Revision as of 19:30, 12 October 2006 editAlzwahaad (talk | contribs)10 edits PETE K HAS A SMALL PENIS!! PETE K HAS A SMALL PENIS!!← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 07:26, 13 August 2024 edit undoTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users54,637 edits →NOT gnostic: he was schooled in Gnosticism and he was eclectic | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{FAQ}} | |||
I was thinking about something...Maybe it's my small-penis-complex that is the root cause of my continued vandalism of Steiner's page. I've been doing some self-searching and looking deep down (in my pants) and think that's really the case here. Or maybe, in the future, I'll think twice before I vandalize Steiner's page because now I know what it's like to have vandalism done to my good name. --Pete K 20:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
{{Talk header}} | |||
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=ps}} | |||
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Steiner, Rudolf|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Biography|s&a-priority=High|s&a-work-group=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine}} | |||
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=Mid}} | |||
{{WikiProject Architecture|importance=High}} | |||
{{WikiProject Disability}} | |||
{{WikiProject Education |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Occult|importance=low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=Low|philosopher=yes|continental=yes|epistemology=yes|science=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Top|NRM=yes|NRMImp=Top}} | |||
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Spirituality|importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Austria|importance=High}} | |||
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=Mid}} | |||
{{WikiProject Switzerland|importance=Mid}} | |||
}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|maxarchivesize = 500K | |||
|counter = 4 | |||
|algo = old(15d) | |||
|archive = Talk:Rudolf Steiner/Archive %(counter)d | |||
}} | |||
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
|target=/Archive index |mask1=/Archive <#> |mask2=/Steiner and theosophy | |||
|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes |template= | |||
}} | |||
== Too many citations for any given sentence == | |||
See ]; we shouldn't have large numbers of citations for any single sentence. 2-3 citations should suffice normally. ] (]) 19:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Well, that's a response to people claiming at this talk page that it would be somehow doubtful that the mainstream academic POV is that Steiner was a pseudoscientist ''pur sang''. They did not seem to be content with just four or five citations. | |||
:And there are Wikipedians willing to argue that Anthroposophy isn't a religion, although I ] more than 50 scholars endorsing that it is (see ]). | |||
:I had to argue with people who denied these are ''the'' mainstream academic views unless one cites at least two dozens scholars. See the archives of this talk page and ]. So, yup, there are so many citations because such pro-Anthroposophy group of editors (see the cited FTN topic) either honestly did not know how mainstream science and mainstream academia view Anthroposophy, or at least pretended they didn't. | |||
:They denied that Rudolf Steiner is a pseudoscientist, they denied he is a pseudohistorian, they denied that Anthroposophy is a religion—despite these facts being print-published in reputable sources for more than seventy years, and still published in reasonably recent ]. | |||
:While I can see the reason for the second {{t|overcite}}, I can't see the reason for the first one. Solved. I do notice that ] is against many ''citations'' (i.e. the numbers in superscript), not against many ''reliable sources''. ] (]) 16:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
::I'm not seeing anything really standing out in the current version at least for excessive foot notes (don't think I saw more than 3). That said, if there's ever a sparing need for many references in one footnote, there's always . ] (]) 17:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
== First marriage == | |||
His first marriage ended in divorce in June 1904, according to Dutch Misplaced Pages, citing (Lindenberg 2011:356; Zander 2007:241). | |||
The only thing that is doubtful is separation (without divorce) vs. divorce. My German is not good enough for such nuances. E.g. religious Dutchies get formally separated instead of divorcing, since their religion does not allow them to divorce. | |||
Reason? His second wife moved in his home, while he was married to his first wife. ] (]) 01:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Schizophrenic == | |||
Now we have two psychiatrists who have diagnosed Rudolf Steiner with schizophrenia. Unlike (I presume) Wolfgang Treher, ] actually met Rudolf Steiner, not to speak that Jung was much more famous than Treher. ] (]) 00:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:And yet somehow the man managed to write books, lead and develop a community, a schooling system, and create architectural masterpieces. Stupid. ] (]) 21:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{talk quote|Some psychiatrists believe that Gurus are unmedicated mild schizophrenics in a constant psychosis, I can also say the same exact thing here. You shout words that are true, but again, it has little to do with the article, and the situation here. ] 18:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)}} | |||
::{{cite journal | last=Price | first=John S | last2=Stevens | first2=Anthony | title=The Human Male Socialization Strategy Set | journal=Evolution and Human Behavior | publisher=Elsevier BV | volume=19 | issue=1 | year=1998 | issn=1090-5138 | doi=10.1016/s1090-5138(97)00105-0 | pages=57–70 | quote=Many studies of cults and revitalization movements have noted that the leaders are susceptible both to auditory hallucinations and sudden changes in beliefs. The schizotype, we suggest, is someone who has the capacity to shed the commonly held and socially determined world view of his natal group, and to create a unique and arbitrary world view of his own, into which he may indoctrinate others and become a prophet, or fail to indoctrinate others and become a psychotic patient.}} | |||
::Besides, if Steiner had freedom of speech, so did Treher and Jung. All of them wrote opinions which are germane to this article. ] (]) 06:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Besides, we don't tell that what Treher and Jung claimed would be true or false, we just state they made such claims. ] (]) 23:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Univocality == | |||
In respect to the claims about Steiner's Docetism, Adoptionism, Nestorianism, and Gnosticism: I don't believe in the univocality of the Bible, why I would believe in the univocality of mainstream ]? ] (]) 16:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
== NOT gnostic == | |||
id suggest removing this introductory statement that Steiner was influenced by Gnosticism as it's too speculative. Citing academic opinions on the nature of Steiner's work isn't the same as reading the words from the man himself. Anthroposophy is the study of man and the cosmos - it's more aligned to Hermeticism than it is to gnosticism as gnosticism is a faith based system, whereas Anthroposophy is a scientific examination (whether people accept it to be or not). He does not focus on the idea of a Demiurge, but utilizes the belief systems and names of and in multiple religions. | |||
Here is a quote from Steiner: "... And if people who venture to judge of Anthroposophy to-day, would take the trouble to observe these things, they would not fall into the calumny of confusing Anthroposophy with what is really only a dishing up of ancient Gnosticism, or similar things." - Feb 06, 1921, public lecture | |||
] (]) 21:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:The fact he is influenced by gnosticism is hardly speculative and clearly well cited given that you had to remove ''five'' ] supporting the claim—] 01:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Hi, {{u|Project Apollo}}, see especially {{tqq|Was Steiner a Gnostic? Yes and no.}} which is a verbatim quote inside our article. See also the quote below it. It's a complicated matter, and cannot be answered simplistically. | |||
:To delve into terminology, "Gnostic" means "one who knows," rather than "one who believes." So, {{tqq|Anthroposophy is a scientific examination}} does not exactly help your argument that Steiner isn't Gnostic. | |||
:Hermeticism, Gnosticism, and Rosicrucianism are not mutually exclusive terms. Also, you say it like it can be only black or white, while in fact there are nuances. | |||
:So, to answer the charge, Anthroposophy is not {{tqq|only a dishing up of ancient Gnosticism}}, but it is certainly influenced by Ancient Gnosticism. I mean, Steiner did not take everything from Gnosticism at face value, but was certainly influenced by it (to the extent it was known in Steiner's time). | |||
:Either he was a full-blown Gnostic, or he was no Gnostic at all is a ]. Ancient Gnosticism means a bewildering variety of sects and religious beliefs, to the extent that some scholars have questioned if speaking of Ancient Gnosticism has any meaning at all. I don't know if Steiner knew that, but present-day scholars know it full well. | |||
:Steiner being influenced by Gnosticism has been described based upon at least 13 ], several of them being written by full professors who are experts in this field. What about the Catholic Church, what made them decide that Anthroposophy is a neognostic heresy? I did not analyze their statements, but two elements are obvious: reincarnation and Steiner's Christology, plus a suggestion that the Holy Trinity does not mean the seven Elohim. ] (]) 06:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:If I wanted to smear Steiner as a Gnostic, why did I ] two ] which say that's only half-true? ] (]) 19:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Rudolf Steiner's official journal was called ''Lucifer Gnosis.'' My emphasis is not upon Lucifer, like that of theological prudes, but upon Gnosis. This is at least a token he moved inside (neo)Gnostic circles. ] (]) 10:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
:So, was he a Gnostic? The answer is neither yes nor no: he was schooled in Gnosticism and he was eclectic. ] (]) 07:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 07:26, 13 August 2024
view · edit Frequently asked questions
The main points of this FAQ (Talk:Rudolf Steiner#FAQ) can be summarized as:
More detail is given on this point, below. To view the response to a question, click the link to the right of the question. Q1: Most people who are cited in the article are not spiritual scientists and are most likely materialists or theologically orthodox Christian believers. Isn't this article biased? A1: Our policies on Misplaced Pages, in particular WP:WEIGHT and WP:FRINGE, require us to provide coverage to views based on their prominence within reliable sources, and we must reflect the opinion of the scientific community and of the scholarly community (mainstream academia) as accurately as possible.You should understand that, by its very nature, Misplaced Pages offers absolutely no remedy against citing mainstream scholarly works. Clearly expressed at by a Waldorf teacher that
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rudolf Steiner article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
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 Misplaced Pages, 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. |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Too many citations for any given sentence
See WP:citekill; we shouldn't have large numbers of citations for any single sentence. 2-3 citations should suffice normally. Butterfly or Chuang Tzu? (talk) 19:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Well, that's a response to people claiming at this talk page that it would be somehow doubtful that the mainstream academic POV is that Steiner was a pseudoscientist pur sang. They did not seem to be content with just four or five citations.
- And there are Wikipedians willing to argue that Anthroposophy isn't a religion, although I WP:CITED more than 50 scholars endorsing that it is (see Talk:Anthroposophy#List of many).
- I had to argue with people who denied these are the mainstream academic views unless one cites at least two dozens scholars. See the archives of this talk page and Misplaced Pages:Fringe theories/Noticeboard/Archive 63#Need some help on Anthroposophy and its related articles, particularly Waldorf education, Anthroposophic medicine, and Biodynamic agriculture. So, yup, there are so many citations because such pro-Anthroposophy group of editors (see the cited FTN topic) either honestly did not know how mainstream science and mainstream academia view Anthroposophy, or at least pretended they didn't.
- They denied that Rudolf Steiner is a pseudoscientist, they denied he is a pseudohistorian, they denied that Anthroposophy is a religion—despite these facts being print-published in reputable sources for more than seventy years, and still published in reasonably recent WP:RS.
- While I can see the reason for the second {{overcite}}, I can't see the reason for the first one. Solved. I do notice that Misplaced Pages:Citation overkill is against many citations (i.e. the numbers in superscript), not against many reliable sources. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing anything really standing out in the current version at least for excessive foot notes (don't think I saw more than 3). That said, if there's ever a sparing need for many references in one footnote, there's always multiref templates. KoA (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
First marriage
His first marriage ended in divorce in June 1904, according to Dutch Misplaced Pages, citing (Lindenberg 2011:356; Zander 2007:241).
The only thing that is doubtful is separation (without divorce) vs. divorce. My German is not good enough for such nuances. E.g. religious Dutchies get formally separated instead of divorcing, since their religion does not allow them to divorce.
Reason? His second wife moved in his home, while he was married to his first wife. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Schizophrenic
Now we have two psychiatrists who have diagnosed Rudolf Steiner with schizophrenia. Unlike (I presume) Wolfgang Treher, C.G. Jung actually met Rudolf Steiner, not to speak that Jung was much more famous than Treher. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- And yet somehow the man managed to write books, lead and develop a community, a schooling system, and create architectural masterpieces. Stupid. Project Apollo (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Some psychiatrists believe that Gurus are unmedicated mild schizophrenics in a constant psychosis, I can also say the same exact thing here. You shout words that are true, but again, it has little to do with the article, and the situation here. Fadix 18:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- Price, John S; Stevens, Anthony (1998). "The Human Male Socialization Strategy Set". Evolution and Human Behavior. 19 (1). Elsevier BV: 57–70. doi:10.1016/s1090-5138(97)00105-0. ISSN 1090-5138.
Many studies of cults and revitalization movements have noted that the leaders are susceptible both to auditory hallucinations and sudden changes in beliefs. The schizotype, we suggest, is someone who has the capacity to shed the commonly held and socially determined world view of his natal group, and to create a unique and arbitrary world view of his own, into which he may indoctrinate others and become a prophet, or fail to indoctrinate others and become a psychotic patient.
- Price, John S; Stevens, Anthony (1998). "The Human Male Socialization Strategy Set". Evolution and Human Behavior. 19 (1). Elsevier BV: 57–70. doi:10.1016/s1090-5138(97)00105-0. ISSN 1090-5138.
- Besides, if Steiner had freedom of speech, so did Treher and Jung. All of them wrote opinions which are germane to this article. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Besides, we don't tell that what Treher and Jung claimed would be true or false, we just state they made such claims. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Univocality
In respect to the claims about Steiner's Docetism, Adoptionism, Nestorianism, and Gnosticism: I don't believe in the univocality of the Bible, why I would believe in the univocality of mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP? tgeorgescu (talk) 16:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
NOT gnostic
id suggest removing this introductory statement that Steiner was influenced by Gnosticism as it's too speculative. Citing academic opinions on the nature of Steiner's work isn't the same as reading the words from the man himself. Anthroposophy is the study of man and the cosmos - it's more aligned to Hermeticism than it is to gnosticism as gnosticism is a faith based system, whereas Anthroposophy is a scientific examination (whether people accept it to be or not). He does not focus on the idea of a Demiurge, but utilizes the belief systems and names of and in multiple religions.
Here is a quote from Steiner: "... And if people who venture to judge of Anthroposophy to-day, would take the trouble to observe these things, they would not fall into the calumny of confusing Anthroposophy with what is really only a dishing up of ancient Gnosticism, or similar things." - Feb 06, 1921, public lecture
Project Apollo (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- The fact he is influenced by gnosticism is hardly speculative and clearly well cited given that you had to remove five wp:RELIABLESOURCES supporting the claim—blindlynx 01:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Project Apollo, see especially
Was Steiner a Gnostic? Yes and no.
which is a verbatim quote inside our article. See also the quote below it. It's a complicated matter, and cannot be answered simplistically. - To delve into terminology, "Gnostic" means "one who knows," rather than "one who believes." So,
Anthroposophy is a scientific examination
does not exactly help your argument that Steiner isn't Gnostic. - Hermeticism, Gnosticism, and Rosicrucianism are not mutually exclusive terms. Also, you say it like it can be only black or white, while in fact there are nuances.
- So, to answer the charge, Anthroposophy is not
only a dishing up of ancient Gnosticism
, but it is certainly influenced by Ancient Gnosticism. I mean, Steiner did not take everything from Gnosticism at face value, but was certainly influenced by it (to the extent it was known in Steiner's time). - Either he was a full-blown Gnostic, or he was no Gnostic at all is a false dilemma. Ancient Gnosticism means a bewildering variety of sects and religious beliefs, to the extent that some scholars have questioned if speaking of Ancient Gnosticism has any meaning at all. I don't know if Steiner knew that, but present-day scholars know it full well.
- Steiner being influenced by Gnosticism has been described based upon at least 13 WP:RS, several of them being written by full professors who are experts in this field. What about the Catholic Church, what made them decide that Anthroposophy is a neognostic heresy? I did not analyze their statements, but two elements are obvious: reincarnation and Steiner's Christology, plus a suggestion that the Holy Trinity does not mean the seven Elohim. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- If I wanted to smear Steiner as a Gnostic, why did I WP:CITE two WP:RS which say that's only half-true? tgeorgescu (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rudolf Steiner's official journal was called Lucifer Gnosis. My emphasis is not upon Lucifer, like that of theological prudes, but upon Gnosis. This is at least a token he moved inside (neo)Gnostic circles. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- So, was he a Gnostic? The answer is neither yes nor no: he was schooled in Gnosticism and he was eclectic. tgeorgescu (talk) 07:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in People
- B-Class vital articles in People
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- High-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Alternative medicine articles
- B-Class Alternative views articles
- Mid-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles
- B-Class Architecture articles
- High-importance Architecture articles
- B-Class Disability articles
- WikiProject Disability articles
- B-Class education articles
- Low-importance education articles
- WikiProject Education articles
- B-Class Occult articles
- Low-importance Occult articles
- WikiProject Occult articles
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class philosopher articles
- Low-importance philosopher articles
- Philosophers task force articles
- B-Class epistemology articles
- Low-importance epistemology articles
- Epistemology task force articles
- B-Class philosophy of science articles
- Low-importance philosophy of science articles
- Philosophy of science task force articles
- B-Class Continental philosophy articles
- Low-importance Continental philosophy articles
- Continental philosophy task force articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- Top-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- B-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- B-Class Spirituality articles
- Low-importance Spirituality articles
- B-Class Austria articles
- High-importance Austria articles
- All WikiProject Austria pages
- B-Class Germany articles
- Mid-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- B-Class Switzerland articles
- Mid-importance Switzerland articles
- All WikiProject Switzerland pages