When Healing Becomes Educating, Vol. 1 - Waldorf Research Institute

as the essence of anthroposophy. In this sense they are working towards
anthroposophy.
In the discussion that followed the lecture, it was pointed out that
there are Aristotelians who initially have the Platonic orientation and vice
versa. This results in “Aristonics” and “Platelians.” The two types of people
tend to misunderstand each other thoroughly. Those working towards
anthroposophy often consider the others to be dogmatic (consisting of body,
soul and collected works of Rudolf Steiner, is the derisory way of putting
it). Those working out of anthroposophy often consider the others to be
unanthroposophical. Aristotelians, as defined above, feel it is dishonorable
not to be representative of anthroposophy in every respect; Platonists, as
defined above, feel it is wrong to present anthroposophical contents unless
they are independent views.
Influence of anthroposophy on the present civilization
So far, the Aristotelian element—that is, people “working out of
anthroposophy”—has been most effective. Waldorf education, the Demeter
movement, eurythmy, pharmaceutical production, treatment of patients,
etc., have so far been essentially based on anthroposophy and, thus, proved
fruitful.
The question is, where has anthroposophy had practically no influence
in the outside world? In science. This is remarkable if one considers that
anthroposophical scientists distinctly claim to be scientific. The reason is
simple. Science cannot be changed out of anthroposophy. That would be
asking the impossible, for many positions held in anthroposophy go against
current scientific views.
For example, the four principles solid, fluid, gaseous and heat are a basis
of the anthroposophical view of the world and the human being. Science
has only the three states of aggregation solid, fluid and gas, whereas heat is
seen as a form of energy unrelated to these. Another example is the anthroposophical
trinity of spirit, soul and body, or neurosensory system, rhythmic
system, and system of metabolism and limbs. Science, on the other hand,
works entirely with Cartesian dualisms. Also, the search for causes forces
conventional scientists to use statistical analysis (with randomized doubleblind
trials an extreme case). anthroposophy, on the other hand, claims
perception is capable of individual development.
Opposite views of this kind are tolerable in other spheres of life
(education, medicine, art, etc.) and are seen as open-minded pluralism. It
is in the nature of science, however, that contradictions are not acceptable.
It is always against pluralism. Scientists are always seeking to overcome
contradictions or eliminate them. Followers of modern science must
63