John David Ebert Lecture on Rudolf Steiner Part 1

My new book is "The New Media Invasion" which can be ordered here: http://www.amazon.com/New-Media-Invasion-Digital-Technologies/dp/0786465603/r... on Amazon here:
This is the first of 21 parts (a little over three hours) of an audio taped lecture that I gave at the Astrological Institute in Scottsdale, Arizona during March of 2001. It is designed as an introduction and overview of Steiner's main ideas. The first four parts comprise the general introduction to Steiner's life, while the discussion of his ideas proper begins with Part 5. If you like this material check out my website at www.cinemadiscourse.com or see my book "Celluloid Heroes & Mechanical Dragons: Film as the Mythology of Electronic Society" available on Amazon.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• rudolf
• steiner
• john
• david
• ebert
• william
• irwin
• thompson
• joseph
• campbell
• anthroposophy
• nietzsche
• angels
• science
• spirituality
• mythology
• christian
• esotericism
• theosophy
• spiritual
• thinkers

[KabouterKlus]

Rudolf Steiner, Geisteswissenschaftliche Menschenkunde, 19081909, s. 5:9; "But the people that didn't develop their id, that was too exposed to the influence of the sun, they were like plants: They produced far too much carbon under their skin - and became black. That is why the negroes are black."

Very interesting indeed.

[johndavidebert]

Fashionable talk for the time.

What's interesting is your need to carp on these few negative aspects of Steiner's philosophy. It's the grand vision that you're missing. Everyone interesting has either made a racist comment or an off-color remark at some time, including Joseph Campbell. If we start excluding everyone on the basis of an off-color remark, then we're going to wind up celebrating no one and sitting around hating ourselves for our failure to produce anything great intellectually.

[johndavidebert]

But I'm not a Steinerian in any way, shape or form. I do not 'believe' in Steiner, nor do I 'believe' that what he said about the spirit world is 'true' in any literal sense. I read Steiner the way I would read Tolkien: as an imaginative description of the cosmos pictured in mythological terms and as an antidote to the fact worship of 'objective science,' which has stripped the human being of his spiritual worth and capacities. Steiner is great mythology, not literal fact.

[johndavidebert]

This comment seems to imply that I'm attacking Steiner, which is of course ridiculous. These lectures are a celebration of his work and vision. This comment also implies that no one else is allowed to lecture on Steiner other than those whom the Steinerians have officially approved. This, too, is ridiculous. Moreover, it smacks of the dogmatism and intolerance of a cultic mentality, which I am certain that Steiner would not have approved of.

[gjbanson]

@KabouterKlus I get an ego hit when I find something to discredit someone held up to me. I am punk in that way. However, I have a story for you. A mother made a sweet rice pudding with cardamon seeds for dessert. Her son's thought the seeds were stones and wouldn't eat the pudding. The mother took out the seeds, trying to explain that they were not stones. When the mother gave the pudding back to the child, he still wouldn't eat it!

[VoidNewsNetwork]

I am primarily aquainted with Steiner through his theosophical cosmology, which mimics blavatskys "root races" scheme. The connection of that particular cosmology to Germanic cultural idenity, the Aryan myth, and mystical nationalism seems rather important for understanding Steiner. Could somone expand upon the importance of Theosophy and Blavatskys root-race scheme to Steiner for me?

Curious.

[histerics3]

this lecture is marvelous it is so generous of you to post all of this! I just read "Knowledge of the higher worlds." This is an excellent supplement. Do you have any thoughts on accusations against Steiner as antisemitic? I'm only on part 8 of the lecture, so apologies if you mention this later. Once again, many thanks for this lecture, there are people online that would aggressively market this kind of material and sell if as a download for rather high prices.

[MavenKnits]

John,

I'm in my first year of Waldorf teacher formation, studying athroposophy. I've found your lectures to be invaluable in the clarification of concepts I've come across in "Theosophy" & "How to know" that I wasn't able to take in, namely the levels of soul - sentient, intellectual etc.

One thing I know is that Steiner never said to believe outright, but to hold the information inside of oneself until one finds truth in it.If we don't remember this, we will fail to supercede our teachers.

[DrKaoliN]

Penetrating thinking is definitely not popular, I know. You are free to opt for whatever you like.

[arararpa]

DrKaoliN, I'd opt for a pile of nonsense. And not quite so innocent nonsense. It baffles me how few people realize how profoundly unoriginal his thinking is. Blavatsky with some christian mysticism and blut und boden.

[DrKaoliN]

Sorry, I meant "acquainted with his later works".

[DrKaoliN]

I can hardly imagine that someone acquainted with his former works would imply that belief is the only faculty on which his anthroposophic worldview can be sustained. Quite the opposite, without a penetrating thinking, his works become either excellent sleeping pills, or just a pile of nonsense.

[DrKaoliN]

I cannot help admiring those who embrace the "Philosophy of Freedom", but I also cannot help saying that there is absolutely no incompatibility between Steiner's earlier works and his later ones, if both are rightly understood.

Plus he never claimed belief. He also repeatedly emphasized that the Goetheanum is not a temple, but a school of spiritual science.