![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
This article reads like one giant promo for Anthroposophy. It goes on and on and on about every minute detail of this rather obscure belief system with all the analysis of an advertising brochure. For an article about the same size as the one for the Catholic Church (which has over 1 billion followers), there's no critiques, criticism or even solid demographic data. The only area that's less than glowing about Anthroposophy is the section about how it's not borne out by science, but it weasels out of that by saying it's not really meant to be, after all.
I believe in more information, not less, so I'm not suggesting cutting down the article. I just think it desperately needs some more balanced sections to show how other groups view Anthroposophy, how many people identify with it, and overall adjust to tone to Encylopedic, not Persuasive. The Cap'n ( talk) 18:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Something really should be added about the Anthroposophical teaching of evolution which is completey spiritual and completey opposed to Darwinism. According to Steiner souls existed on other planets in spiritual worlds and in astral / etheric states etc etc before they incarnated into humans. Also man existed according to steiner millions of years ago much older than is accepted by the mainstream, dinosaurs and man co-existed etc, and different races of man came from the lost lands such as Atlantis and Lemuria etc. Also according to anthroposophy all animals originally derived off the "prototype form" or archtype man, so infact this is devolution. The human form according to the anthroposophical teaching, is the ancestor of all other forms of life. This is the reverse of the Darwinian perspective. CastleWolfenstein ( talk) 23:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Clairvoyance
Also known as lucidity, telesthesia, and cryptestesia. Clairvoyance is French for seeing clearly. The term is used in the parapsychological literature to denote a * visual or * compound hallucination attributable to a metaphysical source. It is therefore interpreted as * telepathic, * veridical or at least * coincidental hallucination.
Reference
Guily, R.E. (1991) Harper's encyclopedia of mystical and paranormal experience. New York, NY: Castle Books.— Jan Dirk Blom, A Dictionary of Hallucinations, p. 99
Source: [1]. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 20:41, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories#Articles states clearly that "Categorizations should generally be uncontroversial; if the category's topic is likely to spark controversy, then a list article (which can be annotated and referenced) is probably more appropriate." Categorizing this as pseudoscience is certainly likely to spark controversy and so clearly violates the guideline. hgilbert ( talk) 13:25, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
The article asserts that Anthroposophy is a philosophy. Are there any reliable sources backing this claim? Wikipedia has this to say on philosophy: "Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument". I would like to dispute the claim that (1) A. is systematic in its approach, as well as the claim (2) that it is reliant on rational argument. Anthroposophy is a revealed "truth", essentially a doctrine of faith discovered (invented?) by Steiner. 90.129.23.220 ( talk) 13:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
These links have been removed; the edit summary suggests looking at WP:EL. This policy suggests including official links meeting these criteria:
These seem to be met by the Anthroposophical Societies' own web pages. Should the links be restored? hgilbert ( talk) 01:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
This article appears to whitewash, no pun intended, the racist beliefs of Steiner as if they were a mere product of his time. Racism is an inherent part of anthroposophy. That Steiner was racist is not an opinion but a fact. Steiner believed the white race was superior to the black and Asian races. Why not include some actual quotes from Steiner concerning race:
“On one side we find the black race, which is earthly at most. If it moves to the West, it becomes extinct. We also have the yellow race, which is in the middle between earth and the cosmos. If it moves to the East, it becomes brown, attaches itself too much to the cosmos, and becomes extinct. The white race is the future, the race that is spiritually creative.”
“The Jews have a great gift for materialism, but little for recognition of the spiritual world.”
“Negroes” are “decadent" and “completely cut themselves off from the spiritual world”
“[I]f we give these Negro novels to pregnant [white] women to read, then it won’t even be necessary for Negroes to come to Europe in order for mulattos to appear. Simply through the spiritual effects of reading Negro novels, a multitude of children will be born in Europe that are completely gray, that have mulatto hair, that look like mulattos!”
"Today's red and black races descend from abnormal humans and have not participated in the evolution led by whites"
“If you look at pictures of the old American Indians the process of ossification is evident in the decline of this race ... [A] representative of these old American Indians still preserves a memory of that great Atlantean civilization [i.e., the civilization of Atlantis] which could not adapt itself to later evolution ... The Atlantean had not assimilated all that the Venus, Mercury, Mars and Jupiter Spirits [i.e., gods] brought about in the East, to whom we owe all the civilizations which reached their zenith in Europe ... The descendant of the brown race did not participate in this development.”
https://sites.google.com/site/waldorfwatch/steiners-racism
Smiloid (talk) 09:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
6 months have gone by since the NPOV tag, and not a single source has been supplied to support the claim. I am removing the tag pending a real, source-based discussion here. HGilbert ( talk) 20:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
This is a complex topic, given the cycles within cycles of anthroposophy's descriptions. I've tried to clarify the description using terminology that is less confusing (Steiner emphasizes that what he calls planets are nothing like our present conception, so using the word without long explanations is pretty misleading --I've tried to work around this.) a good source should be found, however. HGilbert ( talk) 01:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
This article reads like one giant promo for Anthroposophy. It goes on and on and on about every minute detail of this rather obscure belief system with all the analysis of an advertising brochure. For an article about the same size as the one for the Catholic Church (which has over 1 billion followers), there's no critiques, criticism or even solid demographic data. The only area that's less than glowing about Anthroposophy is the section about how it's not borne out by science, but it weasels out of that by saying it's not really meant to be, after all.
I believe in more information, not less, so I'm not suggesting cutting down the article. I just think it desperately needs some more balanced sections to show how other groups view Anthroposophy, how many people identify with it, and overall adjust to tone to Encylopedic, not Persuasive. The Cap'n ( talk) 18:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Something really should be added about the Anthroposophical teaching of evolution which is completey spiritual and completey opposed to Darwinism. According to Steiner souls existed on other planets in spiritual worlds and in astral / etheric states etc etc before they incarnated into humans. Also man existed according to steiner millions of years ago much older than is accepted by the mainstream, dinosaurs and man co-existed etc, and different races of man came from the lost lands such as Atlantis and Lemuria etc. Also according to anthroposophy all animals originally derived off the "prototype form" or archtype man, so infact this is devolution. The human form according to the anthroposophical teaching, is the ancestor of all other forms of life. This is the reverse of the Darwinian perspective. CastleWolfenstein ( talk) 23:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Clairvoyance
Also known as lucidity, telesthesia, and cryptestesia. Clairvoyance is French for seeing clearly. The term is used in the parapsychological literature to denote a * visual or * compound hallucination attributable to a metaphysical source. It is therefore interpreted as * telepathic, * veridical or at least * coincidental hallucination.
Reference
Guily, R.E. (1991) Harper's encyclopedia of mystical and paranormal experience. New York, NY: Castle Books.— Jan Dirk Blom, A Dictionary of Hallucinations, p. 99
Source: [1]. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 20:41, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories#Articles states clearly that "Categorizations should generally be uncontroversial; if the category's topic is likely to spark controversy, then a list article (which can be annotated and referenced) is probably more appropriate." Categorizing this as pseudoscience is certainly likely to spark controversy and so clearly violates the guideline. hgilbert ( talk) 13:25, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
The article asserts that Anthroposophy is a philosophy. Are there any reliable sources backing this claim? Wikipedia has this to say on philosophy: "Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument". I would like to dispute the claim that (1) A. is systematic in its approach, as well as the claim (2) that it is reliant on rational argument. Anthroposophy is a revealed "truth", essentially a doctrine of faith discovered (invented?) by Steiner. 90.129.23.220 ( talk) 13:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
These links have been removed; the edit summary suggests looking at WP:EL. This policy suggests including official links meeting these criteria:
These seem to be met by the Anthroposophical Societies' own web pages. Should the links be restored? hgilbert ( talk) 01:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
This article appears to whitewash, no pun intended, the racist beliefs of Steiner as if they were a mere product of his time. Racism is an inherent part of anthroposophy. That Steiner was racist is not an opinion but a fact. Steiner believed the white race was superior to the black and Asian races. Why not include some actual quotes from Steiner concerning race:
“On one side we find the black race, which is earthly at most. If it moves to the West, it becomes extinct. We also have the yellow race, which is in the middle between earth and the cosmos. If it moves to the East, it becomes brown, attaches itself too much to the cosmos, and becomes extinct. The white race is the future, the race that is spiritually creative.”
“The Jews have a great gift for materialism, but little for recognition of the spiritual world.”
“Negroes” are “decadent" and “completely cut themselves off from the spiritual world”
“[I]f we give these Negro novels to pregnant [white] women to read, then it won’t even be necessary for Negroes to come to Europe in order for mulattos to appear. Simply through the spiritual effects of reading Negro novels, a multitude of children will be born in Europe that are completely gray, that have mulatto hair, that look like mulattos!”
"Today's red and black races descend from abnormal humans and have not participated in the evolution led by whites"
“If you look at pictures of the old American Indians the process of ossification is evident in the decline of this race ... [A] representative of these old American Indians still preserves a memory of that great Atlantean civilization [i.e., the civilization of Atlantis] which could not adapt itself to later evolution ... The Atlantean had not assimilated all that the Venus, Mercury, Mars and Jupiter Spirits [i.e., gods] brought about in the East, to whom we owe all the civilizations which reached their zenith in Europe ... The descendant of the brown race did not participate in this development.”
https://sites.google.com/site/waldorfwatch/steiners-racism
Smiloid (talk) 09:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
6 months have gone by since the NPOV tag, and not a single source has been supplied to support the claim. I am removing the tag pending a real, source-based discussion here. HGilbert ( talk) 20:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
This is a complex topic, given the cycles within cycles of anthroposophy's descriptions. I've tried to clarify the description using terminology that is less confusing (Steiner emphasizes that what he calls planets are nothing like our present conception, so using the word without long explanations is pretty misleading --I've tried to work around this.) a good source should be found, however. HGilbert ( talk) 01:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)