Anarchy, Social Chaos, and
Revolutionary Transformation,
within and about the Anthroposophical
Society
All of humanity presently seeks to
navigate social-seas of great turbulence. One need
only read the News with a clear mind's-eye in order to see
this. There are a million Arks trying to
ride out this modern social-Flood. One such
potential Ark is the Anthroposophical Society. A
main feature of these Arks is their need to be living -
that is to be organically flexible. If they are
rigid with tradition, the savage nature of these seas will
reduce them to kindling, and nothing of the original
social-form will survive. We are also well
past the time when there can be Noahs - leaders dominating
the whole.
In other circumstances, ... I wrote that following the
First Great War many deep thinkers in America became
stand-up comics and cartoonists. This was due
primarily to the fact that for a pragmatic people, which
Americans are, when the world just gets more and more
crazy, there isn’t a lot that one can do to cure these
culture-wide forms on insanity. At the same time,
humor was both a means to point out the insanity (gross
irrationality everywhere), and to some extent diffuse its
effects. If we can learn to laugh at our situation,
and particularly at ourselves, a kind of soul balance can
be obtained. See note (1) for a few
details. The point here is to not take this essay
too seriously. An excess of gravitas is one
sign of the presence of the ahrimanic.
clearly archetypal anthroposophists ... do you notice
yourself here?
*
* *
What is the Anthroposophical
Society? From one point of view, it is a social
form engaged in Adult Education - adults gather together to
study Spiritual Science and many other related
subjects. How is adult education different from the
education of the young, such as is done in Waldorf Schools?
First of all, the soul is mostly formed in an adult.
Life choices have been made, karma is active, and a world
view is in place. With the children most all of that
is open. With adults it can seem much like a closed
system. At the same time, for a variety of
reasons, the adult is now aware of how much the world of
their experience is seemingly out of sorts. That pain
of life is where this otherwise closed system is open - an
open wound some might say. People naturally want
explanations and possible solutions for the suffering and
pain they see everywhere, and experience themselves.
oops!
From science fiction writer Frank Herbert's novel
Dune:
"When religion and politics travel in the same
cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their
way. Their movement becomes headlong - faster and
faster and faster.
They put aside all thought of obstacles and
forget that a precipice does not show itself to the man in
a blind rush until its too late."
It used to be that certain personal
problems were taken up by therapists of one kind or another,
but with the New Age, other modes of facing and encountering
change became more acceptable. So people get life
coaches, or learn yoga or meditation. They worry about
their health, and if they have children they worry about the
children’s education. A small few of these already
encounter such as Waldorf or Biodynamic Farming and
Gardening. Often when that happens, they then run into
Rudolf Steiner in one way or another.
Underneath everything is the paradigm of Natural Science -
with its Big Bang origin of the Universe in physics, or its
Theory of Evolution in biology. As Owen Barfield
points out, many of the individual words and common phrases
in our languages have embedded in their meanings these
ideas. Barfield’s works, in fact, ought to be the
study-group material of any collection of folks who set out
to consciously develop an adult education school.
Again and again his works find their Way through the
mine-field of modern languages and their built in
assumptions.
Barfield is one of the Platonists that participated in our
work during the 20th Century. I recommend: Speakers’
Meaning; History, Guilt, and Habit;
as well as Worlds Apart.
Barfield/Platonist
Walt Kelly's
Pogo
Steiner/Aristotelian
In effect two myths confront each other
when an effort is made to ride the modern seas of change, if
we seek to foster in the A. Society, a less
Steiner-oriented, more consciously Platonist, school for
adult education. One myth is the assumptions and
dogmas of Natural Science, and the other myth is our ideas
about Rudolf Steiner and the significance and meaning of
Anthroposophy. The social heart of a truly modern
school needs to be a circle of discussions in which both
myths become confessed, made conscious and explored.
Both myths easily fit into what Steiner wrote at the end of
the original preface for his book: The Philosophy of
Spiritual Activity: “One must be able to
confront an idea and experience it, otherwise one will
fall into is bondage."
If we sleep as to the conceptual/idea content of our own
minds, we will be the prisoners of these myths, whether we
are an anthroposophist, or a secular humanist, or somehow:
both.
Now the creation of this viable enterprise (a modern adult
school - Ark) requires some foundational work. Mostly
for Branch and Study Group members this means taking up the
study of the works of the Platonists. Having acquired
the language vocabulary of Steiner’s Spiritual Science
(which is not Anthroposophy by the way, see the next several
paragraphs), the Aristotelian tendencies in the
Anthroposophical Society are just now ripe enough to best be
able to meet the Platonists, and take in their
inspiration. We are a very fertile ground awaiting new
seeds. Note please that Emerson asserted that the only
purpose of books is inspiration, and if they take us into
their orbit (such that we abandon our own thinking) these
books fail us. This tragedy, sadly, is basically an
undercurrent condition of the mostly Aristotelian
Society. Whether we call it Steinerism, or
Steiner-said, it is the same. We made a myth of the
“great initiate”, who could do no wrong, and many of us have
believed in everything he taught, without any critical
limits or considerations. On these rigid traditions,
the potential Ark of the Society will founder in the coming
seas of change.
An important distinction to appreciate is that Anthroposophy
and Spiritual Science are not the same. That the use
of the term “anthroposophy”, frequently among members and
friends of the Society, conflates the two is evidence of our
sloppy and unscientific thinking. In fact, if one
applies critical thinking to the discourse in the Society,
this is seen as evidence of being somehow not loving
enough. The critical thinking is never argued with,
but the personality (such as myself) is dismissed because we
seem to say unkind things. That Steiner did this as
well (say seemingly unkind things about the members and
friends) is forgotten. I just follow where he went
here (2).
I came to this conclusion on my own, but then subsequently
found that Owen Barfield (see his Romanticism Comes
of Age) agreed with me all the way back in 1933
in a lecture given in Dornach. Basically Anthroposophy
is the method or how we
do something, while Spiritual Science is the content
or what we acquire.
Notice these terms: method/how/do and
content/what/acquire. The former is more active, and
the latter more passive. They remain, however, in
close proximity, being two sides of one coin.
One big clue here is this frequently used
phrase of Steiner’s: anthroposophical spiritual science.
If these two were actually an identity, that phrase would be
the logical equivalent of saying or writing: grape flavored
grape flavor, which is clearly nonsense. Anthroposophy
then is exactly what Steiner said it was in the first
sentence of the First Leading Thought: Anthroposophy
is a path of cognition from the Spiritual in the human
being to the Spiritual in the universe.
Daffy Duck trying to explain to Marvin the Martian what
the word "Anthroposophy" means.
The initial problem came with the
translation of the German word: erkennen, by many
translators, to be read as: knowledge, when
the better sense, in terms of Steiner’s epistemological
writings (GA-2; GA-3; and, GA-4), is as cognition
or perceiving. For English
speakers the idea of knowledge more easily means the “what”,
or a passively received content, than does the word
cognition, which is a “how” and more active. This
confusion is actually the ongoing working of the Ahrimanic
Deception, or the Enchantment, via the intellect-aspect of
the human mind. An awake cognitive activity, which
elsewhere I name: the Rising of the Sun in the Mind,
is how the Platonists in the Society (and elsewhere) have
found their Way to the moral aesthetic of the Idea,
while the Aristotelians has been drawn into a (hopefully)
temporary prison of the abstract intellect (Steinerism or
Steiner-said).
Again, the counter to this, for the mostly Aristotelian
thinkers among the members and friends, is to concentrate on
the reading of the works of Platonists. This
intermixing, of the Aristotelian or abstract nature of
Steiner-thought, with the pictorial and concrete nature of
Platonist works, can only be done by individuals. This
then prepares people to serve in the coming emergence of a
free school of adult education, that wants/needs to replace
the rigid traditions of the A. Society at the Dawn of the
Third Millennium.
As individuals do this reading, and discuss it with each
other, then the vocabulary bequeathed to us by Rudolf
Steiner is enriched, and now we will be able to meet the
“other”, or the thou, whose hunger for the true and the good
has brought them into our newly evolving circles of mutual
inquiry. A school of true adult education is not a
situation where we pour into empty souls something we
perceive they are missing, but rather a place where people
on the same journey can aid each other in the development of
the self-educated adult individual.
Someone reading both Steiner and the Platonists will have
then a worthwhile experience that can be shared. But
it is not the texts themselves (Steiner or otherwise) that
is crucial, but the life changes each individual has learned
and can now convey.
Recall now the point above about the collision of the
two myths: The near-religious belief in the
accuracy of Natural Science (something still very young) and
a similar near-religious belief in the certainty of anything
Steiner-said or wrote.
religion vs. science / Steiner and science / Platonists
vs. Aristotelians
which is which? who is what?
does anyone really care?
One viable social model for this
encounter is the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous.
Everyone there is equally a true believer in their
individual denial system, and all must confess their
addiction-bondage (3). Whether it is natural science,
or spiritual science, any absolute belief in those ideas is
a prison for the human being seeking to learn how to be a
true and free thinker.
With this background, let us now look at this embryonic
school from a different direction, so as to enrich the Idea
(complex of concepts) we are experiencing here.
Now a school can be conceived of as a physical building,
organized architecturally into classrooms, a gym, a
playground, administrative offices and so forth. If we
follow the Waldorf model we add gardens, and wood-shops,
maybe even some chickens and goats. The reality is
that each type of room or structure involves a
function. The classical idea in biology is that: form
follows function. So what are the needed
functions of an adult self-educational school?
What is the function, or need? Places for human beings to
meet. That’s it. Nothing else is required.
Did Christ and the disciples wait to build a church first,
before meeting? Of course not.
Another fact worth noticing is that people have different
interests, so that this school would actually be
self-organizing (something that happens all the time in this
age of social media - witness what happened when Occupy Wall
Street took over Zuccotti Park in New York City, or the
recent Arab Spring revolutions). People took up
different spaces for their particular needs, and then on
occasion, as an added function/need, representatives meet
collectively when necessary. One important point here
is that these were organized from the bottom up, not from
the top down.
Already the A. Society is organized into Branches and Study
Groups, seemingly overseen by a no longer
vital hierarchical organization. What does that
hierarchical organization actually contribute, other than a
kind of spiritual/intellectual dominance (such as: themes
of the year or the meaning and purposes
of conferences)? Who makes more money,
from the Society? Who has more privileges?
Whose ideas seem to have to descend from above toward those
of us at the bottom?
If we study a lot of modern social
forms, especially business forms, we will find that they
tend to grow in such a way that still remains pyramidal in
nature, with a top where the so-called directing power lies,
and the bottom where the worker-bees provide the cheap
labor. Sometimes the middle-management sector often
expands, because of a law observed there, called the Peter
Principle: “... people will tend to be promoted until
they reach their “position of incompetence”.
In my last missive, I wrote that in our anthroposophical
pyramid, the top was occupied by the ghost of
Rudolf Steiner, or in our present language usage: the
myth. At the bottom, dues are collected,
as well as a great deal of gift money, and this all filters
upwards to support the imaginary needs of the folks in the
Centers: the Executive in Dornach, the Section leaders of
the School, and the Councils in America. Money gets
spent so that these folks can meet with each other, and so
that there is some bit of organizational business-like
activity taking care of dues collections, meeting
organization, and other assumed necessary activities like
publications and so forth. There are no doubt lots of
travel expenses, and I would be very surprised to discover
that our “leaders” pay out of their own pockets, for
anything (fees, food, housing and so forth), when they go to
our conferences, which they organize and intellectually
dominate. Are we really being served in this Way?
Not only does being at the top (having reached their
position of incompetence?) mean no costs and in some case no
doubt an income as well, but they automatically get to be
the leading speakers to which we must all endlessly
listen. At one time I ran into the idea that the
School was intended by Steiner to produce people capable of
doing original spiritual research. Is there any
evidence this is true today in practice? Prokofieff
(4) fights with von Halle (5). Ben-Aharon takes his
own path outside the Society (6). And the Platonists,
who are perhaps former members of the School of Chartres, -
none of them are certainly working and sharing their
research with us from the "top". They are all in the
Periphery or what otherwise could be called the bottom or
the social commons.
How does this come about? Mainly because
psychologically we are predisposed (by our own rigid and
unconscious traditions) to grant these so-called leaders
portions of the myth of Rudolf Steiner. This myth then
includes the additional concept/tradition that these folks
get to pick those who replace them on the basis that by
already occupying that position, they are able to know who
best should succeed them. They all say very nice
things about each other, don’t they? A kind of mutual
admiration society of people whose main skill seems mostly
social-political, and the capacity to appear to be able to
quote Steiner to excellent effect. This seems to me to
be more like a department in a University, with all its
struggles and competitions, than a truly esoteric/spiritual
organism. Recall the quote from Frank Herbert above,
about religion and politics being in the same cart, and not
seeing the coming precipice. Did our leaders perceive
the recent world-wide financial debacle? No, and all
our institutions dove off that cliff.
Now I am not going to name names, but some of these folks
get idolized, while others stay around for decades.
Neither being idolized and adored, or having the ability
occupy office for long period, and not be replaced, is a
sign of competence at ... at what? Factually nothing
new in terms of spiritual research is being, or has been,
added since Rudolf Steiner died (except for the presently
excluded Platonists), and we need to not forget that
the whole group in Dornach, at that time just following
Steiner's passing, fell into a cat-fight over who was to be
adorned with his mantle of myths (see again, note 2).
Just think about the Sections of the School of Spiritual
Science. They ended up being run by the same
personalities as they were when Steiner died. They
were not supposed to be, by the way. Nobody pays much
attention to the actual history of the Society after Steiner
left it, because - drum roll - one of his last acts was to
completely change who was to be “in charge”. Then he
died, and those changes were not implemented (see again,
note 2).
poets and cartoonists - often wise
So, where are we now?
We need a function where people gather together to add, to
the works of Steiner already being studied, the works of the
Platonists. What, you say ... we already have
that? Yes, we call them Study Groups. The Study
Groups already self-organize themselves on the basis of
shared interests. As the Platonist influence is
digested, these interests will change, because the member
and friends themselves will change.
Now each local area also has a Branch. This particular
kind of social form is much like the type of plant organism
that does not need the tree or bush or flower anymore ... it
can root itself. All the life forces it needs are
already there. The Branch and Study Groups don’t
actually need anything above (or beneath) them at all.
“What?” you say. What about conferences and
meetings? Well that’s fine if you still want to go
someplace and pay out of your own pocket to hear a small
group of self-selected people speak. People whose main
skill it that they most likely don’t know very much, but how
to quote Steiner and remain a power in the institutions
which themselves no longer serve a purpose. That's
right, what is the purpose of our social stuctures?
What is there that meaning for the future of Anthroposophy,
because these people themselves don’t even know how to teach
the how of the Rising of the Sun in the Mind.
All they got is the content, - the method Steiner taught in
his epistemological works has escaped their notice.
That’s a mouthful ... read it again, slowly.
Follow the yellow brick road to Dornach in the sky, where
the wizard behind the curtain is a dead man,
or stop off at your local Branch and see who and what is
really living in that place.
The Study Groups are the fruit growing
on the limb of the Branch. The school for adult
self-education is already there. The books of the
Platonists are the bees going from flower to flower as the
Branches experience their Spring, a justly earned blessing
just in time for the start of the Third Millennium.
Imbibe the genius of spirit of Owen Barfield, and discover
the myths and taboos of Natural Science. Throw off the
myths of Rudolf Steiner and of the fantasy of pre-eminence
among the so-called leadership. Take in the living
nutrients and vitamins of the Platonists. Learn to
think for yourself, without any need to quote anyone else
ever again, unless it is to notice how what your own
thinking has perceived was also thought by another.
And yes, pay dues, and provide gift money, but keep it where
it belongs - only in the local community. The top of
the needing to die hierarchical pyramid did just what the
financial institutions did when times got tough - they fired
other people and keep their own jobs, while still failing to
actually accomplish anything for anyone else but
themselves. Recall the little boy about the King who
isn't wearing any clothes.
Throw open your doors to other seekers, and share what you
have yourself experienced. But please, please, please,
don’t try to make any more baby-Steiners. The world
doesn’t need that. The world needs you, and you, and
you. That's it.
All that said, what just happened? We had a spiritual
revolution right on these pages, because we challenged the
fundamental operational myths of the A. Society. We
turned the traditional structure upside down and inside
out. Obviously, unfortunately, these kinds
of changes are not easily accomplished, and in few
cases may not be wise. The point was to establish that
our Idea of the existing relationships within
the Society is itself a kind of fiction, based upon
tradition. We keep to them because we have kept to
them. For the A. Society to evolve, it must cut itself
free of its past. Ahriman, in fact, likes us to live
in the past, but it is a cold comfort, lacking as it does
the passion of engagement with the present that Steiner
called: enthusiasm.
Doing things because we did them before is never sufficient
reason for continuing to do them. We need a now
reason to justify maintaining a special group of people in
preeminent positions of mythical authority. And, we
need it from them. The executive, the leaders of the
sections, the members of the councils in America, ... all
must explain, with social-scientific accuracy, just why a
third-epoch hierarchical social form is justified in the
fifth cultural epoch.
Is it that simple? Can't be? Social Reality has
inertia and momentum - things change but somehow remain the
same. How to proceed in practice is a good question.
Is the language we use in the Society too full of
specialized terminology, so as to be essentially obscure?
We believe we understand it, but need to recognize that
most non-anthroposophists cannot.
It is a given that holders of power and
trust seldom give that away, even though it might be wise to
resign, while helping create something new and less
traditional. Perhaps we should take another look at
these matters, again seeking for something of a spiritual
nature that is both radical and revolutionary, and as well
able to provide additional income. This revolution
will proceed from the Study Groups, and then the
Branches. The last people to get it will be the
Executive, the Section Leaders and the Councils in America.
As noted recently, all the world’s peoples navigate perilous
social/historical seas, and troubles so dynamic as to
suggest that we are in the middle of nothing less than the
end/metamorphosis of Western Civilization. Yet, we
would also be correct in noticing that Rudolf Steiner
existed and did what he did, although it might help to carve
away the excesses of myth. What did he actually do,
and what is the relationship of that to our turbulent times?
He stood in the midst of the triumph of scientific
materialism, on the cusp of the 19th and 20th Centuries, and
discovered, and then revealed to the world, how to be
scientific and empirical about the nature of the human
mind/spirit. He then proceeded to take that personally
developed art of the new mysteries of thinking, and turn
himself into a source of new spiritual revelation, which he
called Spiritual Science. But the key in that lock was
the development of the mind mapped out in the book The
Philosophy of Freedom: subtitled: some
results of introspection following the methods of natural
science. It was the science impulse that he used
to foster new spiritual revelation.
The revelation - Spiritual Science, however, has been turned
into a religion of Steinerism and Steiner-said. As
Steiner predicted, the Cosmic Michaelic Intelligence (out of
which he spoke) was materialized (made too fallen, rigid,
and earthly).
Of all the millions and billions in the world, only a small
few noticed. All the same, one matter that Steiner
revealed was that on the cusp of the 20th to the 21st
Century something else would happen, which he called The
Culmination of the Anthroposophical Movement. Many of
the Platonists would incarnate at the same time as the
returning Aristotelians, and these would have karma to work
out in relationship to the Anthroposophical Society.
In between these two cusps were a couple of other
events. The first, beginning around 1933, was when
people would become able to perceive the Cosmic Christ in
the form of an angel in the Ethereal Realm, the realm where
true thinking takes place. The other concerned the
Bodhisattva incarnations of the Future Maitreya
Buddha. In addition, this writer has pointed out the
incarnation of Ahriman, which took place in 1950, at the
mid-point between these two cusps.
So we have then Steiner’s redemption of thinking at the end
of the 19th Century, the return of Christ in the Ethereal on
the cusp of first third of 20th Century, one or more
Bodhisattva incarnations of the future Buddha, the
incarnation of the Ahriman, all in preparation for the
Culmination at the cusp of the 20th and 21st Centuries,
which was to include the return of several of the
Platontists, that were apparently leaders of the School of
Chartres from the 10th and 11th Centuries, which itself took
place at the beginning of the Second Millennium. All
these spiritually gifted individuals would be taking their
places for the drama leading to the Dawn of the Third
Millennium, and even Rudolf Steiner would return with
several of those who had incarnated with him 100 years
before.
And here we (humanity) are as well, at the time when the
main scientific question/assertion/assumption is that the
brain and the mind are the same, and that the human being is
merely an organic artifact of an vast uncaring cosmos,
developed by random and chance processes, with no spiritual
meaning at all.
Anyone want to assert that what we in the Society do, at
this point in time, is of little consequence, given that we
are the only ones who seem to know all this stuff is going
on? And, I might add, what does it mean that the
leaders in the Executive, and the School and the Councils in
America hardly talk about any of this?
if you already believe you are enlightened with all the
answers,
because you are well read in Steiner, you might not
be as wise as you think,
for the thoughts you include can in fact exclude others
Now me, I’m looking for a job, which is
to teach this stuff to a wider audience, and in that way
earn money for the Society while doing it. That’s my
talent. That’s what my life trained me
for. Plus I don’t need to be paid for it,
and given the various electronic means available, I don’t
need (like our “leaders”) to be transported anywhere and get
to give speeches to large groups at conferences. But I
can’t do that job on my own. I need your help.
In this way, we recognize that while the Society needs to
become more like a school for adult self-education, it has
some baggage (traditions) it needs to shed on the way to
becoming that.
So, what next? But first a
word from our sponsors, as to the question of Why
Bother?
There are several reasons: A primary one is that I
have been the beneficiary of the written works of many
others. They bothered, and I benefited. Seems to
be a good thing to do to pass that on. There also
seems to be something at risk, which in my view is the
Anthroposophical Society itself. What happens to the
Society if it does not connect to the Platonists? My
initial approach above was that there could be a failure in
the Centers, such as the Executive, the Section Leaders, and
the Councils in America, and this would be okay if the Study
Groups and the Branches took up the needed labors on their
own. In my article on the Culmination I wrote of it as
something that required participation. We cannot be
passive, but must be active participants in the Culmination
on some level. To essentially conclude, as Stephen
Usher did in his article, that the Culmination is or has
happened, and then perhaps relax and leave things to take
whatever course they seem to want to take, is to my thinking
to abrogate our responsibility. If the members and
friends and the leadership do not participate, something
that belongs to the heart of the work will not arise, and
the Society itself will founder on the coming seas of great
changes.
To know that there are matters we can do, we only need read
Steiner's
Awakening to Community. Its
basically all there, in one form or another. In there
is my last reason, which begins to be understood with this
quotation: (lecture three), on the consequences of failing
(which has happened) to 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!"
We seem to be, within the Society itself, swimming in seas
of conflict (Prokofieff vs. von Halle; law suits over the
Constitutional Question; even this paper is an elaborate
disagreement). All this related to not collectively
appreciating the importance of his book:
The
Philosophy of Spiritual Activity. All
kinds of people have read it, and many treat it the same way
most Christians treat the Sermon on the Mount, as something
essentially inspirational. It is not. It is a
map to the mind - a very good map. Like the Sermon on
the Mount, however, it needs to be practiced - the mere
reading of it doesn't work. Recall, if you will, that
last verses of the Sermon: "
Therefore whoever hears
these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to
a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain
descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on
that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the
rock. "But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and
does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his
house on the sand: and the rain descended, the floods
came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it
fell. And great was its fall."
Ultimately all any of us have to give is ourselves.
There are sports cliche's to cover this. From poker:
"All in." Or, "leave it all on the field." Some
of those strategies and tactics are what is
next.
Even though it sometimes appears
that the other guy as all the chips
Things I can do to keep busy while I grow more and
more ancient,
and for which I must confess I need help
Outrageous Logical Speaking
If possible, those American anthroposophists, with some
influence in the academic world, might want to see if they
can create opportunities for me to be on a stage with the
likes of such as Sam Harris or Richard Dawkins, leaders of
the new atheist movement. These would not be debates
but conversations, where a Platonist (me) trained by studies
of Barfield, Steiner, Kuhlewind, Adams, Lehrs, Talbott,
Holdrege, Brady, Clarke, Klocek, MacCoun, Tomberg, Cowen,
Schmidt, Hauschka, Schad, Schwenk, Kuhn, Shaing, - its a
really long list from 40 plus years of preparation, sits
down with such folks and asks them questions, just like
Socrates. For a further example of my preparations,
who among the so-called leading personalities can say they
read Steiner’s lectures on Spiritual Science and
Medicine - twice, as well as Victor Bott’s Anthroposophical
Medicine. Or George Adams’: Universal
Forces in Mechanics; Space and Light of
Creation; and, Physical and Ethereal
Spaces; as well as read and studied Whicher’s Projective
Geometry. None of these studies, by the
way, are about the content per se. Rather it is about
developing the mind in such a way that it frees itself from
the limitations of our ordinary education and language.
my office desk where I type these #@$^&!% weird
essays
We make sure these conversations with leaders of the new
atheists are digitally recorded and uploaded to the
Internet. Why the new atheists? Because the
discussion concerning the relationship between science and
religion in modern times is a crucial public discussion; and,
because Harris, for example, is a student of consciousness and
a believer in the concept that the brain is the seat of
everything - all is matter there is no spirit.
Anthroposophy, or the Rising of the Sun in the Mind,
needs to participate in these dialogues.
Platonist Think Tank (what
will he think of next?)
Another kind of help would be to aid me
in forming a kind of actual spiritual think-tank. As a
place marker, lacking the dialogue to make a group
selection, lets temporarily call this:
The
Pharaoh Foundation. Again using
mostly electronic means I would be supported in connecting
with leaders in any field which has some interest in the
future. Not the future as it should be (not an
ideology, such as social threefolding), but the future as it
is actually becoming. They pay a fee for services to
the think-tank, which is owned by perhaps something like the
Rudolf Steiner Foundation, an already existing structure for
funneling capital to the daughter movements and so
forth. Again, this is a situation where the process is
Socratic. I don’t tell those who attend these
seminars, what to think, but by asking questions they don’t
yet know can be asked, I lead them to perceiving the true
future out of their own activity of thinking.
Call On Your Mother! (visits
to elders?)
This last can appear to be a bit rough,
but is something that is needed in order to get the most
traction in the A. Society itself. The leadership
should be encouraged to call on me, where I live, when
the opportunities arise and they are in the neighborhood
(anywhere in New England). Now this isn’t about
“kissing my ring” or setting people up to bow to some kind
of power. It is about courtesy due an elder, and about
them having to go through the process of considering,
through deeds, that they don’t know everything, and that the
Platonist impulse is important enough to go out of ones way
in order to engage it. Again, I’m not going to tell
them anything. They just need to dare to meet someone
who is going to ask them very interesting questions they
need to be able to answer.
Just keep in mind that I am 73, and not necessarily going to
be alive next week. Any Aristotelian, that wants to
seriously consider the Platonist impulse, ought not to just
read their books, but should go out of their way to meet one
or two. It doesn’t have to be me, for example.
There are two other Americans mentioned in my article in the
Culmination, and two Europeans. The Executive doesn’t
have to go to America, as Scotland (Elizabeth) and Italy
(Bruno) are far closer. That’s five possible former
members of the School of Chartres, if you are into that
aspect of things (I don’t recommend it by the way, because
none of us in this life are who we were in any other.)
Plus, everyone from the original Ark is pretty down to
earth, and maybe a bit spicy too.
The Executive, and the Section Leaders, and the Council
members in America, just have to be encouraged to show, by
example, that the Platonist works are worthy of reading, and
the personalities are worthy of meeting. After all,
they get paid to go all over the world to be the center of
attention, and give lectures to the rest of us all the
time. Maybe the spiritual community, that is the true
Anthroposophical Movement, needs to see them trying a little
harder, and demonstrating that they are willing to learn
more than just Steiner, and that from the living.
Of course, for us regular folks, going to pay an honoring
visit is not so dangerous to the ego, so if you are in
America, Stephen hangs out in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and
Catherine hangs out in around Chicago, I believe. Yes,
I’m not handing out addresses and phone numbers, but in the
Culmination article (7) there is a trail that any
detective-minded individual can follow to find any of us.
A Living Global Library, meant to
survive the end of Western Civilization
(just go to the link, please:
The
Global Mind)
And finally, from the dessert tray:
Cosmic Politics
This would be a made at my home (with
some good tech equipment etc.): A ready for Internet or
Cable, round table TV discussion with me and several
ordinary people. Same methods: Socratic. What
is missing from the political conversation is regular
folks, getting asked sane questions, by someone who knows
how to do that without looking for an agenda or a
sensational story. Again, I need help to bring this
off ... some money for tech stuff (we can use the dinning
room in our home); a tech person to help us set this
equipment up initially, and be able to trouble shoot when
necessary; a producer to round up folks who want to
be interviewed (and who can mostly manage not to throw
things at each other); and someone who knows about the
Internet programing scene to guide us into how to do
that. We don't necessarily want a continuing cast of
"characters", but some folks should get to be on more that
once, as they will get better and more relaxed over
time. I can guarantee it will find an audience,
because lots of normal people would like hearing folks
similar to them say something sane. We include a
feed back system and maybe also read e-mails aloud that
get sent in. Except for the tech folks and the
producer, nobody else gets paid and the whole thing runs
on gift money, which may only be needed in the start up
phase.
Notes:
(1) Cartoonists: Warner Brothers Bugs Bunny’s “What’s up Doc?”
(he’s the archetypal anarchist); Mad Magazine’s Alfred E.
Neuman: “What? Me worry?”; Walt Kelly’s Pogo, who says
in 1970: “We have met the enemy and he is us.” and then
Bill Griffith’s Zippy the Pinhead: “Are we having fun yet?”
(the Zeitgeist in one sentence). The deepest was Bill
Watterson’s Calvin and Hobbes, impossible to describe, yet
full of amazing social observations.
Stand-up Comics (beginning with Will Rogers) have to include George
Carlin and Robin Williams, as well as Williams’ mentor
Jonathan Winters. Right now in America the most potent
news analysis is on cable’s The Daily Show, and the Colbert
Report. Philosophy has always been about clear and
precise thinking, which ought to include a sense of
humor. The question then remains: Are we having fun yet?
(2) General Renewal – or Illusion – of the
Anthroposophical Society, by Harald Giersch http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/Giersch.html
(3) The Spiritual Scientific Import of the Twelve Steps of
Alcoholics Anonymous: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/TwelveSteps.html
(4) http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/Prokofieffbookreview.html
(5) http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/vonHalle.html
(6) http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/benaharon.html
(7) http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/Culmination.html