-

-

-

-

-

TEST CASE:

WALDORF CHEMISTRY

[Association of Waldorf Schools of North America, 2004.]

Poking around in Anthroposophical publications can be rewarding. Here is a Waldorf teacher stating, more or less openly, that Waldorf schools train students in forms of thought that lure them to Anthroposophy:

"When a foundation of observation and disciplined thinking is established, the high school science teacher now introduces a new type of thinking ... [T]his 'new' thinking is called phenomenological thinking ... [F]irst a phenomenon is carefully observed; second, the rigors and laws of thinking and science are applied ... third, everything up to now is laid to rest, the mind is cleared, and the phenomenon itself is allowed to speak. The student observes what comes forward while keeping the mind from straying ... This activity opens on up to new possibilities ... This type of thinking is freed from the senses and allows the universe to speak through the individual. It is a type of thinking which is truly moral and can be the fertile ground for the 'new' science of the twenty-first century." — David S. Mitchell, THE WONDERS OF WALDORF CHEMISTRY (Association of Waldorf Schools of North America, 2004), pp. 12-13.

The "new" thinking is a form of meditation ("the mind is cleared...keeping the mind from straying"). [1] It is the sort of thinking Steiner advocated for producing clairvoyant powers. 

◊ "Whoever wants to acquire imaginative clairvoyance develops this force through meditation and gradually attains it." — Rudolf Steiner, SLEEP AND DREAMS (SteinerBooks, 2003), p. 124. 

◊ "This kind of meditation may reach any of a number of stages, from the smallest gain in moral strength to the highest attainments of clairvoyance. " — Rudolf Steiner, THE CHRISTIAN MYSTERY (SteinerBooks, 1998), p. p. 222. 

◊ "Many people object they have tried to meditate in all kinds of ways but are still not becoming clairvoyant. This lack of clairvoyance simply shows they do not want the strength and activity I have just described." — Rudolf Steiner, THE PRESENCE OF THE DEAD ON THE SPIRITUAL PATH (SteinerBooks, 1990), p. 6.

The "new" thinking described by Mitchell is "freed from the senses" because, according to Rudolf Steiner, clairvoyance is seated not in the physical brain but in nonphysical organs of clairvoyance. 

◊ "And just as natural forces evolve the physical eyes and ears of the physical body, out of living matter, so will the organs of clairvoyance evolve themselves from the spiritual feelings which are thus evoked." — Rudolf Steiner, THE WAY OF INITIATION (Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co., 1910), p. 83. 

◊ "Out of these feelings and the thoughts that are bound up with them, the organs of clairvoyance are formed." — Rudolf Steiner, HOW TO KNOW HIGHER WORLDS (Wilder Publications, 2008), p. 26.

Waldorf students who attempt the "new" kind of thinking may not leap straight to clairvoyance (in reality, they cannot, since clairvoyance is a fantasy). But by using "phenomenological thinking" as described by Mitchell, they will be on their way (or so true-believers on Waldorf faculties hope). [2] Phenomena and/or the universe itself will "speak through the individual" as through a clairvoyant or seer.

The thinking Mitchell refers to is hardly new. It is an approach advocated by the German author Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and embraced by Steiner. [See "Goethe".] So-called "Goethean science" is meant to be an alternative and corrective to conventional science. And as Steiner arranged matters, Goethean science leads to "spiritual science," i.e. Steiner's own doctrines, i.e. Anthroposophy. 

"[T]he science [Steiner] spoke of was not conventional science of the abstract mechanical-materialist type. Modern science in this sense was, in fact, a deviation ... The corrective was to create an alternative science based on different assumptions." — Anthroposophist Christopher Bamford, introducing Steiner's WHAT IS ANTHROPOSOPHY? (Anthroposophic Press, 2002), p. 19.

But Goethean science is not real science at all; it is a misconstruction of scientific procedures and values. In this sense (pace  Bamford), the form of "science" found in Waldorf schools is a deviation from truth and from the search for truth. Yet Goethean science is close to the heart of the Waldorf enterprise. Waldorf schools try to inculcate a meditative form of thought that leads students toward accepting Anthroposophy. Students taking a class that may seem to be centered on conventional science (e.g., chemistry) wind up being introduced to a form of thinking that leads them into Goethean science ("Waldorf chemistry") and, by indirection, it leads on to "spiritual science" (Anthroposophy). Waldorf schools exist to promote Anthroposophy. This is what Mitchell and Bamford and Steiner have told us, without meaning to be quite so direct about it. (Although sometimes they have come close.

"Anthroposophy will be in the school when it is objectively justified, that is, when it is called for by the material itself.” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 495. 

And when will the material — seen through the "new" way of thinking — call for it? Just about always.)

 ◊

R.R.'s Footnotes for this Section

[1] The essence of meditation is emptying the mind, attaining openness and peace. Each time this cleared consciousness is violated — that is, each time the mind strays — the meditator puts the intruding thought aside and returns to meditative stillness. Peaceful, clear, open/empty-mindedness is the desired state. [See, e.g., AN INTRODUCTION TO ZEN BUDDHISM, by D. T. Suzuki and Carl Jung, SPIRITUAL DIRECTION AND MEDITATION, by Thomas Merton, and (at the pop level) 8 MINUTE MEDITATION: Quiet Your Mind, Change Your Life, by Victor N. Davich.]

“It is usually better to remain quiet, to be still ... The most important thing is to seek silence, tranquility, recollection and peace.” — Thomas Merton.

I have nothing to say against meditation. I meditate daily. It is a good way to become centered. But the Waldorf approach — believing that meditation can lead to clairvoyance — is deeply flawed. Clairvoyance is a delusion, and most of Steiner's occult teachings are wholly unsupported by any form of real evidence. People should be clearly informed that Waldorf schools aim to lead students toward the forms of "thought" advocated by Rudolf Steiner. Parents who like what Steiner said may find Waldorf schools to be just what they want for their kids. But parents who see dangers in Steiner's occult doctrines may want to look elsewhere.

[2] Not all Waldorf teachers are true believers — that is, not all of them are committed Anthroposophists. But Steiner said all Waldorf teachers should  be true believers, and his true-believing followers have often said the same. E.g., 

◊ "As Waldorf teachers, we must be true anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling.” — Waldorf founder Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 118.

◊"Waldorf teachers must be anthroposophists first and teachers second." — Waldorf teacher Gilbert Childs, STEINER EDUCATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE (Floris Books, 1991), p. 166.

— R.R.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Previously, we considered an excerpt from

WALDORF SCHOOLS TEACH 

ODD SCIENCE, ODD EVOLUTION

by Eugene C. Scott

National Center for Science Education

[http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Eugenie_Scott_94.html]

Here are more extended excerpts: 

[I]f schools follow Steiner's views on science, education will suffer. Steiner believed that materialism was insufficient for the understanding of nature. He believed that science needs to "go beyond" the empirical and consider vitalistic, unobservable forces, a perspective also common in 20th century New Age healing approaches ... Anatomy and physiology a la Steiner are unrecognizable by modern scientists: the heart does not pump blood; there are 12 senses ("touch, life, movement, equilibrium, warmth, smell," etc.) corresponding to signs of the zodiac ... Physics and chemistry are just as bad: the "elements" are earth, air, fire, and water. The four "kingdoms of nature" are mineral, plant, animal and man....

Waldorf teachers are supposed to teach Steinerian evolution. In this view, species were specially created, rather than evolving from one another, and "spiritual beings were the creators." "Let us start from the point that the gods, or the divine spiritual beings, decided to create the world and man. For this we have a good authority in the first chapter of the first book of the Bible." (All quotes from a teachers' training manual by [Waldorf teacher] Roy Wilkinson, MAN AND ANIMAL, The Robinswood Press, 1990....)

The Waldorf version of evolution is especially concerned with the relationship of humans to animals, but this relationship is quite different from that of mainline evolutionists. "It becomes apparent that man is a compendium of the animal kingdom; alternatively expressed, that the animal kingdom is the human being spread out." The human "essence" passed through a number of "spiritual states" on the way to becoming human, which was a relatively recent event. "Dr. Steiner considers animals to be the by-products of human development. Man has been involved from the beginning but not in a physical form. Man existed spiritually and the animal forms represent physically incarnated soul forces which the human being had to dispense with in order to mature sufficiently to receive the ego. ... As in life...we are trying to overcome the lower passions to evolve to something higher, so throughout evolution, the passions were separated out from man and these were incorporated as animals."

"We see then that man is not the result of animal evolution but that he is at the beginning of it and is central to it. Indeed he is the cause of it. The animal world represents soul qualities which the human being has discarded although he still retains remnants of them."

Steiner's teachings on race are also unscientific. Books authored by Steiner that are still being sold at Waldorf schools make claims such that "If the blonds and blue-eyed people die out, the human race will become increasingly dense if men do not arrive at a form of intelligence that is independent of blondness" ... [I]t is not likely that racist propaganda of this sort is being taught [in Waldorf schools today], but it is not at all clear that proponents of Steiner's philosophy have publicly repudiated such views. Something upon which aficionados of Steiner's philosophy should reflect is that if he was so dead wrong about genetics and racial variation in general, couldn't he also be in error regarding other supposedly "scientific" teachings?

...One NCSE member, Dan Dugan, investigated the Waldorf school his son attended and found that although teachers claimed that only Steinerian methods were used, the pseudoscientific content of Steiner's views also crept into the curriculum.

Surely there is value in an educational system that promotes spontaneity, creativity, expressive arts, and enthusiasm in children, but such an approach should not denigrate a more materialistic, scientific way of knowing, which has proven its usefulness. Both are necessary for good education.

[End of excerpts]

◊

A Note from Your Host

Are Anthroposophical falsehoods actually taught in science classes at Waldorf schools? It depends. Some Waldorf schools are more deeply committed to Steiner and his teachings than others are. At a minimum, you should be alert. If you are considering a Waldorf school for your children, do your best to penetrate that school's science curriculum. [For some pointers on how to evaluate a Waldorf school, see "Clues". The remaining items on this page may also prove helpful.]

— R.R.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

CENTRE FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION

From a discussion at the 

British Centre for Science Education

[http://www.forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2681&sid=51f15e2b90e3652abeb0176fee5b0878&start=30#p35380].

I have added a few footnotes. — R.R.

Comment by “MarkH”:

"I’ve been doing some research on science teaching in Steiner schools….

"It is, unfortunately, difficult to find out what's actually going on in the classroom. When I asked the Hereford school for some information on lesson plans and the science curriculum, they referred me to a book by Richter & Rawson: 'The Educational Tasks and Content of the Steiner Waldorf Curriculum'. This is apparently the major source on which the curriculum in most UK Steiner schools is based. The chapter on life sciences is particularly interesting. There’s no specific mention of creationism, and evolution is taught, though with some reservations … Darwinism is [described as] 'rooted in reductionist thinking and Victorian ethics'. We are urged to give the fullest consideration to questions such as whether we are 'a naked ape or a spiritual individuality clothed in a physical body'. Evolution is singled out as an example of the limits of science, whereby existing theories can be superseded by more powerful and useful descriptions of nature. Alternative theories are not discussed, but we are assured that 'current ideas' will be replaced during the students' adulthood. 

"Other worrying aspects of the life sciences curriculum include the claim that 'the circulation of the blood is not a closed system and the pump model [1] is not sufficient to understand the circulation of the blood or the sensitivity of the heart to the emotions'. 'The limitations of the germ theory of disease', the benefits of certain childhood diseases [2] and discussion of vaccination [3] in the context of rejection of foreign proteins by the immune system, are all hints that Anthroposophical ideas and culture can seep into the science curriculum. 

"In chemistry, Richter & Rawson give homeopathy [4] as an example of a phenomenon that cannot be explained by 'atomic theory', with its unfortunate 'implicit materialism'. A couple of paragraphs later, the authors emphasize that an open-minded approach to science, 'grounded in clear thinking and exact observation' should be cultivated. However, there is little evidence here that students are given the tools to think critically and to differentiate objective phenomena from illusion and personal, subjective interpretation.

"I have no idea how much of this makes it into the classroom and no easy way of finding out. However, it's enough to have convinced me that there are better places than the local Steiner school to get a good science education."

◊

R.R. Footnotes for this Section

[1] E.g.,

"[Science] sees the heart as a pump that pumps blood through the body. Now there is nothing more absurd than believing this, for the heart has nothing to do with pumping the blood.” — Rudolf Steiner, FREUD, JUNG, AND SPIRITUAL PSYCHOLOGY, (SteinerBooks, 2001), pp. 124-125. [See "Steiner's Quackery".]

[2] Steiner taught that diseases are often needed — they are part of our karma, and therefore they often should be allowed to run their course. [See, e.g., "Growing Up Being Made Sick by Anthroposophy".]

[3] Steiner did not forbid vaccination, but he warned of its spiritual dangers. [See the section "Vaccination" in "Steiner's Quackery”.]

[4] Anthroposophical medicine includes various homeopathic or near-homeopathic nostrums. From the perspective of conventional medicine, however, homeopathy is considered both unfounded and ineffective. [See, e.g., the entry for "homeopathy" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.]

— R.R.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

FROM A FORMER WALDORF STUDENT

The following is extracted from Grégoire Perra's

"My Life Among the Anthroposophists".

I have added a few footnotes. — R.R.

Waldorf schooling promotes a uniform religiosity that overflows into all areas of school life. Even in science class, we were taught to observe the experiments with an attitude of devotion. I can even say that this atmosphere stimulated in me, at times, certain abnormal mental states. Thus, I remember that when a mythic tale was used as an introduction in Geography, I had the distinct feeling out of my body floating outside of time. That at least is how I pictured the experience after I had returned to myself....

Waldorf schools say that they teach the scientific disciplines based on a particular method. This is the systematic observation of phenomena in order to progressively discover the laws contained within them. [1] This approach is claimed to offset the general trend towards abstraction that is characteristic of modern civilization. It rebels against the widespread practice of teaching students the laws of physics, chemistry, optics, and other sciences, without first teaching them to observe natural phenomena as they occur. Today, to support their approach, Anthroposophic educators claim that such trends as the emphasis on "hands-on" schooling are in tune with their method.

However, having experienced from the inside how these attractive principles are applied in the actual education of a Waldorf student, I can attest to their complete ineffectiveness. In reality, observing phenomena to discover their inner laws requires a gradual shift from description to conceptualization. When the student is in the presence of a phenomenon, such as during a chemistry experiment, the realization of what he sees raises questions about the phenomenon observed and these questions lead him to formulate hypotheses, which then may be confirmed in the form of scientific laws. But within Anthroposophic teaching, there is a broad inability to pass from observation to understanding, from perception to conceptualization. When I was a student, we spent hours to prepare, perform, and observe experiments. But we learned nothing. We never comprehended anything that we saw. We got bogged down in the process of  description, which never raised any thoughts. This pattern was repeated no matter which teachers I had. They reproduced an experiment by following the instructions given by Rudolf Steiner or one of his disciples, but they were unable to raise questions and thoughtful analyses that would have led us to comprehend underlying laws. Partly this was because they had a horror of abstraction and therefore were reluctant to get to the point where, in an appropriate scientific spirit, they should frame a law in an abstract form. But the problem was also that they were genuinely incapable of thinking in conceptual terms, as I would notice later when I observed them as an adult. Anthroposophy, which is a mystical approach, had atrophied or destroyed their ability to rise to concepts. At most they wanted to reach for images, but not beyond.

The best example of the kind of teaching I am describing was a seventh grade course in chemistry dealing with acids and alkalis. Our teacher had us make a broth of red cabbage, to show how the liquid changed color when it shifted from alkali to acid. We repeated the process several times, without understanding the purpose, as if we were observing a magic trick. The scientific approach became literally bogged down in red cabbage, with most of it falling to the ground in the general confusion caused by our increasing lack of interest in an experiment that taught us nothing. I also frequently remember our science teacher in 11th grade describing the phenomenon of electricity by using the metaphor of the attraction that lovers feel for each other. This inability to formulate abstract principles, even in science, did considerable damage to our study of mathematics. I remember, for example, that in twelfth grade we had the greatest difficulty understanding the concept of "an algebraic function" because no metaphor was available to characterize it. This rejection of abstraction, coupled with the fact that we were almost never asked to commit anything to memory and we were rarely tested, meant that my class's level of comprehension in all scientific fields, especially in mathematics, was absolutely abysmal. The only students who learned enough to pass a standard science exam were those whose parents arranged for extra tutoring outside school, or who themselves supervised their offspring in this area. As is often done in the Steiner-Waldorf schools, during our final year our class was divided into two groups: the first consisting of students who did well in science, thanks to instruction provided by competent outsiders, and the second group — of which I was one — who had to settle for a "course" offered by a former student who had a head for math but who was a terrible teacher, had no qualifications to display, and treated us with a nonchalance that resembled babysitting. However, the school wanted to hide these matters from our parents, so our grades were artificially inflated right through graduation. This had the effect that I confidently enrolled in an advanced college course in mathematics and philosophy, and I scored 10% in the first round of mathematics; I managed to pass only because I got 80% in philosophy, which improved my average.

But the inability of teachers in the land of Anthroposophy to lift their thinking to the level of concepts was not restricted to the sciences. It was also evident in the arts and in art history courses. Indeed, it often arose in our "grand art classes," in which slides showing famous works of art were projected onto screens. We had to describe these works in a collective process, with every student in the class invited to take the floor. What was said in this process was not uninteresting, since we learned to observe a work closely, working out each of its details, etc. But when it came to going beyond description to interpretation, we hit a large blank wall. Our teacher was completely incapable of ascertaining the meaning to what we saw. She seemed to be happily trapped at the level of sensitively gazing at the art. All that she could say boiled down to a single comment that she repeated for each of the works, namely: "It's very interesting!" That is as far as we got! When I met her again, years later, as a trainer at a center for Steiner-Waldorf teacher training, I saw that she had absolutely not changed in this regard. She presented us works art, we had to describe them, and then she concluded with "It's very interesting!" — which left us puzzled while she blinked her eyes with an absent air. A few Steiner-Waldorf alumni in the training program were scandalized to meet this kind of instruction again after so many years, but they did not dare to openly voice any reproach, for fear of the great power wielded by this trainer at the core of the Steiner-Waldorf system. Anyone protesting against such instruction would invalidate his training and have no chance of finding a job later.

I should stress that what I have described in my science teachers and the instructors of the "grand art classes" is a common trait that I found in all Waldorf teachers. I am not trying here to stigmatize any particular person, but to point to a general feature that I found often strongly expressing itself. It might seem strange that a system of education founded by the author of THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM [2] is characterized by inability to think through concepts. Indeed, didn't Rudolf Steiner devote many pages of this book to an effort to identify precisely the nature of conceptual thinking, which he called in other parts of his work "pure thought" or "truly human thinking"? [3] But if you study his pronouncements, it should be noted that he is always and ever elusive in his description of these matters. He mentions the existence of pure thought, and he claims in his statements that we can gain access to it, but his readers are never actually shown it, even in his early works [i.e., while he was still ostensibly a secular intellectual]. Subsequently, when Steiner set forth Anthroposophy as an esoteric and mystical system, we can say that his disciples became bogged down in metaphorical and reverential thinking. [4] That is why speeches by Anthroposophic educators are full of metaphors, such as the germination of the seed, but they almost never lay out concepts that are truly delineated. And is this not also because conceptual thought, such as we find in genuine philosophy, contains a force that gives individuals freedom, while Anthroposophy is a bondage?

Anthroposophy is a mode of religious thought, which causes it to be fundamentally inconsistent with a truly scientific approach. Because it is the basis of Steiner-Waldorf schooling, Anthroposophy prevents the normal teaching of science. Religion is noble, certainly. But towards perceptible phenomena, Anthroposophy develops an attitude of reverence that does not allow critical analysis. This is the reason why, in many Steiner-Waldorf schools, the parents of the students are well aware that science is the "poor relation" in the curriculum. Some Steiner-Waldorf schools sometimes try to stem this disaster by bringing in outsider instructors, if they have the acceptable associations. Thus, we can find distinguished researchers sometimes teaching senior science courses in Steiner-Waldorf schools. But is this not an admission that it is basically impossible to entrust scientific disciplines to Anthroposophic teachers, who do not have the proper spirit for this mission? And this is aside from the problem that researchers are not necessarily good teachers, and they can't perform miracles when the bases for science instruction have not been laid, so the level of what they present is often too complicated for Waldorf high school students. To bring in outsiders from various scientific fields is an admission to the world that an education based on Anthroposophy is incompatible with truly learning science.

◊

R.R. Footnotes for this Section

[1] Perra is referring here to the Goethean science espoused in Waldorf schools. Such science, so called, seeks to penetrate to spiritual realities underlying physical phenomena. [See "Goethe".] The objective is to produce a deeply subjective, mystical state of consciousness; in effect, the purpose is to nudge students toward spiritual revelation of the sort that underlies Rudolf Steiner's "spiritual science," Anthroposophy. The is the new "science" that Rudolf Steiner's followers want to see replace the natural and physical  sciences. Severing the self from the physical senses, the "spiritual scientist" rises to a "higher" consciousness of "higher" realities.

[2] THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM, by Rudolf Steiner, was originally a straightforward philosophical text. When Steiner wrote it, he was a secular intellectual, and he had great hopes for the book's reception. Critics did not hail Steiner as the next great German philosopher, however, and not long afterwards Steiner amazed his family, friends, and students by plunging into occultism. Thereafter, he revised THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM to make it consistent with his new mystical doctrines. This is the form of the book now studied by Waldorf teacher trainees. [For more on such matters, see "What a Guy", "Freedom", and "Teacher Training".]

[3] Steiner's teachings about intellect are complex and, indeed, self-contradictory. On the one hand, Steiner claimed that his "spiritual science" — Anthroposophy — is consistent with intellect and the natural sciences. On the other hand, he disparaged intellect and the natural sciences. [See, e.g.,  "Science".] Ultimately, after fully committing himself to occultism, Steiner advocated clairvoyance and "living thoughts" (which are sent to us by the gods) rather than reasoning or, indeed, the use of the brain. [See, e.g., "Clairvoyance" and "Thinking".]

[4] The essential discipline of Anthroposophy is the effort to discipline the mind so that one can attain clairvoyance or even — what Steiner claimed to possess — "exact" clairvoyance. To look into these matters, see "Knowing the Worlds" and "Exactly".

— R.R.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ANTHROPOSOPHICAL "SCIENCE"

"‘Science’ for Anthroposophists is not what is usually meant by this English word ... Steiner sought to ‘free’ the scientific method....

"Living Thinking, a path for the philosophically and mathematically inclined, and Goethean Science, which is based on observation, are generally held [by Anthroposophists] to be equivalent to the first stage of Imagination. Steiner was deeply influenced by Goethe’s holistic scientific method, which he spiritualized as he adopted it into his burgeoning Anthroposophy. Goethean science’s search amidst the multitude of plant forms for the archetypal plant (or Urpflanze) is considered a first step toward spiritual knowledge.

"There has been considerable Anthroposophical investigation into ‘etheric’ forces. They are identified with the ‘four elements’ ... There is also a belief, consonant with traditional astrology, that minerals on earth are permeated by etheric streams from different planets....

"[Steiner] believed that animals had a descending evolution, evolving ‘downwards’ from their archetypal origin, the spiritual human form ... Human beings descended and condensed or incarnated later. Evolution is also [believed by Anthroposophists to be] ascending towards greater conscious spirituality ... [Steiner’s] time scales were very short even in terms of contemporary geological and anthropological knowledge, but the huge time spans established by more recent radiocarbon dating have made many of his statements look shorter still. His follower, Guenther Wachsmuth, surmounted the problem through ‘establishing’ that radioactive decay itself first began between 15,000 BC (the entry of the Platonic year into Libra) and 13,800 BC (when it entered into Virgo).

"Occasionally, the possibility that Steiner made a mistake may be contemplated. Deep ocean exploration has made his siting of Atlantis look impossible. Some Anthroposophists reputedly believe he erred ... But others defend the revelation ... It has also been held that Steiner’s descriptions of Atlantis were not intended literally.

"...Anthroposophical science...seems to presuppose Steiner’s cosmology and then amplify it spiritually. Life on earth derives from chains of supernal and immanent beings. Thus the First Spiritual Hierarchy [i.e., the highest gods below the Godhead] are said to be so pure that they are separated from the ‘selfhood’, which constitutes the Second Anthroposophical Spiritual Hierarchy. In Anthroposophy some of the latter (the Powers) form plants, animals, man and planets, while others (the Mights) govern the growth of living things. The Third Anthroposophical Spiritual Hierarchy directly affect life on earth, thus flowing water is said to contain the Angels. Wind and fire are infused by other spirits, and Zeitgeists (or Spirits of the Age), which are taken literally, are thought to be the manifestation of the Principalities. These and other spirits have ‘offspring’, which are the ‘nature spirits’ of air, water, earth, and so on. In Anthroposophy there are also...’elemental beings’ such as goblins, sylphs, undines, [spiritual] salamanders, and gnomes ... A man who takes sixteen false paths in his incarnations may become one [i.e., fall out of human evolution]." 

— Geoffrey Ahern, SUN AT MIDNIGHT (James Clarke & Co., 2009), pp. 92-94.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

OBSOLETE GIZMOS

A news item:

“High school students at [X] Waldorf School took real pleasure in completing physics projects, designing a Wimhurst machine, DC motors and Van de Graaff generators.” 

[phoenixvillenews.com, Jan. 23, 2009.] 

◊

Wimhurst machines are generators invented during the 1880s; Van de Graaff generators date from the 1930s. Building such devices may give students some appreciation of electricity, but it would not convey twenty-first century scientific information.

According to a spokesperson, 

“‘At [X] Waldorf School, students are provided experiences that strengthen and reinforce their own inclination to experiment, explore and question. Students often communicate how science is perceived as fun.’” [phoenixvillenews.com, Jan. 23, 2009.] 

Recreating old-fashioned gizmos may well be fun, but it would hardly produce the creativity needed for real science, which is the exploration of the unknown. It is in no way a form of experimentation or scientific research. It is a diversion.

— R.R.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

“Where does it come from, this [standing] upright? ... If you loosen a stone here it will fall to the ground. Why? ... [A] force exists that pulls it down [i.e., "gravity"] ... We, too, must adapt ourselves to this vertical line. We must learn to stand in the vertical when we are earthly human beings ... [O]ur physical body would serve no purpose if we did not assume the vertical position ... But does the ether body also need what the physical body needs? ... [T]he human ether body, this subtle body which we also have, does not get so used to the vertical position ... [It] always wants to follow the rotation of the earth ... If the ether body did not want to make this movement, you would want to rotate all the time when you are just walking...wanting to go round and round all the time because you'd hurt all over from the shove you are given [by the Earth's rotation] ... You can also see from this how little thought is given to things in modern science." 

— Rudolf Steiner, 

FROM MAMMOTHS TO MEDIUMS 

(Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), 

pp. 8-9. 

[R.R. sketch, 2009, 

based on the sketch on p. 8,

showing the deceptive 

power of gravity.]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

OH THOSE SCIENCES

“The teacher of the physical sciences in the Rudolf Steiner school is faced with a formidable task. He cannot morally be present in the school and teach unless he has absorbed, understood, and is in agreement with Rudolf Steiner’s basic conception of the world ... Material science and explanations cannot explain nature.” 

— Waldorf teacher Roy Wilkinson, 

TEACHING PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY 

(Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1997), 

p. 1.

◊

The physics and chemistry teachers at Waldorf schools face “a formidable task” because they must be true to Rudolf Steiner’s teachings, but these teachings are at odds with the findings of modern science. Steiner himself disparaged modern science, including physics and chemistry. Thus, science teachers at Waldorf schools confront a daily dilemma. If they teach their sciences straight, they violate Steiner’s doctrines. But if they are faithful to Steiner, they must violate the established truths of their sciences.

How they resolve this dilemma varies from school to school. The main point for us to grasp here is that the dilemma exists. Waldorf teachers must bend modern scientific knowledge to one degree or another, since they cannot “morally be present in the school” unless they are devoted followers of Rudolf Steiner — they must be “in agreement with Rudolf Steiner’s basic conception of the world” (or, as Steiner put it, they must be “true Anthroposophists”).* Therefore, “morally,” they must misrepresent the truth about physical reality; they must be false to science in order to be true to Steiner. Inevitably, the education of their students must suffer as a result. To the degree that scientific truths are shaded to conform to Anthroposophical doctrines, students are taught Anthroposophy, not science.

◊

* Begging your pardon, I will repeat a directive from Steiner, one we have seen more than once previously. It is crucial to our understanding of Waldorf education. Speaking to teachers at the first Waldorf school, Rudolf Steiner said this:

“As teachers in the Waldorf School, you will need to find your way more deeply into the insight of the spirit and to find a way of putting all compromises aside ... As Waldorf teachers, we must be true anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling.” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 495. 

The formidable task of Waldorf science teachers is doubly illuminated by this directive. Waldorf teachers must not compromise, yet if a science teacher provides students with any real scientific information that contradicts Steiner's teachings, s/he has made a profound, soul-wrenching compromise. Steiner did not deny that science contains much accurate information about the physical universe, but he said such information is, at best, only half-true, since it leaves out everything that is important: spiritual truths. And then sometimes, going even further, he often denied that scientific descriptions of reality are true even at the merely physical level. Ordinary science is simply wrong, he said on such occasions.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Let's take a little tour through examples of 

Anthroposophical "scientific" teachings

.

.

.

ASTRONOMY, EARTH SCIENCE

The influence of the Moon beaming down to the Earth. 

"When human beings cling too strongly to earthly things it may be difficult for them to find their bearings in the sphere of the Moon Beings ... The moon-influences do not penetrate very deeply into the earth." — Rudolf Steiner, KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS, Vol. 2 (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1974), p 150. 

[I've made my copy off-kilter, since the original on p. 150 is. 

To lend a little pizzazz to the b&w illustration in the book, 

I have added colors; 2009.]

EARTH SCIENCE

Possibly you do not realize that the Earth is a huge, dead human head. 

“[W]hen we look inside the head, we find dying matter ... Once we have penetrated this hard, lifeless skin and reached the brain, we find in it fossilization everywhere, just as we do upon the surface of the earth ... [T]he earth is a huge human head, indeed, a huge, dead human head." — Rudolf Steiner, FROM CRYSTALS TO CROCODILES (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2002, pp. 148-149. 

[R. R. sketch, 2009, based on illustration on p. 148. 

Atop, a cross section of a human skull; below, terra firma.]

By the way, Steiner sometimes said that the Earth is alive; on other occasions, he said it is dead. On no occasion, however, did he describe it accurately in terms of geology, geography, astronomy, or any other actual body of knowledge.

ASTRONOMY, PHYSICS

Steiner denied that gravity is a universal force; really, it is only a word, he said. He denied that planets orbit the Sun — although, in public, he tended to gloss over this: The Moon does orbit the Earth, he said, although this has little to do with gravity. The Moon attracts the Earth, and vice versa, for occult reasons, not due to the laws of "materialistic" physics.

“[P]eople who think like Einstein run out of ideas when they come to the sphere of life or of the spirit ... Now if the earth is to attract the moon, one really cannot speak of a materialistic view at all." — Rudolf Steiner, FROM ELEPHANTS TO EINSTEIN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998), p. 175.

Copernicus was wrong. Galileo, too. Newton, too. Einstein, too. 

“Einstein, if he were to think in terms of reality [would see things differently] ... But he does not, for the materialism of our age does not permit him to do so. So he thinks up examples that do not relate to reality, that one cannot think, that are impossible to think." — Ibid., p. 178.

Einstein was wrong. It is impossible to believe Einstein. 

Who is right about the physical universe and its laws? Blushing modesty, Steiner would have to admit that he — and, for practical purposes, only he — is right.

In the diagram above, you see the Earth and Moon, some forces of attraction, and suggestions of the universal ether.

"[W]hat I am drawing here is the cosmic ether; it consists of lots of small grains, tiny little grian. And these tiny little grains bump into here, and bump into there, but bump more there than they do in the middle. So if you have two bodies, earth and moon, and there is more pushing from the outside than from the inside, it is as if they were attracted to each other." — Ibid., p. 178.

But the attraction (gravity) is an illusion.

[R.R. sketch, 2009, based on image on p. 175 

of FROM ELEPHANTS TO EINSTEIN.]

P.S. Steiner said people used to believe in the cosmic ether, back in the days before blind materialism became ascendant. And rejecting modern materialsim (modern science), Steiner himself believed in the cosmic ether.

“The cosmic ether, which is common to all, carries within it the thoughts; there they are within it, those living thoughts of which I have repeatedly spoken in our anthroposophical lectures, telling you how the human being participates in them in pre-earthly life before he comes down to Earth." — Rudolf Steiner, CURATIVE EDUCATION (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1972), lecture 2, GA 317. 

This is one of Steiner's most mature thoughts, coming just a few months before he died. (But "mature" in quotation marks.)

.

.

.

PHYSICS

"People merely gape at the rainbow nowadays. If you only look at it with some imagination [i.e., basic clairvoyance], you will see elemental beings very active in it, and these elemental beings show us some remarkable phenomena. Here [red and yellow] you see elemental beings coming out of the rainbow all the time ... The moment they arrive at the lower end of the green, they are drawn in. You see them disappearing here [green and blue]. On the other side they come out again." — Rudolf Steiner, ART (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003), pp. 233-234. 

[Above is my 2009 colored version of the  

b&w image in the book, which includes labels.]

"Elemental beings" (also called nature spirits) are invisible beings such as gnomes, according to Steiner's teachings. Elemental beings such as gnomes really exist, Steiner taught. [See "Neutered Nature".]

.

.

.

PHYSICS, ANTHROPOLOGY, MEDICINE

A prism splits white light into a spectrum, ranging from red to violet. The spectrum is usually depicted as a bar of color. Steiner — following the lead of Goethe — denied that white light can be broken down into component colors, although he acknowledged that there is a color spectrum. Like Goethe, he bent the spectrum bar to form a circle, then he added the esoteric complement of each color (the corresponding colors existing in the spirit realm). He claimed this provided far more information, especially about the spiritual powers of colors and their meaning in higher worlds.

“...If you take the usual diagram found in physics then all you have is...red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet ... [N]ow if I do not show it as it appears on the physical plane but as it is in the next highest world, I would have to bend the warm and cold sides of the spectrum so that it is drawn like this ... I would have my peach-blossom colour up here at the top ... In this way I obtain a complex arrangement of colours which, however, reveals more of the nature of colour than you will find in physics....” — Rudolf Steiner quoted by John Fletcher in ART INSPIRED BY RUDOLF STEINER (Mercury Arts Publications, 1987), p. 132. 

[R.R. sketch, 2010, based on the ones on pp. 133-135. 

I have refrained from emphasizing peach-blossom.] 

“Peach-blossom” is the color of white European skin, according to Steiner. No other human skin color is correct, he averred. 

“The color which comes closest to a healthy human flesh color is that of fresh peach blossoms in spring.” — Rudolf Steiner, THE ARTS AND THEIR MISSION (Anthroposophic Press, 1964), p. 93.

.

.

.

PHYSICS, ASTRONOMY, GEOLOGY

"Theories of Relativity no longer hold water, when the inner motion proves  that man moves. And it is impossible also to prove the movements in the interior of the Earth, except by means of the inner changes that go on in Man. The movements of metabolism, for example, are the true reflection of that which the Earth executes as motion in space. And again, that which we have termed the organ-building forces, active in the course of the year, are the equivalent of the annual motion of Earth and Sun together. We shall have occasion to speak more specifically of these things later; at the moment I should like to draw your attention once more to our model, where I have pointed out that the Earth moves behind the Sun in a screw-like line, the Earth moving along always with the Sun. And then if we view the line from above, we get a projection of the line and the projection shows a lemniscate." — Rudolf Steiner, MAN: HIEROGLYPH OF THE UNIVERSE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1972), lecture 6, GA 201.

[R.R. sketch, 2010.]

.

.

.

BIOLOGY, ANIMAL SCIENCES

“If a human being compares himself to a dog, he can exclaim, 'Isn't that something; it can wag its tail, and I cannot.' The whole force that is contained in this wagging tail, however, has become dammed back in man, and it has pushed the brain forwards." — Rudolf Steiner, FROM COMETS TO COCAINE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), pp. 91-92.

[R.R. sketch, 2009, based on p. 91. 

Unimportant disclosure: I have taken the liberty of suggesting 

that a dog has ears and legs, components missing from the book's image.]

.

.

.

EVOLUTION, METAPHYSICS

This image shows the Moon (gray) and three stages of the Earth's evolution: Earth in the Lumerian Epoch, the Aryan Epoch (the present), and the Sixth Epoch. Two lines of influence extend from the Moon to each Earth stage, a spiritual stream and a physical-astral stream. Jehovah provided an impulse for humanity during the Lumerian Epoch; Christ provides a crucial impulse now; the "Father" will provide an impulse in the Sixth Epoch. — See Rudolf Steiner, CORRESPONDENCE AND DOCUMENTS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1988), p. 85.

("Aryan epoch" is one of the various labels Steiner attached to the present stage of human evolution.)

[Above is my 2009 copy of the sketch in the book.

Below is the sketch in the book.]

[Rudolf Steiner, CORRESPONDENCE AND DOCUMENTS 

(Rudolf Steiner Press, 1988), p. 85.]

.

.

.

METAPHYSICS

Hierarchies of spiritual beings — gods — dwell above humanity. Here is my copy of a sketch Steiner made, showing spiritual hierarchies as spheres above the physical plane. Steiner described an occult initiate saying,

"I felt myself one with the Beings of the First and Second Hierarchies, and I beheld the weaving and working of the Third Hierarchy in mighty spirit-clouds over my body."  — Rudolf Steiner, KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS, Vol. 2 (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1974), p. 235. 

[My colored 2009 version of the b&w, 

image in the book, which includes labels.]

.

.

.

ANTHROPOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 

(& ART)

"If we take the flesh color of a Caucasian person, which resembles spring's fresh peach-blossom colour, we have the living image of the soul. If we contemplate white in an artistic way, we have the soul image of the spirit ... And if, as artists, we take hold of black, we have the spiritual image of death. And the circle is closed." — Rudolf Steiner, ART (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003), pp. 188-189. 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

MODERN ABSTRACT MATERIAL SCIENCE

“In earlier, more spiritual ages, when men had more wisdom than has modern abstract materialistic science, they were always conscious that there was an old clairvoyance to the possessors of which the world became transparent. They felt that man had lost this old sight and had entered into his present state. Formerly, men did not express their knowledge in abstract formulae and theories, but in mighty, vivid pictures. The Myths are not ‘thought out’ or invented, but are the expressions of a profound primeval wisdom acquired by spiritual vision. In ancient times there was consciousness of the fact that at a still earlier epoch man had embraced the whole world in his feeling, and this is expressed in the Myths. The ‘clair-sentience’ of the old Indian was the last remnant of an original, dim clairvoyance. This was known; but what was not known, was that this clairvoyance — let us summarise it so — withdraws little by little, giving way to the external life which is confined to the world of the senses.” — Rudolf Steiner, THE EAST IN THE LIGHT OF THE WEST (Rudolf Steiner Pub. Co., 1940), lecture 7, GA 113. 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

For a discussion of pseudoscience

in and around Waldorf schools,

see "Pseudoscience".

For scientific skepticism 

about clairvoyance and other 

"psychic phenomena,"

see "Clairvoyance".

For additional statements 

Steiner made

about science, 

see "Science".

For the connection 

between "spiritual science"

and prayers, 

see "Power Words".

For information about the 

study of math 

in Waldorf schools,

see "Mystic Math".

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

IS IT SCIENCE?

For a devastating debunking of Steiner's "science," see Sven Ove Hansson, "Is Anthroposophy Science?" at http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/Hansson.html. It is an excellent piece, although flawed in one way. After convincingly arguing that Anthroposophy is unscientific nonsense, Hansson falls into a common error. Evidently wishing to be gentle with Steiner, he suggests that some of Steiner's teachings, in areas apart from science, might have beneficial practical effects, and he specifically mentions Waldorf schooling. Perhaps Hansson was unaware of Steiner's statements that 

"Anthroposophy will be in the school" — FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 495 

and 

"As Waldorf teachers we must be true Anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word" — Ibid., p. 118. 

In other words, Waldorf students will be "educated" in an atmosphere of unscientific nonsense — specifically, Steiner's occultism: Anthroposophy.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

DEDUCE NOT

Genuine science is inextricably bound up with rationality — you observe phenomena, rationally deduce an explanation for them (that is, you frame an hypothesis), and then you test your explanation (you conduct experiments that confirm or disprove your hypothesis). Among the great difficulties in all this from a Waldorf perspective is the Anthroposophical aversion to rational, abstract thought. [See, e.g., "Steiner's Specific" and "Thinking".] A Waldorf "science" class will often be structured in such a way as to deflect students from making abstract or rational deductions. Thus, for instance, a Waldorf teacher describing the study of acoustics injects this important note:

"No emphasis [should be] given to any theoretical explanations which would only lead the children into speculations of a more abstract nature. This is, of course, the danger that lurks in all popular books on acoustics [or science generally] and must be properly recognized." — Waldorf teacher Helmut Krause, Waldorf Clearing House Newsletter, Spring 1975, p. 5.

Use the following link to go to

the third part of "Steiner's 'Science'".