across a school yard, minding my own business, and then from left field, over by the trash cans, he lobs a rotten tomato in my direction.  Has to make a comment.  He isn’t adding anything to what some folks like to think of as a “conversation”, he’s just talking trash.  Keep in mind the comment is there by choice - its an act of will - nobody forces him to write it and the content belongs to him.

His deeds, to me, seem very immature.  Not to say he’s stupid, ‘cause he’s not.  Which makes it all the worse for being so juvenile, and coming from a guy who advertises himself as a therapist.  He might even be good at that, but when it comes to me, sure doesn’t feel like he’s even trying to be “good”.

Now the things he says are not all that bad, either.  But still, its kind of like getting poked at by a stick, with him knowing before hand (and/or during) that I’m not going to like it.  He’s not the only one that pokes, however, but the other ones they are not so persistent and repetitive.  From them, this could be nothing.  Linda said to be above it all, and I said, well I was from Montana, and if you are from Montana, them’s fighting words.  Guy throws wrong and unkind words at you, he better be ready to put up his fists.

Like I said.  Same as being in a school yard.

So, how do I know ‘bout Jeff’s attitude,  you ask?  ‘Cause he doesn’t stand behind his words.  Flies by, says ‘em and then goes away.  Does it all the time, which is a pretty good clue its personal and purposeful.  He seems to want to force a public argument.  Call me out in front of others.  Why is that deed of his so revealing?  Well, if he has some intelligent criticism, then there is a right Way to do that.

When I complain about the quality of someone’s work, I do it the right Way.  The complaint could be wrong, but the Way is right.  Long essays, all kinds of quotes and arguments and stuff.   I’ve done Prokofieff, Ben-Aharon, von Halle and others.  Well written, carefully argued.

Jeff doesn’t even have the courtesy to do that.  Just lobs in the rotten tomato and walks on.

I’ve asked for direct calls, on my phone, on my skype number, even e-mails.  Nothing.  Doesn’t stand behind his words, but used the Facebook comment function as a way to make noise.  Seems kind of cowardly to me. 

Practicing anthroposophy is a Way that requires respect for the truth.  Jeff doesn’t give evidence of respecting the truth.  He just comments, says the sames things he’s said before, but doesn’t really stand behind it.  I’ve un-friended him, and he’s one of the main reasons I’m leaving these groups.  I don’t mind reading stuff arguing with what I say, but his stuff is just plain mean and he knows it.   And, I am tired of looking through a bunch of comments, seeing his name, and feeling: Oh, crap, another turd from Oregon.

Second on my list is the folks who judge me for making “claims”, about being an initiate or a bodhisattva.  Most of those folks have clearly never thought much about any of that.  They seem to think that if you say such a thing, it must be a brag - a not-truth - and so they judge you.  They don’t investigate, or do any work.  Yet, Steiner can say all kinds of things hard to verify and these same folks will treat it as the word of God. 

If any of them care, or even know how to read (always a good skill to have, but you have to practice it or it doesn’t mean anything), there’s this: “Five Paths to the Spirit”: [ ]  Don’t want to bother to read and understand what I write, then don’t be going around saying I’m making “claims”.  That’s just more useless unsubstantiated trash talk.   Sloppy thinking to say the least.  Not as mean as Jeff, ‘cause they don’t keep coming back at me again and again, but still a reason for me to be tired of these lists.  

Now Robert Mason has said similar things about the “bodhisattva” stuff, but I respect how he’s gone about doing them.  Tried to do research.  Tried to have standards.  Wrote long screeds.  Actually (more or less) carefully read some of my stuff, in particular “biographical necessity”.  He even recognized that I didn’t come out and actually claim to be the Future Maitreya Buddha.  He just thought that I was being tricky - clever, and tried to call me out on that.  Mostly, however, he just gives conclusions - judgments - and doesn’t quote me carefully at all.  Better than Jeff though.  More effort given.

Tom Mellett, who seems to have suffered some kind of invisibility complex - he liked to mock me about the “Buddha” stuff in lots of other Internet venues.  That mocking business I don’t respect either (just another lame version of trash talk), but he and I have a lot of old business - a lot of history, so I’m not going to go over any of that again.  A lot of that belongs in the “private” file.

Then there is the general quality of stuff on these lists.  I can’t blame a lot of folks for what they do here, given the examples they’ve meet while becoming introduced to Anthroposophy.  If you imitate a bad example, we really can’t say you should have known better.  You are just behaving like what you saw others do.

So anthroposophists in general talk about meditation, and over-quote Steiner, and never heard (most anyway) of the New Thinking Mystery or the New Community Mystery (the “reverse cultus”).  I’ve written a ton or articles on this, made references to those works in my own comments, but there never is much evidence people read my research.  That’ just plain lazy, by the way. 

Nor do they seem to have heard about the split in the Society after Steiner died and all that trash talk then, that ended  up with people being kicked out of this and that and the various National Societies all getting huffy and having a big break up (institutional divorce).  Later they made up, sort of, but only on the horizontal level of the social.  Not on a spiritual level at all, which might have required a little more inner work than has become the standard.  Want to be an actual esoteric Society, then the remarriage should be esoteric as well.  What’s that mean?  Well, ... at the least Michael should have been invited to officiate in some way, and as far as I know, that never happened.

All that stuff mostly before everyone’s time, so the modern A. Society people don’t talk about it, like it was some bad cousins who did wrong stuff, and needs to be a well kept family secret.  Then, who can blame people who come along and don’t know Ita Wegman, and Marie Steiner and Elizabeth Vreede treated each other like screw-ups for the first ten years after Steiner died.

What’s funny, when you read the stuff that was said, is how “polite” it was in a way.  Long letters and papers on this one or that one speaking an “untruth”.  Legal fights over who owns or controls Steiner’s literary estate.  Another fight over who should lead the Class Lessons.  More fights over who was to be on the Vorstand, or the Executive.  Discussions about Tomberg, and whether he could succeed Steiner, who clearly declined to name a successor.  If they’d done that over here - in America near our present, everyone would be wanting them to go to therapy together, get out of their heads and talk about their “feelings”.

Oh, things did get “heavy”.  People got voted out of various associations.  Groups took sides.  So, for example, we could get interested in George Adams’ amazing works on science and math and physics and the fact that he translated Steiner’s lectures.  When Steiner went to England.  Steiner would talk for 15 minutes or so, then Adams would render a free translation.  But, guess what?  Adams made the mistake of taking a side while the ladies where fighting, and boom, they booted him out of the club, or at least one of the clubs.  A great genius, and he gets the boot because all this other petty stuff was going down.

Can’t say Steiner didn’t warn them.  Told them straight up before he died that if they didn’t get their soul/spiritual lives together, then “karma will hold sway”.  Guess that’s what’s happening still today.  Karmas running all over everyone’s dogmas.  Got to stand far to the side, if you don’t want to get some errant rotten tomatoes on you.  Get Frank T. Smith to give you a precis on the “constitutional question” over the last 15 to 20 years or so.  Unkind words, lawsuits, attempts at palace coups.  The Executive spending a lot of our dues money defending itself from being removed.  Power pushes to make sure Gordienko’s very revealing book on Prokofieff doesn’t see the light of day.

Now maybe I have karma with Jeff.  Could be, don’t care.  What I haven’t done yet is drive to Oregon, and give him a bloody nose.  Think about it ‘tho.  Think it would be real fun.  Manly even.  Maybe not nice-nice spiritual, but I do favor a good revenge fantasy on occasion.  Got to not forget we have a dark side.  When you pretend that you don’t, that’s when it just sneaks right up on you and gives you a nice kick in ass.  Why?  Because that’s what you need. “You can’t always get what you want.  But if you try sometimes well you just might find. You get what you need”.  You know that one.  From the bad boys of Rock ‘n Roll, the Rolling Stones. [ ]

There is a tricky part here, a deeper truth as it were.  I’ve never met Jeff, and he’s never met me - not really (although I vaguely believe he might have visited me once when I lived in Fair Oaks, but that somehow didn’t make all that much of an impression.  Fact is, I’ve hardly met me.  I’ve also never met those who think I make “claims” that are not true.  I’ve never met any of the people on these Facebook groups who seem fascinated with Steiner and at the same time seem fully unconscious as regards the real nature of the history of the Society, its true current conditions, or even appreciate what Steiner actually meant when he used the word: Anthroposophy.

Messages found in some bottles on the long long shores of a very ancient sea.  This is just another one.  Each of us walks these sands of time, picking up some bottles and believe (or not) that communication/conversation is a real in the moment event that occurs regularly on these Facebook groups.  Maybe it does.  Even if it does, and even if the impressions are real, I’ve lost interest in continuing, however else we may characterize the experience.  Not bored actually, just tired.  Wears me down to read a lot of stuff here.  Be a lot better were we to go on a month long retreat with each other and have some nice face to face encounters, with plenty of time to figure out how easily we use the same words to mean entirely different things.

Good luck to all of you who continue to journey here.  To those who have asked me to be friends, I thank you for what you will share, have been sharing, and I hope that what we continue to share in that environment - my regular Facebook home page - can have meaning for us all.

Life is precious, it just needs to not be held to too pretentiously.  Color outside the lines, at every opportunity.  And if you can’t, move the lines around to where you do color.  Lots of Ways to be in this world and all of them are right, at least for the person that lives them.  Even Jeff.  Got to respect Jeff for being Jeff.  Somebody must have a use for him, even if I don’t, ... yet.

Let’s take the trouble to revisit (at least from my point of view) what Jeff and I argued about ...

For a long time now, I’ve been putting forward the idea that, as Owen Barfield put it, the book “A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe’s World Conception” is the least read, most important book, that Steiner ever wrote.

Now Jeff is not a unskilled thinker, and he read a lot of stuff, thought about his own mind, and came to the conclusion (this is my version of it, Jeff’s will be - no doubt - a bit different), that Steiner made some observational errors in that book, which Steiner later regretted, and made various efforts as he grew older to correct those problems.  It was Jeff that got me to take a look at Steiner’s “Anthroposophy - a fragment”, which I eventually did. [ “an alternative introduction to Steiner’s Anthroposophy  (a fragment)”: ]

Now I’m going to skip over the “tricky” parts, but in brief say that a serious question Jeff raised is what is it really that we use the term “experience” to describe, a word Steiner made a big deal of in his book “A Theory ... “.  Somewhere in those discussion Jeff used a term something like (relying on memory here): the pure percept.  In Steiner’s The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity we get the terms: concept and percept, while in “A Theory ...” we have the terms thought and experience, including a Chapter titled: “Thinking as a higher experience within experience”.

Jeff’s argument (as I understand it at least) is that this division between percept and concept or thought and experience doesn’t really grasp the nature of the reality of what appears to and within our consciousness.  There is really only the “pure percept” - the experience in all its unlimited endlessly varying glory, and we can find Steiner saying at various times something on the order of: That he (Steiner) just saw the world with greater intensity and that then revealed what was hidden (or not yet visible) from (or for) the casual perceiver.

This is important stuff.  Jeff is definitely onto something here.

Even though I got “that”, it was clear to me that at the same time Jeff was a bit goofy on aspects of the “whole” situation.  For example, Jeff “sees” things in a perhaps better way (maybe), and finds the works of regular anthroposophists, including folks like me) wanting in this respect.  We should get what he sees too, Jeff seems to think.  But not “perceiving” the Way Jeff wants, he describes us as having “filters”.  And, a filter is a kind of unchangeable preconception that stands in the way of perceiving the “truth” of the situation (again, according to Jeff).

So then I counter that point of view, by pointing out that this perception of the pure percept is something in the future of the human evolution of consciousness, not something in the present.  It is more in accord with Barfield’s idea of “final participation”, and ignores where humanity is today, which is the “onlooker separation”.  In terms of the evolution of consciousness, we need to be exactly where we are, not where Jeff seems to have gone, and for which our not going there is to Jeff a kind of flaw.  So periodically Jeff throws these rotten tomatoes at me, which is to try to remind me that I too am flawed.

I asked him, for example, where is the book.  You (Jeff) make a serious and respectable offering as regards Steiner’s early fundamental epistemological thinking, so maybe Jeff should give us all the gift of his insights, instead of just throwing rotten tomatoes from the sidelines.  Get on the field of inquiry and become an actual player.  That’s my challenge to Jeff.

But, he doesn’t produce such a book, or if he has, there is no evidence of that.

Then to make things worse, I remind Jeff that this one of Ahriman’s tricks (according to Steiner), which is to bring something from the future into the present and outside the stream of time as it is meant to unfold.  I basically accused Jeff of the “crime” of an excess of ahrimanic thinking, far too clever, and not in accord with the real nature of the present justified stage of ordinary human consciousness. 

Everyone gets a bit cranky on occasion.

I’m not arguing with the “truth” of his observations, but rather with what he is doing with them, particularly as regards me.  Because, as I have carefully explained to him a couple of times, I’m writing to ordinary consciousness, and so was Barfield.  That means it is just fine to use Steiner’s map to the mind in “A Theory ... “, especially given that what is urged upon people is not that the truth is found in that book, but that what they really need to study is their own minds.  The concepts of experience and thought in that book remain quite correct for many people as a place to start the adventure of the investigation their own consciousness.

Plus, while Anthroposophy is not for everyone, this business of helping people find a way to the New Thinking may be a real need in order to halt materialism from going to far.

Were Jeff to write his book, a perhaps too daunting task for him in his own stage of development (he’s not my age, and this suggests his soul/spirit matrix is not yet ripe enough), the whole world might benefit, and it might even help the development of Anthroposophy as it continues to seek incarnation during the 21st Century.   Instead Jeff just appears for a bit, throws a rotten tomato at me, and goes back to whatever he does with the rest  of his life.

There are also some additional tricky aspects to the situation.  Jeff and I seem to agree (from different perspectives) that where people are is where they are supposed to be.  But for Jeff to go down that road, he has to spend some effort (apparently, since he never shows such “cards” here), paying attention to what modern scientists, philosophers, religious people, and even politicians are talking about, because the whole world is in “conversation”, and each of us is invited to play a role there as well.  The arguments about the brain and the mind are going to influence all kinds of ways in which the future unfolds.  People, who can help that argument be more “sane”, are needed, and Jeff just might be one, given his avocation as a decent philosopher, coupled with his work as a therapist.

Jeff, at least here, appears to believe he can stand on the sidelines of theses conversations, throw his rotten tomatoes at whomever he likes (pointing out their filters, which he does not confess to possessing), and that satisfies whatever obligations, duties, moral intuitions or whatever, by which he is a member of the human race.  He does hint of other activities, but does not share.  We are left then with how he “behaves” here, and that I find less than desirable. 

Enough said on that subject ... 

Oh, and by the way.  Put down your Steiner books and read mine for a while.  That’s if you’re still into reading.  Not good to have just one kind of spiritual food in your diet. I’m quite skilled at what I cook up, and I’ve had a lot of help from various Beings (Jeff doesn’t seem to notice Them - another mystery) that have an interest in the work of Real Anthroposophy.  Don’t want to read, ... I made some videos:

Each of these Facebook groups has a future.  What will it be?  I won’t be here, ... I’ve given what I can and need to conserve forces and focus them in other venues.  I just urge folks to get it that a “scientific” attitude is helpful, and as my eldest recently said on one of these groups, making Steiner into a demi-god is not very useful.  One of the main reasons I am leaving is the endless messages that begin with quoting something from Steiner.  Another is the people who have no faith, and actually believe the world is organized in a such a way that the Stage Setting is going down in flames and we are all going to die.  Well, guess what, we are all going to die anyway, so maybe just maybe (at least from an “anthroposophical” truth point of view), too much beam in your own eye about the world and the rich and the rest, needs to change.

Me I’m just seriously tired of reading that shit over and over again, in places where people at least have the possibility of being a lot wiser.

Me, I’ve been losing track of what Day of the Week it is.  A Day is just a Day.  Linda is more bound to the days of the week, than I am.  I need to keep track of dates, because of doctor appointments, but they can be any Day of any Week.   She has church and stuff, ... I’m always in church.

Makes a difference whether its light out or not.  More hungry in the morning, less at night.  Most of my best writing is between 4 a.m. and 7 a.m., if we go by the clock on the DVR.  Hear the muse, need to pee or drink some water, get up and write.  No muse, back to bed waiting on the dream-sendings.  Take naps, later.  Linda likes the News.  I’d rather watch the squirrels play in the trees or the birds feeding on the deck.  Or read a good book.

Snow keeps getting deeper.  We’ve another storm coming - looks to snow for three or four Days straight.   Lots of Crazy out there in the wilder more crowded places.  People have all kinds of hungers ... hardly ever satisfied.  I used to want really badly to be “right” all the time.  No so much anymore.  Leave the Big Picture to Them ... They are way better at it than I am.  “Good night and good luck”:

P.S.  Want to know what the biggest paradox of all is?  We are never ready for whatever comes, and we were born ready for it all.