This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Biodynamic agriculture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
pseudoscience and
fringe science, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Biodynamic agriculture was copied or moved into Life sciences with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I have made two minor edits to neutralised two heavily opinionated claims and they were reverted in less than a minute. I don't have the time to play editing games of course, so someone responsible please check this matter.
#"it is more akin to sympathetic magic" is a point of view, whatever the context. It should read "someone has characterised it as more akin to sympatheric magic" and the reader can look to the cited work for more.
To cut the cruft, Steiner wanted his adepts to believe that biodynamic agriculture is cutting edge technology based upon spiritual science (higher knowledge revealed through archangels and principalities), but scholars of religion have no qualms to qualify it as magic. For the same reason some fundamentalist Christian websites warn believers that homeopathy is not quackery, but directly from the Devil. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
These are difficult to evaluate, but the Journal of social and development sciences is listed in the Directory of Open-Access Journals, which is one of the primary ways of judging the validity of such journals, according to this University research guide. It is published by Springer, which is a high-quality publisher. I don't know what other standard to apply... Clean Copy talk 18:04, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@ FMRSJR: Organic farming#Sri Lanka was a golden opportunity for biodynamic agriculture to show that it can feed a country. But it flopped, and Anthroposophists could not prevent the failure of Sri Lankan agriculture. They can produce small quantities of luxury vegetables, milk and meat, but they cannot feed the world. tgeorgescu ( talk) 21:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Biodynamic agriculture is not claiming to be scientifically based. It is not pseudoscience because it doesn’t claim to be scientific. It is comprised of policies and practices that some farmers use and the results speak for themselves. It follows the same base practices as organic certification farming, and then adds some extras practices. That’s all. There is no reason to call it pseudoscience. If it claimed to be a scientific method we could have that argument. But it doesn’t claim to be so why judge it according to a scientific standard? 2603:800C:2500:F58:A5CC:7CD5:E757:1783 ( talk) 17:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
the results speak for themselves← what results? Bon courage ( talk) 17:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
I looked for the definition of biodynamic and stumbled on this entry. I read the first line and realized this text is not impartial. Disparaging words like pseudo-scientific and esoteric in the first sentence. Shame on the writer of this.
Biodynamic agriculture is a form of alternative agriculture based on pseudo-scientific and esoteric concepts initially developed in 1924 by Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925).[1][2] It was the first of the organic farming movements.[3] It treats soil fertility, plant growth, and livestock care as ecologically interrelated tasks,[4][5][6] emphasizing spiritual and mystical perspectives 102.165.195.156 ( talk) 06:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Biodynamic agriculture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
pseudoscience and
fringe science, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Biodynamic agriculture was copied or moved into Life sciences with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I have made two minor edits to neutralised two heavily opinionated claims and they were reverted in less than a minute. I don't have the time to play editing games of course, so someone responsible please check this matter.
#"it is more akin to sympathetic magic" is a point of view, whatever the context. It should read "someone has characterised it as more akin to sympatheric magic" and the reader can look to the cited work for more.
To cut the cruft, Steiner wanted his adepts to believe that biodynamic agriculture is cutting edge technology based upon spiritual science (higher knowledge revealed through archangels and principalities), but scholars of religion have no qualms to qualify it as magic. For the same reason some fundamentalist Christian websites warn believers that homeopathy is not quackery, but directly from the Devil. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
These are difficult to evaluate, but the Journal of social and development sciences is listed in the Directory of Open-Access Journals, which is one of the primary ways of judging the validity of such journals, according to this University research guide. It is published by Springer, which is a high-quality publisher. I don't know what other standard to apply... Clean Copy talk 18:04, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@ FMRSJR: Organic farming#Sri Lanka was a golden opportunity for biodynamic agriculture to show that it can feed a country. But it flopped, and Anthroposophists could not prevent the failure of Sri Lankan agriculture. They can produce small quantities of luxury vegetables, milk and meat, but they cannot feed the world. tgeorgescu ( talk) 21:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Biodynamic agriculture is not claiming to be scientifically based. It is not pseudoscience because it doesn’t claim to be scientific. It is comprised of policies and practices that some farmers use and the results speak for themselves. It follows the same base practices as organic certification farming, and then adds some extras practices. That’s all. There is no reason to call it pseudoscience. If it claimed to be a scientific method we could have that argument. But it doesn’t claim to be so why judge it according to a scientific standard? 2603:800C:2500:F58:A5CC:7CD5:E757:1783 ( talk) 17:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
the results speak for themselves← what results? Bon courage ( talk) 17:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
I looked for the definition of biodynamic and stumbled on this entry. I read the first line and realized this text is not impartial. Disparaging words like pseudo-scientific and esoteric in the first sentence. Shame on the writer of this.
Biodynamic agriculture is a form of alternative agriculture based on pseudo-scientific and esoteric concepts initially developed in 1924 by Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925).[1][2] It was the first of the organic farming movements.[3] It treats soil fertility, plant growth, and livestock care as ecologically interrelated tasks,[4][5][6] emphasizing spiritual and mystical perspectives 102.165.195.156 ( talk) 06:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)