supposedly, this is the one place I can type without getting censored, so I'll figure out a system to have interesting conversations right here! 

The  free human being must struggle to both create and recognize human freedom without the luxery of recieving it from an "outside" source.

 

Tom's recent post shares a very interesting quote by Steiner in which he says:

 

When speaking to anthropop's about my "concern" regarding the conventional approach to introspection, I try to introduce to notion that we can create a new kind of unfinished concept that

Chapter 3 of PoF is brilliant.  A careful study of chapter 3 within the context of PoF as a whole, can lead to an experience that changes everything one first took for chapter 3.  The exp

When a president of united states needs to make an action or annoucement that he knows is going to be controversial, he does it on a friday.  This ensures that it will get minimal play on the

"The strong cannot grieve when an action goes wrong, when the result does not accord with his intentions. But he does not blame himself. For he does not measure his way of acting by supernatural yardsticks. He knows that he has acted thus in accord with his natural impulses, and at most he can regret that these are not better. It is the same with his judgment regarding the actions of others. A moral evaluation of actions he does not grant. He is an amoralist."  --Rudolf Steiner (1895)

Oh, please no. Dear no.  I don't expect people to actually comment here (although what fun if so).  I write these for retroactive purposes.

 

Steiner was amazing.  His philosophical insight beyond profound.  As a young man he worked hard to state his brilliant insight in a language system that simply could not hold it up for long. 

a fun exercise for those open to questioning the current anthropop construct called "experience"

ok, look at the experience that young Steiner said MUST be the starting point.  That means: conjure up in your mind an imagination of a landscape that has one side a buzzing blooming confusion of sounds/sights/touch......and then on the other side you can turn your head and see a land of concepts (I know it's silly but this is really a naked statement of the conventional and unjusified articulations). 

Ok, now look at some aspect of the supposed pure percept and then pick out some other aspect.  Now go back and forth between them.  Ok, I hope you see my point.  Because if you do that exercise you are very likely to then become sensitive to the primary reason we need not start with a conceptual construct of experience, as if "experience" must start with the distinctions that our great leaders claim it does.

I'm fortunate to be in a position wherein I get to work with PoF in a wide variety of contexts.  When I find myself in conversation with people  who self-identify with Anthroposophy (and

Tom,

I'd LOVE to get a PoF edition into my Kindle with your annotating system!!!

 

Jeff

a. free action is entirely unpredictable. --any other action contains some degree of predictibility-- at least in principal

b.  Predictability is not less moral/useful/meaningful than fee action.

c. You don't observe freedom in others.  You imagine it. You desire to see it.  You wish for it.  You don't see other's freedom. 

d. You share it.  You participate it.  You receive it by extending it.  There are perceptions that may or may not come along with such participation. These are often taken to be perceptions of  freedom.  Many have written about observing Steiner's free deeds.

e. when you think you are observing freedom in another person, you are more likely reacting to an unexamined repression in yourself.--more...

Due to some computer problems that I'm having which affect my ability to find threads on this site, I'll have to wait a bit to add to this post.  But in regards to the nature of fundamentalism

http://www.salon.com/books/excerpt/2008/04/17/glenn_greenwald/

 

 

 

This journal will be where I explore (with you) my reactions, experiments, understanding of PoF as an organic formation that can only be "seen" via our participation and individuation...

Jeff

Hi Sara,

As Patri recently pointed out, things mushroomed during this conversation on editing.  I'm doing a sort of phenomenology on how this discussion about editing evolved.

Should anyone be able to censor your posts and if so according to what policy?

what's happening when somebody is upset but instead of talking about his or her needs he talks about other's faults?

This is just thinking outloud on an aspect:

John,

if the mood strikes you, I'd love to know more about your experiences associated with the Goethean method in relation to accessing special needs......