If you visit a Waldorf school, you will likely encounter at least a few Anthroposophists. (Not all Waldorf teachers are Anthroposophists, but many are — including many senior faculty and administrators, the people with most authority in the schools.) How can you have productive conversations with them? Here are a few pointers.

I should start by acknowledging that there is a wide range of Anthroposophical types, about as wide as you would find in most other cross sections of human beings. To lump all Anthroposophists together, as if they are indistinguishable from each other, is an error. Nonetheless, there may in fact be an archetypal Anthroposophical personality, one you will encounter often when meeting with Steiner's faithful followers, whether these are Waldorf teachers, Antroposophical medicos, fervent biodynamic farmers, or any other representative members of the Anthroposophical community. Many Anthroposophists may evince this personality, to one degree or another.

Various observers have commented on this personality, even observers from within the Anthroposophical movement. Consider the account given by Keith Francis, a prominent Anthroposophical insider — he was, for a number of years, the headmaster of the Rudolf Steiner School in Manhattan, New York City. [See "His Education".] Here is what he was written about "the Anthroposophical personality":

"Anthroposophists generally practise what Anthroposophy preaches...but only up to a point. We certainly have no difficulty in rejecting most of the world's recognized authorities, along with the orthodoxies of politics, economics, medicine, science, art, agriculture and education that they represent — except when they just happen to fit in with something that we are pushing. As a group we believe that we have access to knowledge that puts us in a superior position, and the tendency to let this feeling of superiority show is one of the most off-putting features of the anthroposophical personality. The 'anthroposophical personality' is a palpable presence ... I gradually became used to it ... 'They [i.e., non-Anthroposophists] don't know what we know," as an old anthroposophist said to me. To feel pity for one's less enlightened brothers and sisters is in itself admirable, but when the feeling is adultered by a strong dose of de haut en bas [looking downward from a superior position], the situation is not healthy." — Keith Francis, THE EDUCATION OF A WALDORF TEACHER, pp. 60-61.

Anthroposophists tend to feel superior; they think they possess important knowledge that you lack. They often consider themselves to be initiated in esocteric wisdom that is hidden from you. [See, e.g., "Inside Scoop".] Chatting with an Anthroposophist may be difficult, then. S/he may pity you, but s/he may also look down upon you. S/he may feel, indeed, that s/he must hide many important matters from you. [See "Secrets".] These attitudes naturally impede any free and open exchange of information; they undercut the premise that a meeting between an Anthroposophist and an outsider such as yourself is a meeting of equals. From the Anthroposophist's point of view, you stand at a lower level.

Now, again, I must hasten to stress that I am generalizing. I am accepting, more or less at face value, Keith Francis's description of the Anthroposophical personality. Francis' view is seconded by others who have spent many years in Anthroposophical circles — they have given similar accounts. [See, e.g., "My Life Among the Anthroposophists".] The Anthroposophical personality may really exist, but we must remember that we are contemplating an abstraction, a generalized archetype. Some individuals may come close to epitomizing the archetype, but others may share in the archetype only slightly. So we must not make excessively sweeping judgements; we need to proceed with charity, trying to see each individual as  an individual.

That said, there are many obstacles that can impede attempts to communicate with Anthroposophists. Perhaps the first and greatest is the sheer strangeness of the Anthroposophical belief system and the communities that arise from it. As Geoffrey Ahern says in his study of the Steiner movement, outsiders may tend to recoil and, in reaction to the strangeness of Anthroposophy, double down on their own "normal" points of view.

"Outsiders who visit the Goetheanum [the Anthroposophical headquarters] may well be impressed by the strange environment. Approaching Anthroposophiy from 'normality' as the result of a chance contact, nothing at first made sense to me ... Many outsiders, confronted with radically different thought systems [in this case, Anthroposophy], will reinforce their own 'normality' through outright rejection." — Geoffry Ahern, THE SUN AT MIDNIGHT (James Clarke & Co., 2009), p. 13.

Reacting that way can close the possibilty of productive conversation, obviously. You need to be open to the Anthroposophicl perspective. Try to listen to strange Anthroposophical opinions with an open mind. On the other hand, don't expect reciprocity. As Keith Francis indicated, Anthroposophists are inclined to reject almost all views other than their own. If they reject "most of the world's recognized authorities, along with the orthodoxies of politics, economics, medicine, science, art, agriculture and education that they represent" — how willing are they likely to be to accept your views?

In general, Antroposophists think they possess The Truth, and they assume that almost everyone else — including you — is in the dark. So, from their perspective, two-way conversations are largely pointless. You have nothing of value to say, they generally believe, whereas they think they possess extraordinary wisdom that must often be kept hidden. Anthroposophists think they are privy to divine secrets that, for the most part, should remain secret. The result is that silence may hang in the air when you approach Anthroposophists, and attempting to convince Anthroposophists to open up is often a futile undertaking.

What this boils down to is that Anthroposophists are devout, committed adherents of an unusual religion: Anthroposophy. They generally deny this; they generally deny, indeed, that Anthroposophy is a religion. It certainly is, however. [See "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?"] And if you do not embrace the Steiner faith, you stand outside the charmed circle. At the very center of the circle stands Rudolf Steiner, the originator and chief guru of the faith. [See "Guru".] If Anthroposophists are willing to say much to you, they are likely to advise you to study Steiner. Virtually all true wisdom, they generally affirm, derives from Steiner's teachings.  Thus, a Montessori teacher who originally planned to become a Waldorf teacher has reported the following about the devoutly Anthroposophical Waldorf teachers she met:

"[A]ll the teachers were passionate and really believed in what they were doing. It soon became obvious to me that...what I had hoped was a misinterpretation of Steiner’s philosophy was in actuality the perfect implementation of it. As far as the outright distortion of scientific or historical facts in the Waldorf curriculum, I was asked, 'Whose facts are they? How sure are you that yours are true?' ... For many of the teachers, the only science or history they knew were what they learned in their Waldorf teacher training courses. Then came the statement that clarified all their misinformation for me. I was told, 'Steiner had exceptional powers, he saw the future, he knew the truth. If you truly need to learn, you need to study and follow Steiner. Steiner is all anyone ever needs to know.”' [See "Ex-Teacher 5".]

Anthroposophists may certainly be friendly, on occasion. They may practice good PR. [See "PR".] They may be smart and articulate. But attempting to talk with them means trying to communicate across a wide divide. Anthroposophists generally have their vision fixed on what they call "higher worlds" [see "Higher Worlds"]; they take correspondingly less interest in what we might call the real world. A corollary is that Anthroposophists generally have limited respect for people (such as you?) who live wholly or primarily in the real world. From their perspective, the "real" world and its denizens are largely tainted with falsehood and evil. A further corollary, then, is that Anthroposophists may look upon you as an enemy, precisely because you come from the realm of falsehood.

Steiner's followers frequently act as if the realm of falsehood encloses and looms over their small circle of light — they often see themselves as beset by enemies. [See "Enemies".] They suspect that many of these foes (such as you?) are in league with the arch-demon Ahriman. [See "Ahriman"]. Rudolf Steiner, who "knew the truth," told them to take these dire possibilities very seriously. He told them, for instance,

“[T]he Anthroposophical Movement is of a nature that attracts enemies ... Our misfortune has unleashed a veritable hailstorm of ridicule, contempt and hatred...with enemies creeping out of every corner ... I have been warning for years that we will have to reckon with a constantly growing opposition, and that it is our foremost duty to be aware of this and to be properly vigilant.” — Rudolf Steiner, AWAKENING TO COMMUNITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1974), lecture 1, GA 257.

This vigilance can produce a persecution complex that may keep Anthroposophists from trusting you and opening up to you. This is aggravated by Anthroposophists' belief that many of their opponents are actually demons in human form:

"[I]f human beings are not prepared to take up impulses which can only come from spiritual knowledge [i.e., Anthroposophy], the body will be filled with demonic powers. Humanity is facing a destiny where the body may be filled with ahrimanic demonic powers. So...there will be people in future who are Tom, Dick and Harry in ordinary life...but their bodies will be empty to such an extent that a powerful ahrimanic spirit can live in them. One will be meeting ahrimanic demons." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FALL OF THE SPIRITS OF DARKNESS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993, reprinted 2008), p. 84.

Don't be surprised if, when you meet an Anthroposphist, s/he seems not only reserved but actually fearful. She has been schooled to fear that strangers may be "ahrimanic demons." This certainly can be an additional, major impediment to communication across the divide.

So how should you proceed? How can you have a productive conversation with an Anthroposophist? Certainly you should begin with good will and even optimism. Don't foreclose the possibility of success. But to save yourself needless frustration, you should also begin with realistic expectations. Conversing across a wide chasm is difficult, if not wholly impossible, and the difficulties only increase when one party demonizes the other. Don't accentuate the latter problem by repeating it: Don't demonize Anthroposophists, no matter how much they may evince suspicion and even hostility toward you. See them not as opponents or malefactors, but as well-meaning individuals whose thinking has taken some odd turns. Try to befriend them, even if they insist on holding you at bay.

Don't expect them to yield to rational persuasion. And don't expect their arguments to follow ordinary principles of logic. Because they believe they possess transcendent wisdom, they generally have implicit faith in their own intuitions, their heartfelt inspirations, and even their subjectively identified "clairvoyance." Rules of logic are generally beneath them (and perhaps unknown to them) —  they think they operate on a higher level. Then, too, because they think they are fighting on behalf of all that is Good and True, they think that almost any statement they make, an any action they take, on behalf of their position is justified — even if these statements and actions are, from your perspective, obviously and objectively wrong.

So be patient. Be sympathetic. Be forgiving. And remain calm. There may be little or no meeting of the minds, at least during initial efforts at discussion. But don't despair. When you are with Anthroposophists, hear them out, consider carefully what they say, and attempt to plant at least a few seeds of realism in their consciousness. Then later, if you think you detected any glimmerings of hope, you might try again. Perhaps, gradually, you will make progress. If you have the necessary fortitude and patience, you might make a contribution in the human quest for mutual understanding and the advancement of knowledge. Seen in the largest context, most humans are on a similar journey, seeking answers to life's challenges and mysteries. In this context, efforts at communication that seem hopeless at first may eventually become, to one degree or another, productive.

[R.R.]

Postscript

I should add this: I do not claim that I, myself, have always followed the above advice as well as I could wish. Being demonized is no fun. Because Anthroposphists tend to look on me as an enemy, I have sometimes been goaded into responding to their hostile messages more harshly than I should have. Then, too, I have sometimes declined to engage in colloquies with Anthroposophists, especially when these seemed likely to become endless and unproductive. (As I have said elsewhere, I find that debates, as distinct from conversations, are generally pointless. [See "Yours Truly".])

But my personal failings should not deter you. Perhaps you will do better than I have sometimes done. This is easy to imagine.

— R.R.

Jan. 23, 2022