I am trying to avoid the topic, but I couldn't help noticing that Iran's theocracy has more freedom and democracy than the Anthroposophical Society. Not as it was set up by Rudolf Steiner, but how those in authority today run things. For example, the Faust Branch of the Anthroposophical Society in Sacramento selects its officers secretly without a vote, the US Society selects the candidates you can vote for (they may have modified this slightly), the Vorstand (top council) doesn't allow a vote to select the top officers of the Society or a selection committee.
In Iran the party selects the candidates you can vote for like the Society, but the voters get to select the experts who select the supreme leader who then selects the people who determine who you vote for. The Iranian theocracy has checks and balances with the voters that the Anthroposophical Society lacks.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| how-iran-works1.jpg | 23.55 KB |
Are you comparing like with like?
Furthermore are you equating freedom with democracy? And further furthermore are you universalising voting as the only method of selecting people for a job?
Your headline is really just a nasty little sound bite FF. Its hit and run.
I didn't realise you had a beef with the Anthroposophical Soc. Care to tell us about it?
Homonculus
PS I know what you mean tho about Sergei Prokofieff and his irritatingly well informed analysis of all things Anthro, including computers. His latest work I read, was about the neccessity of devotion to Dr Steiner himself. Hard to swallow.
As sad as the burning of the Goetheanum
Ethical individualism is not just about inner freedom as many would have you believe. You are only an ethical individualist to the extent you realize your ideals using the process of moral intuition, moral imagination, and moral technique. If you just have ideas you are like the critic on the side line who never produces anything themselves.
Unfortunately, Steiner's warning about the Anthroposophical Society has come true. It has fallen far behind anthroposophy itself as a result of rejecting Steiner's path, The Philosophy of Freedom. Instead they live in the old guru path listening to the lectures of speculative metaphysicians and feeling mystics. Others who have taken up a few specific Steiner lectures to develop initiatives like agriculture or education have been more successful.
The problem with the Society falling behind anthroposophy is that at the start of the 21th century many people are now ready to embrace Steiner's ideas of anthroposophy in The Philosophy of Freedom but the Society is not able to help. Their declining membership and falling revenues at this critical time is an indication how irrelevant they are as they peddle an outdated speculative theosophy. Anyone who has read The Philosophy of Freedom on even a surface level of understanding will not find its principles embraced even on a theoretical level in the Society as seen in their perverted form of governance which defies Steiner's society statutes. Thus they are not able to meet the spiritual yearnings of 21st century individuals but only attract those who have been left behind humanities evolution. This is as sad as the burning of the Goetheanum.
Homonculus: His (Sergei
Do you have this quote? It might make an interesting discussion topic.
Yes Tom. The book is called..
"Relating to Rudolf Steiner". I haven't got it to hand at the moment, but I read it a couple of weeks ago. I bought it off Amazon out of grisly fascination of mine to read about the viewpoint of others on issues that make me squirm. SP is very strong on his point that devotion to RS is, yes IS, an integral part of Anthroposophy. Of course Prokofieff is fairly circumspect about exactly what he means by devotion.
While we're on Sergei P. He's just published a book on POF. I'm on chapter four and I can tell you I'm impressed. SP's VAST recall of Steiner's work enables him to bring up some helpful quotes. Also Sergio himself has organised a lot of stuff schematically, material that I have only experienced in a more dispersed way, so I am helped by his structurings. Of course it would be an incomprehensible or intrusive book if I hadn't already grasped the basics on my own tho.. Good book IMO.Once again on Amazon. Full title:-
Anthroposophy and the Philosophy of Freedom: Anthroposophy and its method of cognition: The Christological and Cosmic-Human Dimensions of the PoF.
2008 Sergei O Prokofieff. Temple Lodge
Bless us all!
Homunculus
About the Anth Soc Tom...and Prokofieff again...
I like your analysis Mr Last on this one and have been part of such an appraisal myself. For me as regards Anth soc etc, I only play tunes with people I like-whoever, wotever.. If I don't like 'em, my instrument stays firmly in its case. However...
Having listened to Mr. Prokofieff (on paper) for a week or two, and knowing that he is now a leading member of international Anthroposophy Soc I can recall what he has to say in reply to suggestions of a moribund Society.
Basically we all know that the International Society fell to bits when Rudi died. Then Hitler sat on it, then the Hippies totally eclipsed it, and all we have left today is, as you say, a bit thin on the ground one way and another. Peace'n'love nil-Sorat 1. Job done.
But Sergei's rather late counter-move is to wind the clock back to the moment of the Foundation Stone laying; a point when things were more positive, before the rot set in.
As Prokofieff tells the tale, it it looks to me as if in 1923/4 Rudi hurriedly established the whole Anthrosoc thing on a secure esoteric footing and then jumped ship (died)- "apres moi le deluge".
Besides, by the time of the famous Christmas Conference RS was claiming that the burning of the Goetheanum was really a sacrement, and that he had actually recovered it all from the Akashic records anyway and it (the burning) was providing the "spiritual substance" of the being "Anthroposophia" who was now focused around anyone who wanted to take the Foundation Stone event seriously. And who's to argue?!
Seeing as Sergei is a big wheel in Anthroposophy headquarters, I assume that he expresses what other leading posophists there think too. I see it as a sound response in its way too; a step back to a clean point, then foreward at the etheric level.
I don't know if the above strategy is a quick fix, a cop out, a fantasy, a hagiographic joke, a lame excuse or what. But it deoes stop me intellectually slaying the worthies from AS who I encounter; on the grounds that there is still some logical hope for a Society of some sort, somewhere, somehow, some when. Until themn of course I plough my solitary furrow and get by with a little help from my friends. I suppose I'll have to re-look at that Foundation Stone now goddam it!
Homonculus
Society comfort for elderly
I realize the Society is a comfort to its elderly members and I can speculate that it may also have some value in other realms, but my concern is with the younger generation. It is a science based generation that rejects religion, new age fantasy, Eastern gurus, and theosophical speculation, but still has a strong intuitive spirituality. Their science training, as it did for Steiner, prepares them for the pure thinking required for Steiner's path in POF. The Philosophy of Freedom fits them perfectly, so I wish more were interested in sharing it with them.
On the money sir!
Running a brilliant site like this your conscience must be clear. Let the dead bury the dead.
All Hail
Homunc
Post new comment